|
Post by justjohn on Mar 15, 2006 11:00:44 GMT -7
Kaima, Have you heard anything about this? Burst oil pipeline causes 'catastrophe' in AlaskaBy Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles Published: 14 March 2006 A burst pipeline in Alaska's North Slope has caused the Arctic region's worst oil spill, spreading more than 250,000 gallons of crude oil over an area used by caribou herds and prompting environmentalists again to question the Bush administration's drive for more oil exploration there. The leak was first spotted by a British Petroleum worker 11 days ago, and was reported to have been plugged a few days later. Initial hopes expressed by BP that the spill was limited to a few tens of thousands of gallons proved to be over-optimistic. Alaska's Department of Environmental Conservation has steadily increased its estimate of the size of the spill, the latest estimate putting it at around 265,000 gallons. The leak, whose cause is unknown, occurred in a remote part of the most sparsely populated state in the United States, and it remains to be seen what damage, if any, it has done to ecosystems. It does, however, give grist to groups who have challenged Washington's assertion that oil can be prospected and shipped while leaving only the gentlest of "footprints" on the landscape. "This historic oil spill is a catastrophe for the environment," Natalie Brandon, of the Alaska Wilderness League, said in a statement. "Tone-deaf politicians in Congress should now stop trying to push for more drilling through sneaky manoeuvres ... The fact that the oil spill occurred in a caribou crossing area in Prudhoe Bay is a painful reminder of the reality of unchecked oil and gas development across Alaska's North Slope." The biggest battle has been over the fate of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, also on the North Slope, which the White House wants to open up. The initiative, championed from the moment the Bush administration took office in 2001, has been consistently blocked by Congress but is periodically revived. A second battle, meanwhile, is taking place in a previously untouched corner of the National Petroleum Reserve on the North Slope. The Bush administration has allowed oil companies to prospect for oil and gas in an area covering 389,000 acres. Environmental groups have responded with a federal lawsuit, filed last Friday, in which they contend that the Department of the Interior has violated the Endangered Species Act and other laws in an area noted for its flocks of migratory geese. It is not just environmentalists who oppose the administration's plans. Several prominent energy analysts, as well as Washington politicians, argue that the likely yield in unexplored areas of the North Slope is not large enough to justify the intrusion. Alaskan politicians and industry lobby groups are heavily in favour of expanding exploration as it would bring jobs and other benefits to the state economy. The Bush administration, meanwhile, argues that further domestic exploration is essential if the United States wants to decrease its dependence on oil and gas from the Middle East. Accidents and leaks have periodically occurred on the North Slope, and along the trans-Alaska pipeline that takes crude from Prudhoe Bay across two mountain ranges to the port of Valdez on the shores of the North Pacific. Saboteurs blew up a section of pipeline shortly after it opened in the 1970s, starting a major spillage. A hunter accidentally fired into the pipeline five years ago, causing $7m (£3.6m) worth of damage. A burst pipeline in Alaska's North Slope has caused the Arctic region's worst oil spill, spreading more than 250,000 gallons of crude oil over an area used by caribou herds and prompting environmentalists again to question the Bush administration's drive for more oil exploration there. The leak was first spotted by a British Petroleum worker 11 days ago, and was reported to have been plugged a few days later. Initial hopes expressed by BP that the spill was limited to a few tens of thousands of gallons proved to be over-optimistic. Alaska's Department of Environmental Conservation has steadily increased its estimate of the size of the spill, the latest estimate putting it at around 265,000 gallons. More here: news.independent.co.uk/environment/article351121.ece
|
|
|
Post by bescheid on Mar 15, 2006 13:43:48 GMT -7
Most of the petrolium (gasoline) here is refined 35 miles (56 km) north of us in Edmonds Washington and is from Alaska. We heard of it on the tv news with the BP spill, then about 3 days later, the price of gasoline begin to rise, and now has risen over 35 cents per gallon (us).
Any excuse to raise the price.
It is an unfortunant occurance. But the residual problem of any spill occurance is the large number of nut cases that seem to fall out of the trees.
If the nut casses had their way, we would all be using candles again for light, and horses for transportation.
Now come to think about this a bit closer, that would not be so bad after all, with horses. An auto, a person can not eat if they shoot it, but, a loused horse can be easly shot, and then eaten. It has been many years since I have eaten horse, but, then, it was not so bad..
