# Pipelines



## QV (28 Apr 2021)

Parliamentarians affirm importance of Line 5 pipeline for Canada and U.S.; call for urgent executive action to keep Line 5 operating
					

CALGARY, AB, April 15, 2021 /PRNewswire/ - A multi-party Canadian House of Commons Special Committee report released today affirms the economic im...




					markets.businessinsider.com
				




For folks in Ontario and Quebec, you better hope Line 5 isn’t shut down. But after all, pipelines are bad so maybe we’ll all be better off.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Apr 2021)

Not only Ontario and Quebec. If Witmer shuts down Line 5, she deprives her own state of  Michigan as well, for things like propane and gasoline.


----------



## Brad Sallows (28 Apr 2021)

No worries.  Obstructionism only kicks in with the first barrel surplus to one's own needs.


----------



## Good2Golf (28 Apr 2021)

If Enbridge Line 5 were the only option to ship NG East it would be problematic. Here, TCPL will make more money shipping more NG through CML (the North route through Nipigon and North Bay).  It’s not operating at capacity.


----------



## daftandbarmy (28 Apr 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> If Enbridge Line 5 were the only option to ship NG East it would be problematic. Here, TCPL will make more money shipping more NG through CML (the North route through Nipigon and North Bay).  It’s not operating at capacity.



Our new 'pipeline' might look like a railway:

CN Rail swoops in on rival CP with higher offer for Kansas City Southern​The bid would be a 20% premium to CP's $25 billion deal reached last month

Canada’s two biggest railroads are vying for a rail network that links their country with the U.S. and Mexico as a reworked trade alliance gets underway and the economic recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic gathers steam. Kansas City Southern’s sprawling system connects farms in the U.S. Midwest to ports along the Gulf of Mexico. It also reaches deep into Mexico, which made up almost half of the Kansas City, Missouri-based company’s revenue last year.









						CN Rail swoops in on rival CP with higher offer for Kansas City Southern
					

The bid would be a 20% premium to CP's $25 billion deal reached last month




					financialpost.com


----------



## Loachman (28 Apr 2021)

Much as I am a rail fan, that is neither the most economical, efficient, or safe way to move oil.

A lot more tank cars would have to be built and paid for, and loading/unloading facilities built, before such an operation could start.


----------



## QV (28 Apr 2021)

Federal Court of Appeal upholds Alberta right to turn-off-the-taps legislation
					

The decision is a victory for the province in its battle with British Columbia over so-called turn-off-the-taps legislation enacted by Alberta in 2018, at the…




					vancouversun.com
				




Looks like Alberta can "turn off the taps" if it chooses.


----------



## Good2Golf (28 Apr 2021)

Loachman said:


> Much as I am a rail fan, that is neither the most economical, efficient, or safe way to move oil.
> 
> A lot more tank cars would have to be built and paid for, and loading/unloading facilities built, before such an operation could start.


I generally agree with you on this, Loachman, but the diver in me looks at the underwater exposure and condition of Line 5 and think “Holy crap!”  At least make it a “No anchor” zone.  Yikes, one wrong flip of the anchor and a fluke could tear through the physical pipe.  At least a hasty protective cage or something around a line carrying 1/2 million barrels/day!


----------



## Loachman (28 Apr 2021)

Perhaps, but trains derail and sometimes large fireballs result.

Regardless, a switch to rail would be neither cheap nor quick.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (28 Apr 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> I generally agree with you on this, Loachman, but the diver in me looks at the underwater exposure and condition of Line 5 and think “Holy crap!”  At least make it a “No anchor” zone.  Yikes, one wrong flip of the anchor and a fluke could tear through the physical pipe.  At least a hasty protective cage or something around a line carrying 1/2 million barrels/day!


So, Enbridge is currently paying for pilots on all vessels transiting the straits of Mackinaw. Nobody is allowed to anchor there anymore and Enbridge has further committed to tunnelling under Strait and moving the pipeline to a concrete lined tunnel by 2024, IIRC. Assuming Michigan doesn’t block that permit, too. Because climate politics are no reason to make petroleum transport safer...


