Making the Keystone XL pipeline safer.


Published on

Solutions for the Keystone XL pipeline.

Published in: Technology, Business
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Making the Keystone XL pipeline safer.

  1. 1. Using existing technology we can make the Keystone XL Pipeline safe and predictable…<br />…while improving the environment, creating jobs and generating revenue.<br /><br /><br /><br />
  2. 2. We know its going to leak…<br />Another Keystone Pipeline Leak in Nebraska December 7, 2010<br />Most pipelines, regardless of what they contain, are designed with a typical life span of 25 years. When they do begin to fail, they do so slowly beginning with leaks at poor construction joints, corrosion points and small structural material cracks, and gradually progress to a catastrophic ending.<br />…two types of pipelines, those that leak and those that are going to leak. We can make a third type. A pipe line that contains leaks.<br />…landowners, upset by last month's oil spill in Michigan, are urging the Obama administration to deny a proposal…<br /><br />…but we can plan for it and contain it.<br />Chevron Pipe Line Co. …About 100 barrels of oil spilled from the 15,000 barrel-a-day line in Salt Lake City Wednesday, local fire officials had said. That is the second spill in the same line in seven months. Last June, the line leaked about 800 barrels of crude oil into Red Butte Creek <br /><br />Shell’s Mississippi oil spill due to out-and-out negligence<br />Jun 13th, 2010 by John Donovan. <br />
  3. 3. We already require in situ catastrophic spill containment for stationary petroleum tanks. <br />How is a pipeline not a stationary tank?<br /><br />Industrial<br />A pipeline can potentially deliver a lot more oil in a shorter amount of time, leaks can go undetected for years and there is no in situ containment regulation. A pipeline is much more dangerous than a stationary tank.<br />Portable<br /><br />Farm<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
  4. 4. How do you contain 250 miles of pipeline?<br /><br /><br />
  5. 5.<br /><br /><br />A protective underlayment could contain and channel leaks.<br />The technology already exists.<br /><br /><br /><br />We already line canals, landfills, ponds…<br />
  6. 6. The area to be lined for a pipeline is much less<br />The technology already exists.<br />and it has already been done.<br /><br /><br /><br />
  7. 7. Leaks captured by the underlayment could be funneled to underground tanks or holding ponds.<br /><br /><br />The technology already exists.<br /><br /><br /><br />Even Wal-Mart builds containment ponds<br />
  8. 8. As all leaks will drain into the valleys, each valleys will need a holding tank large enough to drain the line from ridge to ridge.<br /><br /><br />
  9. 9. An over matting would keep rainwater out.<br /><br /><br />The technology already exists.<br /><br /><br /><br />
  10. 10. An over matting would also funnel fuel fumes to sensors that could detect even the smallest hydrocarbon leak.<br /><br />The technology already exists.<br /><br /><br />Sensors already exist to detect petroleum leaks.<br />Gas detection and sequestration system for a landfill.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
  11. 11. Improving Nebraska’s natural environment.<br />We propose that: <br />1. Land should be purchased by TransCanada and donated to a state or a Nebraska NGO environmental trust. The amount of land should equal to 4 times the area of the land for which the pipeline and pipeline construction covered. Because there are a lot of competing interests in land management, it may be of some value to divide that land up among several parties. Selection of the land should be made by the awarded institutions not TransCanada .<br />2. In addition, 4 times the area of land effected by any spill should be purchased and delivered to a Nebraska environmental trust. This assumes that the effected land was completely rehabilitated. If no spills occur, this provision will never be implemented. <br /><br /><br /><br />This set aside land would be developed into a natural parks and preserves.<br />
  12. 12. The technology already exists, using it will put more Nebraskans and Americans to work, improve our nation’s strength, and if done correctly, improve the natural areas of Nebraska.<br /><br />We have the Technology now.<br />
  13. 13. Assumptions:<br /><ul><li>That the pipeline is going to be built and is going to pass through the Sand Hills. We do not recommend that the pipeline pass through the Sand Hills. Additionally, building the pipeline over the aquifer represents a profoundly risky venture. We do think it can be built and operated in a much safer manner than proposed. (See :
  14. 14. Underlayment and overlayment are made of material strong enough to withstand a blowout.
  15. 15. That cutoff stations are frequent enough to allow underground storage tanks to contain all the oil between stations.
  16. 16. That response time to leaks are within a timeframe that allows the integrity of the containment system to be maintained.
  17. 17. That the restoration to natural areas by construction activities is 100%.
  18. 18. This proposal does not address water crossings. Lack of a suitable solution would compromise the legitimacy of these proposals as it represents a huge gap in protecting Nebraska.
  19. 19. This proposal does not address other environmental concerns including using alternative energy.</li></li></ul><li>This proposal was completed as part of the requirements for the 2010 Doane College Conservation Class<br />