Charles
Charles
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 15, 2006 23:23:24 GMT -7
Let's see if I can copy a currelnt local story preceeded by a map - North Slope crude oil production could remain significantly below normal for two more weeks or longer due to the Prudhoe Bay pipeline leak that caused the Slope's largest oil spill, BP managers said Tuesday. The slowdown in production is costing the state nearly $1 million a day in revenue. The BP managers also said they figure the pipeline leaked for at least five days before the snow-covered spill was discovered. And they said corrosion that ate a small hole in the steel pipe might have been caused by peculiar chemical factors in the pipeline. BP managers said the shutdown of the leaky pipeline since March 2 has cut production by 95,000 barrels per day, or 12 percent of overall North Slope output. They said it will be two weeks before some or all of the production can be restored. The 95,000 barrels, plus an additional 4,000 barrels of idled production because of another pipeline leak in the neighboring Kuparuk field, is trimming state oil revenue by about $960,000 a day at current oil prices of around $60 a barrel, said Michael Williams, chief economist with the Alaska Department of Revenue. If the production cut lasts two more weeks, it'll mean some $26 million less into state coffers this budget year. Kemp Copeland, BP's Prudhoe Bay field manager, said company engineers are working to restore at least some Prudhoe production by diverting oil that normally flows through the damaged 34-inch pipeline into a nearby 24-inch line. To do that, workers must link the two pipelines by laying a 10-inch "jumper" pipeline about the length of a football field. The bypass could start up in two weeks but would restore only 50 percent to 75 percent of the idled production, said Maureen Johnson, a BP senior vice president. Meanwhile, the 34-inch pipeline will be out of service for up to six weeks while it is repaired and tested to make sure it doesn't have any other serious corrosion problems, she said. A massive cleanup of spilled oil continues in harsh winter conditions. Pollution control officials with the state Department of Environmental Conservation say about 60,000 gallons of oil has been recovered from a spill estimated at 201,000 gallons, or 4,790 barrels. The oil has covered almost 2 acres of tundra, including the edge of a frozen lake. The spilled oil was enough to fill 25 tractor-trailer tank trucks but a tiny amount compared with Prudhoe's normal daily production of 490,000 barrels a day. The average well in Prudhoe, the nation's largest oil field, averages 500 barrels per day, Copeland said. BP managers and DEC officials said the pipeline's leak-detection system was working, but no alarm sounded for field workers, most likely because the oil leaked too slowly over time to trigger it. By regulation, the system must detect leaks involving 1 percent or more of a pipeline's daily oil flow. In this case, 1 percent would equal about 1,000 barrels, leading Johnson to figure the leak must have persisted for at least five days given the spill's estimated size of nearly 5,000 barrels. Otherwise, the leak volume would have been large enough to set off an alert. "We believe the leak probably started as a pinhole and grew over time and was too small to be detected by our system," Johnson said. Johnson said BP and DEC investigators are looking into whether too little anti-corrosion chemicals were flowing down the pipeline from Gathering Center 2, a plant that separates water from oil. That or other chemical factors might have caused the increased corrosion seen in the pipe over the last six months, eventually leading to a hole about a quarter-inch wide and a half-inch long, she said. A different section of the same pipeline didn't show the same corrosion problem, Johnson said. BP plans to work with DEC on ways to detect smaller spills that might evade leak detectors, Johnson said. One idea might be to increase the use of aerial infrared surveys, which can spot warm oil obscured by snow. Snow hid most of the Prudhoe spill, which a BP field worker reported after smelling oil as he drove by early on the morning of March 2. On Monday, the mayor of the North Slope Borough accused BP of failing to use the best available technology to detect leaks in Prudhoe's vast and aging pipeline network. Lydia Miner, a DEC official, said Tuesday that the state had started a comprehensive review of spill-prevention regulations, including leak detection, long before the Prudhoe spill occurred. BP runs Prudhoe and owns 26 percent of the production. The biggest Prudhoe owners are Exxon Mobil and Conoco Phillips, each with about 36 percent.
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 16, 2006 0:23:38 GMT -7
Reading the two articles I find the LA article to be quite propagandistic and lacking in much of the substantive comment that our Anchorage paper included.
Now I feel propaganda can be true or a lie, but it is written to shape your perspective. The propaganda starts with “Burst” and “catastrophic” in the headline. If the AK paper is reporting the truth, then the “leak” was from a hole ¼” x ½”, which is still plenty large! It is “the Arctic region's worst oil spill”. May it remain forever “the Arctic region's worst oil spill”. To have environmentalists question the exploration is no surprise, I expect they would question it without any spill as well.
Both accounts seem to agree “the latest estimate putting it at around 265,000 gallons.” The AK paper is nice enough to tell us that the oil covers about 2 acres of tundra and has touched a frozen lake. More propaganda “The leak, whose cause is unknown, occurred in a remote part of the most sparsely populated state in the United States, and it remains to be seen what damage, if any, it has done to ecosystems.” Hmmm…. The cause is corrosion from all accounts from the beginning of the leak. I wonder why word has not reached LA yet? Like everything in life, the final determination may vary, but corrosion sounds quite reasonable. It does surprise me, however, as I have a cousin who works up on the slope and he is always talking about the safety and the corrosion activities up on the slope.