----------



## daftandbarmy (28 Apr 2021)

Loachman said:


> Perhaps, but trains derail and sometimes large fireballs result.
> 
> Regardless, a switch to rail would be neither cheap nor quick.



What do you mean a 'switch to rail'? Oil has been transported by rail for years, and it's increasing:

Canadian Crude Oil Transportation Comparing the Safety of Pipelines and Railways

Canada has the world’s third largest proven oil reserves,3 and development of these resources has accelerated since 2009, with year-over-year production growth of 4.1 percent on average, from 3.2 million barrels in 2009 to 4.6 million barrels in 2018. 4 Historically, most of this oil moved by pipeline. Prior to 2012, rail moved less than 6,000 carloads (that is, filled tank cars) of fuel oil and crude oil per year (Exhibit 2).5 Beginning in 2012, however, the amount of crude oil transported by rail began to grow (as did the amount transported by pipeline), as new sources of production in Canada became available. Early growth in the use of rail for transporting crude oil can primarily be attributed to the need to connect new oil fields with refineries in certain regions where pipelines either were not present or lacked sufficient capacity.



			https://www.railcan.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Canadian-Crude-Oil-Transportation-Comparing-the-Safety-of-Pipelines-and-Railways-1.pdf


----------



## Good2Golf (29 Apr 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> So, Enbridge is currently paying for pilots on all vessels transiting the straits of Mackinaw. Nobody is allowed to anchor there anymore and Enbridge has further committed to tunnelling under Strait and moving the pipeline to a concrete lined tunnel by 2024, IIRC. Assuming Michigan doesn’t block that permit, too. Because climate politics are no reason to make petroleum transport safer...


That’s very positive and shows Enbridge is clearly working to make Line 5 work while the tunnel for 2024 is pursued. Good on them. Hopefully that is taken into account in the upcoming case.


----------



## Loachman (29 Apr 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> What do you mean a 'switch to rail'?


The oil in question is being moved by pipeline.

To move it by rail would require loading and unloading facilities and enough appropriate tank cars to move enough oil in a timely manner. They have to be built and financed. The existing rail lines have to be able to absorb extra trains and may or may not require upgrading to do so. The vast majority of the North American rail network is single-track for cost reasons. Additional passing sidings may have to be built, and/or others lengthened to be able to accommodate additional traffic. Additional locomotives would be required, but different railways have different peak and lull periods and frequently lend locomotives back-and-forth plus there are leasing companies.

Thanks for the document. It was a good comparison - not as much of a difference as I expected on the safety side, but it did not address relative costs.

And, on the safety side, it only takes one Lac Megantic...


----------



## Good2Golf (29 Apr 2021)

Loachman said:


> And, on the safety side, it only takes one Lac Megantic...



Does it, though?  

Where are the new pipelines going through Quebec? 🤔


----------



## Kirkhill (29 Apr 2021)

Is it feasible to use rail to connect pipelines? Rather than using rail to make the long hauls is it a possibility to use rail to jump weak nodes in the network and transport hydrocarbons from one under-utilized line to another?

I was thinking about this during the XL debates.  Some of that line is already in the ground.  The US State Department seems to only have jurisdiction over oil crossing the international borders.   Could the oil be transported by pipeline from Hardesty to a railhead on the Canadian side of the border, shipped by rail across the border and then trans-shipped again into the existing pipelines in the States?   Keep the rail segment as short as possible.

Maybe something similar for Michigan and Quebec?  If nothing else it would give them a port at which they could impose their blackmail,  I mean taxes.


----------



## daftandbarmy (29 Apr 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> Is it feasible to use rail to connect pipelines? Rather than using rail to make the long hauls is it a possibility to use rail to jump weak nodes in the network and transport hydrocarbons from one under-utilized line to another?
> 
> I was thinking about this during the XL debates.  Some of that line is already in the ground.  The US State Department seems to only have jurisdiction over oil crossing the international borders.   Could the oil be transported by pipeline from Hardesty to a railhead on the Canadian side of the border, shipped by rail across the border and then trans-shipped again into the existing pipelines in the States?   Keep the rail segment as short as possible.
> 
> Maybe something similar for Michigan and Quebec?  If nothing else it would give them a port at which they could impose their blackmail,  I mean taxes.



