[Newsbot]

Title: Nexen spill: new pipelines not always safer, investigator says
Category: Environmental
Posted By: DrCaleb
Date: 2015-07-20 07:04:09
Canadian

[Alta_redneck]

Hey Doc, do you sit at your little civil servant job pulling your pud everytime you can post a negative story about Alberta, this story is almost 5 days old and here you go.

I'm thinking you're pissing Andy off because you don't leave him anything to post so he can shit on Alberta like you. Sorry, just can't remember you posting anything positive. Andy and you would get along so well I'm sure he's got a bed for you on the other side of the furnance in his basement.

[DrCaleb]

Alta_redneck Alta_redneck:

Hey Doc, do you sit at your little civil servant job pulling your pud everytime you can post a negative story about Alberta, this story is almost 5 days old and here you go.

Firstly, I'm not a civil servant, and secondly, the story was posted this morning.

And the largest spill in Alberta's history isn't my fault.

[andyt]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Alta_redneck Alta_redneck:

Hey Doc, do you sit at your little civil servant job pulling your pud everytime you can post a negative story about Alberta, this story is almost 5 days old and here you go.

Firstly, I'm not a civil servant, and secondly, the story was posted this morning.

And the largest spill in Alberta's history isn't my fault.

No, but posting about it here is. Only good news stories, unless they make the progs look bad, please.

This is a pretty big blow. A new pipeline with double walls and the latest spill detection tech. Not going to help the building of any new pipes. I guess it will all just wind up getting shipped by rail. Although any rail lines running thru First Nations land will also have trouble at some point.

[DrCaleb]

andyt andyt:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Alta_redneck Alta_redneck:

Hey Doc, do you sit at your little civil servant job pulling your pud everytime you can post a negative story about Alberta, this story is almost 5 days old and here you go.

Firstly, I'm not a civil servant, and secondly, the story was posted this morning.

And the largest spill in Alberta's history isn't my fault.

No, but posting about it here is. Only good news stories, unless they make the progs look bad, please.

Oops.

But, 'good' things rarely make the news, so I'll take that with a large grain of salt.

andyt andyt:

This is a pretty big blow. A new pipeline with double walls and the latest spill detection tech. Not going to help the building of any new pipes. I guess it will all just wind up getting shipped by rail. Although any rail lines running thru First Nations land will also have trouble at some point.

Incorrect. As the article states, until the cause is found we can't really blame the pipe.

And even though it's Alberta's biggest spill, it still only affects 4 acres of land. Land that has had Bitumen all over it for millennia, so it's not really environmentally 'sensitive'.

[andyt]

I doubt any of that will get thru to the anti-pipeline people.

We can certainly blame the failure of the much vaunted spill detection system.

$1:

Kuprewicz said there is not yet enough information available to be sure of much that occurred with the Nexen spill. But new technology sometimes gives an inflated sense of safety, he suggested, and leak detection systems can be helpful and inspire confidence, but they are not always reliable.

"Don't oversell the technology. Don't write cheques you really can't cash," he said.

"Don't create in the mind of the public that you have a system that will work in all situations. Don't be afraid to say, 'There are some limitations in this.'"

Pipeline failures can create a "credibility gap" with the public, Kuprewicz acknowledged. If people are assured that new technology or better methods make the pipeline safe, they are that much more distrustful if a leak does occur.

Maybe the only good thing is that this occurred in Alberta, rather than another province, where the uproar would be louder.

Also, unless it turns out to be sabotage, it doesn't really matter what the cause is, it still hurts pipeline expansion.

[DrCaleb]

andyt andyt:

Also, unless it turns out to be sabotage, it doesn't really matter what the cause is, it still hurts pipeline expansion.

I disagree. Accidents happen. Trucks back into things, people drill test holes where they aren't supposed to. . .

The biggest pipeline spill in Alberta is still minute compared to some of train spills we've had.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ ... b-1.646098

4 acres of land can be dug up and remediated. That lake is still suffering the effects of that 2007 spill.

[andyt]

None of that reassures people who are against pipelines already. The Kalamazoo pipe spill also fucked up a creek - much greater damage. The industry doesn't need this, and they need to be on the ball.