I’ll skip over most of the propaganda and avoid the tit-for-tat type of argument that seems so common today. Now by definition “previously untouched corner of the National Petroleum” hardly exists. Navel Petroleum Reserve Number 4 on the North Slope dates from the 1950’s, perhaps earlier. Oil and gas have been known for so long that the area was set side as a reserve for the navy, as the name implies. It seem the author really slipped up here, using the old name, as I understood environmentalists had the name officially changed to something else so it would be easier to claim it is pristine.
The truth is that it is an old exploration area and has some of the earliest and greatest damage due to the crude travel methods in the 1950’s – but it is so vast that it would be hard not to call it pristine. I would say it is still pristine beyond the imagination of most people in the Lower 48 – you simply are not used to the vast distances up here.
LA also states “Saboteurs blew up a section of pipeline shortly after it opened in the 1970s, starting a major spillage. A hunter accidentally fired into the pipeline five years ago, causing $7m (Ù3.6m) worth of damage.” I would have to research the “saboteurs” comment, as I forgot what I once might have known about it. However, the statement of “accidentally shooting” the pipeline is patently wrong. The idiot that did that did it on purpose. He was a bit of an anti-social type and he was drunker than a skunk when he did it quite deliberately – evidently he was drunk enough to hit the right spot on the pipeline to penetrate it. There have been no reports of imitation shootings, though it would be quite easy to do – and guarantee free room and board for a lifetime afterwards. I’ll add the GOOD NEWS in a follow-on posting. Hint: The ground is frozen.
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 16, 2006 0:24:19 GMT -7
Bad news: Working conditions are miserable up there right now. Reports are COLD and BLOWING. Workers take breaks every half an hour despite wearing special arctic gear to stay warm.
Good news: Containment conditions could not be better. The ground is frozen, so the oil is not penetrating. That is partially why two acres are covered with spilled oil – the oil could not sink in the ground. Recovery will be pretty complete, they will not have to go to great depth to excavate and clean up. With removal of the snow and the ice and oil mix for later separation they hopefully will get a large part of the oil. I will guess that the tundra vegetation will be damaged and I will be able to spot the spill location when I visit next summer. It will be interesting to see what they have for revegetation programs today as compared to the 1970’s when the pipeline was built.
Bad news: I wonder what is happening to the oil that is sitting in the small feeder pipelines standing still. Normally the oil is warmed for transport to keep it flowing, and the main pipeline is supposed to be able to sit for three days before it cools down to where they may have problems getting it flowing again. I suspect the re-start of flow in the smaller pipelines will be troublesome, and perhaps they have been draining these lines to reduce the startup difficulty.
OK, I am out of ideas for the night. Zzzzzzzz I hope that ads a bit of good stuff to chew on along with what the national news feeds you.
Kai
|
|
|
Post by bescheid on Mar 16, 2006 9:26:20 GMT -7
Kai
Thank you very much indeed for being the truth here! I was very much wondering what the heck was actually going on. Our news print here in the Edmonds area just printed up the usual propaganda type nonsense with very few facts, other then the obvious, there was a pipeline break and oil spill.
I would strongly suspect and believe, our television news people here are actually parrots disguised as humans.
Charles
|
|
piwo
Citizen of the World
Co Słychać?
Posts: 1,189
|
Post by piwo on Mar 16, 2006 20:43:11 GMT -7
That's what we get for letting British Petroleum drill in our garden! Any spill whatsoever is an ecological disaster. This is not good.
|
|
|
Post by justjohn on Mar 17, 2006 5:20:26 GMT -7
Thanks Kai,
For the correct info !!!!!
|
|
|
Post by rdywenur on Mar 17, 2006 6:04:20 GMT -7
Do you think HAARP could have affected this.
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 17, 2006 7:10:26 GMT -7
Do you think HAARP could have affected this. Just a minute ..... sorry, I had to put on my aluminum foil cap. I hate it when I misplace it and have to use a metal collander instead! Ahhh.... that is better. My thoughts are my own agian. No, I do believe the electrical field for the HAARP is too weak to affect the pipe so far away. Unless of course, they can focus the transmissions on a piece of pipe 1/4" by 1/2", which is unlikely. OK, now I'll take of the aluminum cap and let the government take control of my mind once again. Kai
|
|
|
Post by rdywenur on Mar 17, 2006 10:05:03 GMT -7
Oh the visuals ;D. Just wondered not that I am any expert in this or even about the topic but sound does affect things and over time maybe loosen things up abit.
|
|
|
Post by sciwriter on Mar 17, 2006 11:48:23 GMT -7
Kai, thanks for the insight. Carl
|
|
nancy
European
Posts: 2,144
|
Post by nancy on Mar 18, 2006 20:39:39 GMT -7
I had to put on my aluminum foil cap. I hate it when I misplace it and have to use a metal collander instead! Oh! Kai! I knew I had seen you somewhere before! Colander Guy!!!!