As you probably know better than I, when you talk to the people in the industries involved they make it all work somehow, anyways, already using a variety of 'modes and nodes', all generally done under the thoughtful scrutiny of the engineers and cost accountants.

It's just cheaper and more reliable, in general, if you can slam it in one mode at source. For oil and gas products, and especially for our landlocked petro-products, pipelines are generally the best option all round, especially if you're competing with a global marketplace that has actors in it like the Persian Gulf States where the oil and gas are only a stone's throw (literally in some cases) from navigable, tidal water.


----------



## Loachman (29 Apr 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Does it, though?
> 
> Where are the new pipelines going through Quebec? 🤔


Through any downtown areas?

That whole line was re-laid to skirt the town. That's not possible/practicable in most cases.


----------



## Loachman (29 Apr 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> Is it feasible to use rail to connect pipelines? Rather than using rail to make the long hauls is it a possibility to use rail to jump weak nodes in the network and transport hydrocarbons from one under-utilized line to another?
> 
> I was thinking about this during the XL debates.  Some of that line is already in the ground.  The US State Department seems to only have jurisdiction over oil crossing the international borders.   Could the oil be transported by pipeline from Hardesty to a railhead on the Canadian side of the border, shipped by rail across the border and then trans-shipped again into the existing pipelines in the States?   Keep the rail segment as short as possible.
> 
> Maybe something similar for Michigan and Quebec?  If nothing else it would give them a port at which they could impose their blackmail,  I mean taxes.


It's feasible, but every transloading operation increases the risk of some incident even though such would be unlikely and minor. It's already a dangerous line of work, and I knew one locomotive engineer who was crushed to death (and not quickly, either) several years ago.

It still involves the time and expense that I laid out above.

I'm not sure when Witmer is up for re-election, but she's not exactly popular in her state right now and a recall effort was being made. I've not followed that one, though, so do not know how it is progressing. Steven Crowder has been mulling about running against her.


----------



## Kirkhill (29 Apr 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> As you probably know better than I, when you talk to the people in the industries involved they make it all work somehow, anyways, already using a variety of 'modes and nodes', all generally done under the thoughtful scrutiny of the engineers and cost accountants.
> 
> It's just cheaper and more reliable, in general, if you can slam it in one mode at source. For oil and gas products, and especially for our landlocked petro-products, pipelines are generally the best option all round, especially if you're competing with a global marketplace that has actors in it like the Persian Gulf States where the oil and gas are only a stone's throw (literally in some cases) from navigable, tidal water.



Nodes and modes indeed.   Why logistics companies get the big bucks.  

What is the difference between delivering a strike package and a load of oil? Those invisible bubbles you try to avoid are governments instead of air defence zones.

The good news is that trade flows like water, always seeking the path of least resistance.  As long as there is a demand there will be a supply.

I am looking forward to the switch to the Hydrogen economy.  The Alberta can manufacture Hydrogen from Natural Gas and ship that to you.  We will also be able to charge you for the CO2 produced as a by-product.  You'll need that for your green-houses.


----------



## Kirkhill (29 Apr 2021)

Loachman said:


> It's feasible, but every transloading operation increases the risk of some incident even though such would be unlikely and minor. It's already a dangerous line of work, and I knew one locomotive engineer who was crushed to death (and not quickly, either) several years ago.
> 
> It still involves the time and expense that I laid out above.
> 
> I'm not sure when Witmer is up for re-election, but she's not exactly popular in her state right now and a recall effort was being made. I've not followed that one, though, so do not know how it is progressing. Steven Crowder has been mulling about running against her.




Agreed on Wittmer - I have a buddy down in Michigan (not Detroit) and he is definitely no fan of hers.

Also agreed on the time and expense, but as I suggested to D&B, the real world doesn't always supply the perfect solution so work-arounds are the norm.

I still can't wrap my head around North American LNG being delivered by sea to Europe being cost competitive with Russian NG delivered by pipeline.  But apparently it is...