The pipe that makes the most sense is the one running east. Look at the opposition to it already, before this spill. This is not going to help. Going west, Enbridge is basically dead, and the spill in Vancouver Harbor sure didn't help the Transmountain proposal.

[DrCaleb]

andyt andyt:

None of that reassures people who are against pipelines already. The Kalamazoo pipe spill also fucked up a creek - much greater damage. The industry doesn't need this, and they need to be on the ball.

The pipe that makes the most sense is the one running east. Look at the opposition to it already, before this spill. This is not going to help. Going west, Enbridge is basically dead, and the spill in Vancouver Harbor sure didn't help the Transmountain proposal.

Some people oppose just to be 'against' something. Those same people usually show up to protests and things using the very oil they oppose.

If they aren't smart enough to see that the safest and most economical way to transport that oil is through a pipeline, then nothing is really going to convince them. All we can do is pick the battles that are winnable, and leave them alone to turn their back on modern society or to wallow in their hippocracy. Take any train accident and measure it against it's equivalent pipeline accident, and there is hardly a comparison as far as environmental damage. That pipleine leak in Kalamazoo (?) was bad, but Lac Meganitc was far worse.

[andyt]

The people that are against something have enough sway that the industry needs to bring its A+ game, no excuses. We can't just ignore them, especially with the power that the FN's have.

$1:

"We sincerely apologize for the impact this has caused," he said Friday.

But Kuprewicz argues that approach can actually make the situation worse.

"The last thing I want to hear is, 'Aw, well, we made a mistake and we learned our lesson,' " he said.

"In Canada and the U.S., the pipeline operator is already supposed to know this stuff. You're not supposed to have these failures."

[BeaverFever]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

andyt andyt:

Also, unless it turns out to be sabotage, it doesn't really matter what the cause is, it still hurts pipeline expansion.

I disagree. Accidents happen. Trucks back into things, people drill test holes where they aren't supposed to. . .

The biggest pipeline spill in Alberta is still minute compared to some of train spills we've had.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ ... b-1.646098

4 acres of land can be dug up and remediated. That lake is still suffering the effects of that 2007 spill.

1) The fact that it only affected 4 acres of land or that the land was already contaminated is just a stroke of luck. If I accidentally fire a gun into a crowd, I can't defend myself by saying "but I didn't hit anyone" because I could have just as easily hit someone.

2)The fact that the current spill occurred on land still contaminated from a spill 8 years ago doesn't really seem to be much a defence. Again its luck and again it shows that there is a pattern of spills.

3) "Accidents Happen" is why people oppose oil sands expansion: They say that inevitably there will be an accident and the stakes are too high. It's disingenuous for the oil industry to say that accidents won't happen because of state of the art this or that, and then when it happens anyway to say "accidents happen".

[DrCaleb]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

andyt andyt:

Also, unless it turns out to be sabotage, it doesn't really matter what the cause is, it still hurts pipeline expansion.

I disagree. Accidents happen. Trucks back into things, people drill test holes where they aren't supposed to. . .

The biggest pipeline spill in Alberta is still minute compared to some of train spills we've had.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ ... b-1.646098

4 acres of land can be dug up and remediated. That lake is still suffering the effects of that 2007 spill.

1) The fact that it only affected 4 acres of land or that the land was already contaminated is just a stroke of luck. If I accidentally fire a gun into a crowd, I can't defend myself by saying "but I didn't hit anyone" because I could have just as easily hit someone.

It's not luck. It's statistics. The pipes come out of the ground there, and there is more heavy equipment around the above ground pipelines than in some rural place where the pipes are buried 6 feet underground.

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

2)The fact that the current spill occurred on land still contaminated from a spill 8 years ago doesn't really seem to be much a defence. Again its luck and again it shows that there is a pattern of spills.

You do know that the bitumen comes out of the ground, right where it was spilled, right? It's like dropping coal in a coal mine and labeling it an environmental hazard.

