Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   ♫ and then one day he was harvesting some wheat, when up from the ground came a bubbling grease... oil that is, black gold, Teexas Tea ♫   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 22
    More: Spiffy, North Dakota, Jed Clampett, wheat, Jack Dalrymple  
•       •       •

5413 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Oct 2013 at 11:56 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



22 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-10-11 11:59:14 AM  
Yes, but this will never happen with the Keystone XL.
 
2013-10-11 12:02:33 PM  

Biff_Steel: Yes, but this will never happen with the Keystone XL.


We'll soon find out. The southern leg from Cushing to the gulf coast is on track to be up and running by the end of the year.
 
2013-10-11 12:06:23 PM  
Teexas? Is that a new state?
 
2013-10-11 12:10:24 PM  

Biff_Steel: Yes, but this will never happen with the Keystone XL.


You do realize that there are tens of thousands of miles of pipeline running all over North America that operate without incident right?  But sure, go ahead force oil companies to use other more expensive, less safe methods of getting oil to market.

Because tanker trucks never have accidents on the roads.

Ask the good folks of Lac Megantic, Quebec how using rail cars works out.

The oil will flow to market, using a pipeline is statistically the safest way to move said oil.

Or perhaps kill the Keystone XL line, the companies will just retask an older, probably less well engineered pipeline by reversing flow direction or converting from natural gas to oil.
 
2013-10-11 12:11:20 PM  

offmymeds: Teexas? Is that a new state?


It's number 54 of 57...
 
2013-10-11 12:16:24 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: offmymeds: Teexas? Is that a new state?

It's number 54 of 57...


blurbrain.com
 
2013-10-11 12:17:08 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: offmymeds: Teexas? Is that a new state?

It's number 54 of 57...


Allllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllaska is the biggest
 
2013-10-11 12:18:07 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: Biff_Steel: Yes, but this will never happen with the Keystone XL.

You do realize that there are tens of thousands of miles of pipeline running all over North America that operate without incident right?  But sure, go ahead force oil companies to use other more expensive, less safe methods of getting oil to market.

Because tanker trucks never have accidents on the roads.

Ask the good folks of Lac Megantic, Quebec how using rail cars works out.

The oil will flow to market, using a pipeline is statistically the safest way to move said oil.

Or perhaps kill the Keystone XL line, the companies will just retask an older, probably less well engineered pipeline by reversing flow direction or converting from natural gas to oil.


The Keystone is a waste of money. Just pump the oil into underground aquifers. Since oil and water do not mix, both products will be pure when they arrive.
 
2013-10-11 12:27:13 PM  
Anayalator:

The Keystone is a waste of money. Just pump the oil into underground aquifers. Since oil and water do not mix, both products will be pure when they arrive.

Brilliant!

media.tumblr.com
 
2013-10-11 12:29:40 PM  

Anayalator: The Keystone is a waste of money. Just pump the oil into underground aquifers. Since oil and water do not mix, both products will be pure when they arrive.


You realize that they modified the route to go around the sensitive area which was going to be a concern for the Ogala aquifer right?
 
2013-10-11 12:33:22 PM  
The pipeline would be fine for delivering water to drought stricken places.
 
2013-10-11 12:39:37 PM  
Spiffy?  Subby, did you even read TFA?
 
2013-10-11 12:39:49 PM  
Pipelines work fine...as long as they are maintained correctly.But that is costly and the CEO may need another jet.

/an oil spill is spiffy?
 
2013-10-11 12:47:49 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: Biff_Steel: Yes, but this will never happen with the Keystone XL.

You do realize that there are tens of thousands of miles of pipeline running all over North America that operate without incident right?  But sure, go ahead force oil companies to use other more expensive, less safe methods of getting oil to market.

Because tanker trucks never have accidents on the roads.

Ask the good folks of Lac Megantic, Quebec how using rail cars works out.

The oil will flow to market, using a pipeline is statistically the safest way to move said oil.

Or perhaps kill the Keystone XL line, the companies will just retask an older, probably less well engineered pipeline by reversing flow direction or converting from natural gas to oil.


What Jensen had found on Sept. 29 turned out it was one of the largest spills recorded in the state. At 20,600 barrels
20,600 x 42 gallons per barrel.  = 865200  galllons

Average tanker trunk holds 10,000 gallons.

That would be 865 oil tanker trucks loosing a complete load just to match this basically insignificant spill.

Keystone XL would increase US capacity by 5%... so even if that were 100% free, and could shift the price of gas at $3 per gallon.. That makes your price at the pump .15/gal less

Seems like a good idea to me.

Here is another question.  If the farmer had to report the issue.

 Did the pipeline operators not notice the loss? SCARY.
Did they notice the and not report it?  Super Scary..
Or did they know about the loss, but did not ask the property owners to check because they don't know who to ask?  Ultra Mega Scar
 
2013-10-11 01:10:02 PM  

KoolerThanJesus: Here is another question. If the farmer had to report the issue.