----------



## Good2Golf (29 Apr 2021)

Loachman said:


> Through any downtown areas?
> 
> That whole line was re-laid to skirt the town. That's not possible/practicable in most cases.


So still by rail...no new pipelines.

check


----------



## Loachman (29 Apr 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> Also agreed on the time and expense, but as I suggested to D&B, the real world doesn't always supply the perfect solution so work-arounds are the norm.


If a profit can be made.

If the pipeline is to be closed, a rail link could be established, but, unless closure is announced well in advance, there would likely be a gap in service.

I am sure that somebody, somewhere, is already doing some basic contingency planning.

Barring any other developments, waiting for Witmer (one "m", or two? I remember seeing "Witler" signs in protest videos) to be voted out would be the cheapest option, and probably not take any longer.


----------



## Kirkhill (29 Apr 2021)

Apparently we're both wrong.   It's "Whitmer".  Who knew?  

Her re-election is due next year.


----------



## Loachman (29 Apr 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> So still by rail...no new pipelines.
> 
> check


Not sure what that means.

That oil was already being moved by rail. The inhabitants of Lac Megantic didn't want a repeat, so the line was to be moved out of town. No pipeline was in use.

I just read through Lac-Mégantic rail disaster - Wikipedia. I'd forgotten much of the story. It's a chilling read - a disaster just waiting to happen and a railway company much shadier than I realized at the time.

The line may or may not have been moved. The article was not clear, or maybe I missed something as I was reading quickly.,


----------



## Loachman (29 Apr 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> Her re-election is due next year.


The mid-term election, yes.

That makes sense, as she was not elected in the last election.


----------



## Good2Golf (29 Apr 2021)

Loachman said:


> Not sure what that means.
> 
> That oil was already being moved by rail. The inhabitants of Lac Megantic didn't want a repeat, so the line was to be moved out of town. No pipeline was in use.
> 
> ...


We wer, or at least I was, talking about rail still being an option.  Your statement that “all it takes is one Lac Megantic” seemed to imply that it would cause a case for pipelines, vice allowing rail transport of petroleum products to continue.

Rerouting oil around one town doesn’t do anything to weaken the case for rail still being used at current levels, if not increased, to counter potential pipeline closures to Line 5 or others.


----------



## Loachman (29 Apr 2021)

I am not against rail at all, especially as I am a railfan, or against movement of oil by rail, especially if looney-left environmentalists and politicians keep holding up or stopping construction of pipelines and thereby leave no other option.

One advantage is the ability to upgrade lines and add locomotives and cars to handle the load without having to jump through ridiculous regulatory hoops to do so, unless a whole knew line is required. That could/should save years, but facilities still have to be planned, financed, and built and rail capacity increased. If there is a stable market, that may well be worthwhile. If a pipeline is shut down by a wayward state governor and her replacement re-opens it two years later, it would not be worthwhile and might not even be possible in that remaining two years.

It is still less efficient, and would not happen if pipelines were allowed to be fairly negotiated, planned, financed, and built.

Railways already own enough land along their rights-of-way to build additional passing sidings without requiring permission, but they need to be reasonably assured of a resulting benefit. Land would probably have to be negotiated and bought for the transloading facilities but, unless the wells are right next to a track, the oil would have to be moved from there to the transloading facility as well, either by pipeline (but a much shorter one) or road.


----------



## daftandbarmy (29 Apr 2021)

Forget the safety issues of shipping oil by rail, think about the risks of sending it by truck, which is even more scary:

From 2018:

Desperate Canadian oil producers turn to tanker trucks to ship crude as supply glut grows​Almost 230,000 barrels of crude were exported by oil truck in August, the most in data going back to January 2015

Canada’s pipeline bottlenecks are pushing Canadian crude prices to the lowest in at least a decade, which has made shipping oil by truck more cost effective. At Hardisty, Alberta, heavy Western Canadian Select sold for US$52.40 a barrel less than West Texas Intermediate crude futures earlier this month, the biggest discount in Bloomberg data going back to 2008.

