Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday September 18 2018, @09:59PM   Printer-friendly
from the Big-oops-made-big-booms dept.

Pipe pressure before gas explosions was 12 times too high

The pressure in natural gas pipelines prior to a series of explosions and fires in Massachusetts last week was 12 times higher than it should have been, according to a letter from the state's U.S. senators to executives of the utility in charge of the pipelines.

Democratic U.S. Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Edward Markey sent the letter Monday seeking answers about the explosions from the heads of Columbia Gas, the company that serves the communities of Lawrence, Andover and North Andover, and NiSource, the parent company of Columbia Gas.

"The federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration has reported that the pressure in the Columbia Gas system should have been around 0.5 pounds per square inch (PSI), but readings in the area reached at least 6 PSI — twelve times higher than the system was intended to hold," the letter said.

The pressure spike registered in a Columbia Gas control room in Ohio, the senators said in the letter, which requests a reply by Wednesday.

See also: Columbia Gas pledges $10M toward relief efforts in Lawrence, Andover, North Andover

Previously: 60-80 Homes Burn; Gas Line "Incident" in Northern Massachusetts


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 19 2018, @11:19AM (6 children)

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday September 19 2018, @11:19AM (#736984) Homepage Journal

    No, they really don't. It would be a huge stretch of EPA authority to do much of anything about a specific local utility. Likewise any other federal power granted to congress. Even then, they can only do something about next time; this time is constitutionally beyond their reach.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by NewNic on Wednesday September 19 2018, @06:47PM (1 child)

    by NewNic (6420) on Wednesday September 19 2018, @06:47PM (#737169) Journal

    I don't believe you can say this with any authority.

    The Interstate Commerce clause is like Schroedinger's box. You cannot tell what's in it until the Supreme Court rules and the court has been pretty inconsistent in the past.

    --
    lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday September 20 2018, @02:36AM

      by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Thursday September 20 2018, @02:36AM (#737350) Homepage Journal

      Oh I can say what's in it. Anyone who reads it and doesn't feel like lying to themselves can easily tell it's been abused like a motherfucker every time SCOTUS got the chance. With authority though? Only the authority every other American has.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 19 2018, @10:06PM (3 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 19 2018, @10:06PM (#737259) Journal

    But, that's the beauty of the system. Congress may not address some specific utility service, in some specific town/city, directly. But, they CAN use that city as an example of how horribly things can go wrong. From there, they CAN pass specific laws which will be applicable nationwide. Or, they CAN send some sternly worded letters to various people around the country, demanding that the EPA, and the various states, and/or the various cities "take action, before we do". In the long run, it's probably more efficient to send those sternly worded letters. They scare hell out of (almost) everyone who gets them, and THOSE people are actually in a position to know how to improve things. That, or they appointed the people who actually know.

    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday September 20 2018, @02:38AM (2 children)

      by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Thursday September 20 2018, @02:38AM (#737352) Homepage Journal

      You're really going to sit there and argue that Congress should abuse its position to usurp via proxy powers specifically denied them by the constitution? I thought better of you.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 20 2018, @09:12AM (1 child)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Thursday September 20 2018, @09:12AM (#737415) Journal

        Negative.

        argue that Congress should

        I am, instead, arguing that congress may do such a thing, as it has already done with the interstate commerce bullshit, as opposed to should. Congress is in a position that they have already committed unconstitutional acts, and there is little to prevent them from doing similar things in the future.