Did the pipeline operators not notice the loss? SCARY.
Did they notice the and not report it? Super Scary..
Or did they know about the loss, but did not ask the property owners to check because they don't know who to ask? Ultra Mega Scar


I am not a pipeline expert, actually I am a hydrogeologist fwiw.  But I read the article and I think I understand why it took the farmer to detect it and report it.

-The hole was small (1/4") so there was probably a negligible pressure loss.  So hard, if not possible, to detect by looking at pressure readings.  Pipeline companies don't make moeny on product that they lose, also the bad press and coming fines etc. are a pretty damn good reason to keep leaks to a minimum if not gone altogether.
-The pipeline was encased in a competent clay unit, which is good because it's not permeable, keeping all of the oil there.  The big knock on the initial Keystone line was that it would go through a sandy area where a leak could seep into the ground.
-As a Canadian I know how rigorous our system is in terms of reporting.  I don't know how N. Dakota's stacks up.  If that's a problem fix it there.

There are problems with pipelines, which are relevant.  You point out that trucks contain a lot less oil, which is true.  However, more and more trains will be used.  Feel free to read up on the Lac Megantic derailment this year (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac-M%E9gantic_derailment">http://en.wi kipedia.org/wiki/Lac-M%E9gantic_derailment ) That's an order of magnitude worse.  All because an engineer didn't properly set a parking brake.

Also, the pipelines in use now would be not nearly as well engineered as the Keystone one will be (given the higher profile).  Over time they will be shut down, need repairs or start leaking.  People complain about aging infrastructure being unsafe.  Well then why not let a new line go ahead?
 
2013-10-11 01:18:16 PM  
Tesoro says no water sources were contaminated, no wildlife was hurt and no one was injured.

i284.photobucket.com
 
2013-10-11 01:38:32 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Tesoro says no water sources were contaminated, no wildlife was hurt and no one was injured.

[i284.photobucket.com image 180x180]


how so? They'll have to clean up a bunch of soil, but like the article says that area had a thick clay layer present, aka an aquitard (means not an aquifer, no contamination of water supplies).  I'm sure it'll cost a bunch of money to excavate and sterilize the soil, then reclaim the land, but the statement was correct.
 
2013-10-11 02:09:37 PM  
Thresh baby, THRESH!
 
2013-10-11 03:03:12 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Tesoro says no water sources were contaminated, no wildlife was hurt and no one was injured.

[i284.photobucket.com image 180x180]

how so? They'll have to clean up a bunch of soil, but like the article says that area had a thick clay layer present, aka an aquitard (means not an aquifer, no contamination of water supplies).  I'm sure it'll cost a bunch of money to excavate and sterilize the soil, then reclaim the land, but the statement was correct.


I'd love to supervise a cleanup that big and that boring for once.  Soil only, farmer's field in the middle of nowhere...
 
2013-10-11 03:13:33 PM  
Protection and care of the environment are fundamental to our core values, and we deeply regret any impact to the landowner," Tesoro CEO Greg Goff

He had to say it in a statement because when he was practicing saying it live he couldn't stop laughing hysterically.
 
2013-10-11 03:55:39 PM  
This is a repeat of an old Lassie episode.
 
2013-10-11 04:08:38 PM  

KoolerThanJesus: Representative of the unwashed masses: Biff_Steel: Yes, but this will never happen with the Keystone XL.

You do realize that there are tens of thousands of miles of pipeline running all over North America that operate without incident right?  But sure, go ahead force oil companies to use other more expensive, less safe methods of getting oil to market.

Because tanker trucks never have accidents on the roads.

Ask the good folks of Lac Megantic, Quebec how using rail cars works out.

The oil will flow to market, using a pipeline is statistically the safest way to move said oil.

Or perhaps kill the Keystone XL line, the companies will just retask an older, probably less well engineered pipeline by reversing flow direction or converting from natural gas to oil.

What Jensen had found on Sept. 29 turned out it was one of the largest spills recorded in the state. At 20,600 barrels
20,600 x 42 gallons per barrel.  = 865200  galllons

Average tanker trunk holds 10,000 gallons.

That would be 865 oil tanker trucks loosing a complete load just to match this basically insignificant spill.

Keystone XL would increase US capacity by 5%... so even if that were 100% free, and could shift the price of gas at $3 per gallon.. That makes your price at the pump .15/gal less

Seems like a good idea to me.

Here is another question.  If the farmer had to report the issue.

 Did the pipeline operators not notice the loss? SCARY.
Did they notice the and not report it?  Super Scary..
Or did they know about the loss, but did not ask the property owners to check because they don't know who to ask?  Ultra Mega Scar


I think you need to check your math.  800,000 / 10,000 is 80.
 
Displayed 22 of 22 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report