Keystone Pipeline (merged)

[Tero]

It ends up in very large diesels. Oil companies want it so they get more regular diesel to sell to our trucks.

[Jason]

It ends up in very large diesels. Oil companies want it so they get more regular diesel to sell to our trucks.

Ah, so Canadian crude is refined into a less refined fuel than regular diesel that they burn in those huge engines in ships and what not. Did not know that. Is it not possible to refine it into regular fuels that can be burned in consumer vehicles?

[Svartalf]

It's heavy crude, poor in the lighter elements that get refined into kerosene or regular car gas... which is why it ends up in ship engines.

[Jason]

Good. There should be a market for naval fuel for the foreseeable future I think.

[Tero]

It ends up in very large diesels. Oil companies want it so they get more regular diesel to sell to our trucks.

Ah, so Canadian crude is refined into a less refined fuel than regular diesel that they burn in those huge engines in ships and what not. Did not know that. Is it not possible to refine it into regular fuels that can be burned in consumer vehicles?

Maybe. But regular dieesel is still fairly fluid and can run trucks at cold temperatures. Probably a viscosity issue.

The crappiest diesel can be used in the ocean going diesels as such whereas truck diesel is often blended
p.29 here
https://www.chevron.com/-/media/chevron ... review.pdf

There is also a regulatory issue: you can pollute off shore
https://www.wired.com/story/container-s ... to-change/

[laklak]

Bunker oil, the only thing denser is asphalt.

[Tero]

Keystone pipeline (not proposed but existing part) in Missouri breaks
https://www.starherald.com/news/regiona ... ac73c.html

[Tero]

Another year of protests. No pipeline will happen in 2019, 2020. If we dispose of Trump, this can be stopped.
https://www.apnews.com/d62e3aaa796c402cbe29bcece6cee009

[Forty Two]

Pipelines are safer than road or rail -

From 2007 to 2016, per billion ton-miles of oil and gas products transported, there were 0.66 incidents for oil pipelines (i.e., the fewest accidents), 0.73 for natural gas pipelines, 2.20 for rail and 7.11 for road.

Pipelines have been getting safer over time. The rates of "serious" pipeline accidents – those that result in a fatality or an injury requiring inpatient hospitalization – per 1,000 miles of pipeline have fallen substantially. Looking at annual averages over 5-year periods to minimize 1-year fluctuations, the average from 1997 to 2009 was 0.025 accidents per 1,000 miles. This rate halved during the period 2012 to 2016. Operators, in conjunction with the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, which monitors and administers pipeline safety, have made considerable progress in pipeline safety and oversight of pipelines and should continue to work towards further improvement.

Even these rates understate the safety of pipeline materials and operations. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration supplies data on the underlying causes of serious pipeline incidents. For the longer-range gas transmission pipelines, the leading cause of accidents is excavation damage, generally the result of an agent other than the pipeline operator or a contractor excavating and damaging the pipeline. "Other outside force damage" is tied for the second-leading cause, of which vehicular damage accounts for the vast majority. While "incorrect operation" accounted for 16 percent of these incidents, there were no associated fatalities. The equipment and operation of pipelines is safer than the top-line incident rates suggest, based on the underlying cause data provided. Further gains in pipeline safety could come from developing methods to reduce third-party contact with them.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic ... gas-safely

[Forty Two]

The result was clear. Both rail and pipelines are quite safe, but pipelines are without a doubt the safest way to transport oil and gas.

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article ... il-and-gas

In every year from 2003 to 2013, pipelines experienced fewer occurrences per million barrels of oil equivalent transported than did rail. Overall in this period, rail experienced 0.227 occurrences per million barrels of oil equivalent transported compared to 0.049 for pipelines.

This means that rail is more than 4.5 times more likely to experience an occurrence.

The scientific consensus is clear - pipelines are safe compared to road and rail transport.

Being anti-pipeline can be described as being anti-vaccine -- the "anti" folks accept a lot of pseudo-science and they are ignorant of the actual data. Pipelines are better for the environment than other modes of transport.

[Animavore]

Another year of protests. No pipeline will happen in 2019, 2020. If we dispose of Trump, this can be stopped.
https://www.apnews.com/d62e3aaa796c402cbe29bcece6cee009

Hopefully. We need to keep carbon in the ground.

[Forty Two]

Another year of protests. No pipeline will happen in 2019, 2020. If we dispose of Trump, this can be stopped.
https://www.apnews.com/d62e3aaa796c402cbe29bcece6cee009

Hopefully. We need to keep carbon in the ground.

This is about moving it - it's coming out of the ground already. Best bet is to use the safest method to move it. Pipelines.

[Tero]

Trump new permit for pipeline still to be tested in court.And this oil (often diluted with higher quality oil) is not worth as much as real oil that is fluid enough to pipe as is:
While the price of a barrel of oil has risen from $50 in recent years to $75 in recent months, it is now down to about $60. At that price, it is difficult to rationalize the pipeline’s $8 billion cost. The line, which would go through Montana, Nebraska and South Dakota, has languished since 2008.

Enbridge Inc. and Kinder Morgan Inc. also want to send Canadian oil into the United States using their existing pipeline routes. Oil traffic is now backed up in Canada, preventing some of it from getting to market. That has caused a $15 billion hit to the oil economy there, says Scotiabank. For its part, TransCanada says that it “remains committed” to the project.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilvers ... lings/amp/

[Tero]

Court sides with Trump
https://www.nrdc.org/media/2019/190606-1
No environmental review needed.

"Despite today's ruling, we remain confident that Keystone XL will never be built," said Sierra Club senior attorney Doug Hayes. "This proposed project has been stalled for a decade because it would be all risk and no reward, and despite the Trump administration's efforts, they cannot force this dirty tar sands pipeline on the American people."

“The court is condoning blatant disregard for environmental laws and allowing regulators to put oil company profits over clean waterways and the people and species that rely on them,” said Jared Margolis, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The Trump administration thinks it’s getting away with approving this dangerous project without adequate environmental review, but we’ll keep fighting Keystone XL to protect the people and wildlife in its path and prevent further harm to our climate.”

[Tero]

HELENA, Mont. (AP) -- A Montana judge must decide whether to once again block the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline or side with the U.S. government attorneys who want him to uphold President Donald Trump's permit to cross the U.S.-Canada border.

U.S. District Judge Brian Morris hears competing arguments Wednesday by environmental groups seeking to halt the 1,184-mile (1,900-kilometer) pipeline and by government attorneys who say the presidential permit isn't subject to environmental laws.

Last year, Morris blocked construction after ruling officials had not fully considered oil spills and other environmental effects.

Trump signed the new permit in March, prompting the plaintiffs to accuse the president of trying to get around the judge's previous order.

A separate lawsuit by Native American tribes alleges Trump's approval did not take into consideration the potential damage to cultural sites.