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 18, 2006 21:39:09 GMT -7
OK, thanks Nancy! It is sweet of you to recognize my real talents and idnetity. My best ideas come with the right colander on my head. Geez, I know you are married, but weren't you once a colander girl?
Kai
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 18, 2006 21:41:23 GMT -7
UPDATE from www.adn.com : Pipeline has been poorly monitored By WESLEY LOY Anchorage Daily News Published: March 18, 2006 Last Modified: March 18, 2006 at 02:15 AM (Published: March 18, 2006) A major pipeline that unleashed the largest oil spill ever on the North Slope came within a whisker of springing a second ruinous leak, and maybe more, according to a federal order for BP to fix the problems. The order, issued this week by the U.S. Department of Transportation pipeline safety regulators, reveals new details about the weakened condition of the pipeline. It also intensifies the question of how thoroughly BP was monitoring the aging pipe's known corrosion problems. Over several days, an estimated 201,000 gallons of oil squirted undetected out of a hole smaller than an almond, coating almost two acres of tundra and the edge of a frozen lake with crude. A BP field worker found the spill near the heart of the Prudhoe Bay oil field March 2 after smelling oil as he drove down a road along the pipeline. BP and state investigators believe corrosion ate through the steel pipe from the inside out. The pipe, 34 inches in diameter, was installed in 1976, a year before production began at Prudhoe, the nation's largest oil field. The company's leak investigation turned up at least six additional "anomalies" along a 3-mile segment of the pipeline, with the same internal corrosion seen in several places, the federal order says. At the worst of the trouble spots, the pipeline's carbon steel wall, normally more than a third of an inch thick, was down to 0.04 of an inch, a razor-thin barrier between the oil and the tundra. Spokesmen for BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc., which runs Prudhoe on behalf of itself and other field owners, did not return phone calls seeking comment late Friday. BP managers have previously said they were surprised the pipe sprang a leak. However, they acknowledged checking the line in recent months and finding corrosion that, for reasons not yet fully understand, was rapidly growing worse. The company says it has an aggressive corrosion control program with a budget that's increased from $50 million in 2004 to $71 million planned for this year. Stacey Gerard, associate administrator for pipeline safety, said the DOT issued BP the unusual order outlining steps to fix and better monitor the pipeline because its continued operation without corrective measures "will be hazardous to life, property and the environment." Gerard said DOT pipeline safety officials investigated the leak and preliminarily concluded the pipeline's leak-detection system "was not effective in recognizing and identifying the failure." They also noted that BP last tested the line with a smart pig -- a bullet-shaped electronic device that slides through a pipe looking for corroded or weak spots -- in 1998, and that the company had no regular pigging schedule. Pigging is one of the most important ways to find flaws in pipeline walls. Gerard ordered BP to meet 10 conditions for returning the idled pipeline to service. The order applies not only to the leaky pipeline, which drains the western side of the sprawling Prudhoe Bay field, but to two similar pipelines, the eastern Prudhoe and Lisburne lines. Under the federal order, BP must: • Repair corrosion damage to the satisfaction of federal officials before restarting the pipeline that leaked. • Develop plans to reduce internal corrosion on all three major pipelines within three months. • Review and improve leak-detection systems on the pipelines within three months. Kurt Fredriksson, commissioner of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, said Friday he welcomed the federal intervention in the spill, a high-profile incident that's figuring in the current congressional debate over whether to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling. He said BP has "a robust monitoring system" to try to prevent and control corrosion in the North Slope's hundreds of miles of pipelines but that the leak was disappointing. Fredriksson added that the state was already in the process of expanding regulation of pipelines, and the spill might result in stricter rules. BP could be subject to millions of dollars in fines for the spill, but another DEC official, Larry Dietrick, said the amount can't be calculated until the cleanup is complete. A massive cleanup continues in subzero weather. Responders so far have recovered about 64,000 gallons of spilled oil, and DEC officials believe tundra damage might be light because the oil can't seep into the frozen ground. Because the pipeline is shut down, North Slope oil production remains down by nearly 100,000 barrels per day, or 12 percent of normal output.
|
|