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

3) "Accidents Happen" is why people oppose oil sands expansion: They say that inevitably there will be an accident and the stakes are too high. It's disingenuous for the oil industry to say that accidents won't happen because of state of the art this or that, and then when it happens anyway to say "accidents happen".

So, you are saying that accidents shouldn't happen? And what makes an oilsands accident higher stakes than say, a gold mining tailings accident?

[BeaverFever]

$1:

It's not luck. It's statistics. The pipes come out of the ground there, and there is more heavy equipment around the above ground pipelines than in some rural place where the pipes are buried 6 feet underground.

I understand what you're saying but the leak was still unintended and not supposed to happen. A "fail-safe" system failed.

Global National: Nexen says ‘failsafe’ system didn’t detect Alberta pipeline

So why should we be confident that this spill isn't likely to happen elsewhere on the line? The luck is that it didn't fail in another location with more catastrophic results.

$1:

You do know that the bitumen comes out of the ground, right where it was spilled, right? It's like dropping coal in a coal mine and labeling it an environmental hazard.

I don't think it's the same thing - the that's why there's an environmental protection order in place and why a wildlife fence has to be put up. The stuff leaking out of the pipe and spilling across the surface is not identical to the stuff under the surface. First of all, the stuff under the surface is....under the surface. Sencond, the stuff leaking out of the pipe is more liquid so can spread:

$1:

A spokesman for the ACFN said a spill this big will have an "extremely serious" impact on the muskeg, which is a source of aboriginal medicines, berries and wild game.

"There is no way to clean or reclaim the muskeg," said Eriel Deranger in a news release Friday. "Destruction and contamination like this that directly affects a key component of our ecosystems is affecting First Nations' ability to access lands and territories for hunting, fishing, gathering and trapping rights, rights protected by both the Constitution and our treaties."

Adam said the spill is "dangerously close" to the Clearwater River, which flows directly into the Athabasca River.

[DrCaleb]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

$1:

It's not luck. It's statistics. The pipes come out of the ground there, and there is more heavy equipment around the above ground pipelines than in some rural place where the pipes are buried 6 feet underground.

I understand what you're saying but the leak was still unintended and not supposed to happen. A "fail-safe" system failed.

Global National: Nexen says ‘failsafe’ system didn’t detect Alberta pipeline

So why should we be confident that this spill isn't likely to happen elsewhere on the line? The luck is that it didn't fail in another location with more catastrophic results.

Thats the jist of this article. 'Newer' isn't always 'better'. Until we know why the spill occurred, we can't be confident it won't happen elsewhere. But my point is that there is no 'stroke of luck' that the ground isn't contaminated more.

Where there is more opportunity for accidents, more accidents occur!

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

$1:

You do know that the bitumen comes out of the ground, right where it was spilled, right? It's like dropping coal in a coal mine and labeling it an environmental hazard.

I don't think it's the same thing - the that's why there's an environmental protection order in place and why a wildlife fence has to be put up. The stuff leaking out of the pipe and spilling across the surface is not identical to the stuff under the surface. First of all, the stuff under the surface is....under the surface. Sencond, the stuff leaking out of the pipe is more liquid so can spread:

$1:

A spokesman for the ACFN said a spill this big will have an "extremely serious" impact on the muskeg, which is a source of aboriginal medicines, berries and wild game.

"There is no way to clean or reclaim the muskeg," said Eriel Deranger in a news release Friday. "Destruction and contamination like this that directly affects a key component of our ecosystems is affecting First Nations' ability to access lands and territories for hunting, fishing, gathering and trapping rights, rights protected by both the Constitution and our treaties."

Adam said the spill is "dangerously close" to the Clearwater River, which flows directly into the Athabasca River.

It is exactly the same thing, as least according to the reports I heard. Bitumen is dug up, and mixed with water to let it flow through pipes. That's what leaked out, the bitumen that was flowing through the pipe. It's just not usually so close to the surface at that location, but a few hundred meters away it might be.

It always galled me that environmentalists called bitumen that was found naturally in the environment to be a 'contaminant'. A few feet lower, and there are millions of litres of the stuff!

[BRAH]

Fuck it! Ship oil by rail, what's the worst that could happen?