$5 Gas in 2012?

[Vedubin01]

I'm sure you have more knowledge on this subject than I do but you obviously admit there are environmental risks. I suppose you are saying the pipeline is worth the risks? Then why do you think the Obama Administration and many land owners think otherwise? They have to have a logical reason for not wanting to build it. Enlighten me of why that is.

Obama is not for Big Oil and the land owners will not get paid what they think its worth to run pipe though their land.

[herbivor]

As nonchalant as it is, it really is the truth. Because those that say we will never have an accident are the ones that really scare me.

I'm sure you have more knowledge on this subject than I do but you obviously admit there are environmental risks. I suppose you are saying the pipeline is worth the risks? Then why do you think the Obama Administration and many land owners think otherwise? They have to have a logical reason for not wanting to build it. Enlighten me of why that is.

[mrsleeve]

As nonchalant as it is, it really is the truth. Because those that say we will never have an accident are the ones that really scare me.

[nando]

Well, I was using worker safety as a comparison. Enbridge responded with "accidents happen" when asked about pipeline safety of their proposed line through BC.

They likely have a different attitude towards workers, because they've never been given more than a slap on the wrist for any of their many pipeline spills.

[mrsleeve]

I guess you have never worked for Enbridge or TransCanada, Enterprise, Williams-transCo. Kinder Morgan, or the like in the filed. Their stance on working safe, is so stringent and off the deep end, that in my opinion causes more issues and injuries than it saves. As everyone is too worried about not getting run off, for some minor safety violation, than concentrating on the job or task at hand. This is even on NEW construction.

Yes I do agree that Enbridge should be stepping up their integrity program and smart pigging more of their older lines more frequently


Oh and enbridge is not building the Keystone XL. TransCanada is :)

[nando]

Sure, but their attitude is inappropriate. It shows little concern for avoiding them and improving safety of their pipelines.

The local refineries have had accidents and will probably have them in the future. But their attitude isn't "oh well" it's "lets do everything we can to improve safety and avoid them". Because in the end, it costs them money.

[mrsleeve]

Are you talking about the 14 Line in Wisconsin??? Or the above ground line in Canada ??? I guess I should have phrased it, Most of Enbridges issues stem from OLD shit.

14 line is part of the old Great lakes/ Lake head system built in the 60's

The Canadians are really big on the phased array AUT (automated ultrasonics) for their NDT/QC/QA when the build shit. Back in the 90s it is was still in the early stages of proving a viable means of NDT inspection on production welding in a pipeline environment, very conceivable a defect was missed or not interpreted correctly back then. Not that thats an excuse as they should have smart pigged in the last 18 years at least once and found something like that.

But Yes accidents do happen unfortunately, and sometimes you just have deal with the aftermath. One thing you have to remember we have improved metallurgy greatly since even the 90's. You know what I do, and accidents are part of the equation, its a risk you take when you go to work, we are all aware of it.

[nando]

The pipeline that just failed was built in 1996... So, no, that's not the only issue. Their stance is "accidents happen" which is NOT acceptable. Imagine how scary it would be to work at a refinery with an attitude like that towards worker safety.

[mrsleeve]

^
Yes they have been buying up smaller US shippers for decades, The issue they had in MI 2 years ago was a line built in 67 for then Great Lakes Pipeline. Their safety record is rather good for the amount of old shit they hold, if you ask me. I have been on some dig up work on some of those old old still in service shit and really it even scares me with what was still in service we see some times. Thats why they run smart tools and we do anomaly digs, to limp these old lines along, since getting new stuff permitted in some places is near impossible

I think we need new pipelines, but enbridge has a horrible safety record. There is good reason to be concerned.

Nando you know as well as I do Enbridge's current issues stem from OLD infrastructure that has been in the ground for DECADES. Most of that shit we have in this country was laid between the mid 50-and early 70's most all of it is well past original design life. I dont think I need point out the differances in older shit Vs what we build now to you ;)

[Vedubin01]

I think we need new pipelines, but enbridge has a horrible safety record. There is good reason to be concerned.

Enbridge is a Canadian company correct? Is there someone else that is capable of doing the job with a better track record?

[nando]

I think we need new pipelines, but enbridge has a horrible safety record. There is good reason to be concerned.

[mrsleeve]

Do you think it's worth the environmental risk?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


Your fucking clueless about this. Are you sure you want to tangle with me on this topic???

There is much much greater risk of leaving the old shit in the ground in service that new lines will take the place of and add capacity. If it was not for your hero in the oval office it would be mostly in ground by now and flowing 680k + barrels a day. If your implying that the tar sands are the issue not the pipe line. Well your not going to stop it from being shipped, as Enbridge and Enterprise are going increase capacity, reverse flow and loop some currently existing line, and build a few hundred miles of new line to get it from alberta to huston. Your hero cant do shit about it as the cross boarder crossing is in place and flowing now. The rest is just subject to FERC and Local regulatory approval , and since most of it is already in the ground approvals are just a formality, last I heard a late 2013 in-service date is expected.

[Vedubin01]

do you think it's worth the environmental risk?

yes

[herbivor]

We could build a big one form Alberta to our heavy product refiners on the gulf coast........................


Oh Wait never mind

Do you think it's worth the environmental risk?

[mrsleeve]

We could build a big one form Alberta to our heavy product refiners on the gulf coast........................


Oh Wait never mind