Almost 230,000 barrels of crude were exported by truck in August, the most in data going back to January 2015, according to data provided by Statistics Canada. Every month since December, more than 100,000 barrels have been exported by truck. A typical tanker truck can carry about 250 barrels of oil, Boettcher said. Hiring a truck to ship crude from the Permian basin of West Texas to Houston, a distance of almost 500 miles, costs about US$15 a barrel one way, or double that if the tanker returns empty, said Sandy Fielden, director of research for the commodities group at Morningstar Inc.









						Desperate Canadian oil producers turn to tanker trucks to ship crude as supply glut grows
					

Almost 230,000 barrels of crude were exported by oil truck in August, the most in data going back to January 2015




					financialpost.com


----------



## Brad Sallows (29 Apr 2021)

> I am looking forward to the switch to the Hydrogen economy



As am I.  The containment failures will be spectacular.


----------



## Kirkhill (29 Apr 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> As am I.  The containment failures will be spectacular.





> *Hydrogen burns* with a pale blue *flame* that is *nearly invisible in dayligh*t. The *flame* may appear yellow if there are impurities in the air like dust or sodium. A pure *hydrogen flame will not produce smoke*



But you'll probably never notice it.  Unless the car behind you starts melting.


----------



## Good2Golf (29 Apr 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> As am I.  The containment failures will be spectacular.


“Oh....the humanity....”


----------



## Brad Sallows (29 Apr 2021)

There will be plenty of other combustibles at hand to add colour to flames and exhaust.


----------



## daftandbarmy (30 Apr 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> “Oh....the humanity....”


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Apr 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Forget the safety issues of shipping oil by rail, think about the risks of sending it by truck, which is even more scary:
> 
> From 2018:
> 
> ...


I am certainly not seeing that low value reflected in the price at the pump.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (30 Apr 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> I am certainly not seeing that low value reflected in the price at the pump.


That is a 2018 article and you know that most of what BC residents pay at the pump are taxes...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Apr 2021)

Should have had more coffee before posting.

I used to do pipeline crossing approvals for NEB regulated pipelines under Sec. 108/109 of the NEBA. In the 20 years I did that pipeline technology advanced tremendously, particularly in the area of Horizontally Directional Drilled (HDD) crossings. What they couldn't do in the beginning, became routine near the end, as long as they had the laydown area they generally could do it. What this meant is that it removed abrupt angles from pipelines crossing under waterways and pushed pipelines deeper under the water way and further from the banks. This removed most of the major natural threats to the pipeline and most common failure areas. Another area is the improvement of sensing Pigs and tracking of them, so problem areas can be better identified and located, allowing them to be repaired prior to ruptures or leaks.


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Nov 2021)

Biden administration weighing whether shutting down Enbridge Line 5.  I suppose they actually have the authority to do so, if they choose (state of MI apparently did/does not).  I am skeptical that "weighing" will lead to shutdown.  Still, would be a good experiment to run, preferably if it can start before winter.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Nov 2021)

Self-inflicted wounds


----------



## daftandbarmy (11 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Biden administration weighing whether shutting down Enbridge Line 5.  I suppose they actually have the authority to do so, if they choose (state of MI apparently did/does not).  I am skeptical that "weighing" will lead to shutdown.  Still, would be a good experiment to run, preferably if it can start before winter.



It's the Michigan Governor that wants to shut it down. The Federal government disagrees, it seems:

White House says it's not considering Line 5 shutdown​
"The White House pledged to discuss a key pipeline that carries Canadian crude through Michigan with the northern neighbor, stressing the U.S. isn’t considering a shutdown of the conduit the state’s governor wants shuttered. 

The Canadian and U.S. governments will “engage constructively” on the future of Enbridge Inc.’s Line 5 pipeline, the White House principle deputy press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, said at a briefing Tuesday.

“These negotiations and discussions between the two countries shouldn’t be viewed as anything more than that, and certainly not an indicator that the U.S. government is considering shutdown,” she said. “That is something that we’re not going to do.”

The comments helped clarify the position of the Biden administration in an escalating dispute between Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, a Biden ally, and Enbridge. Speculation the U.S. was considering a shutdown of the line that delivers propane and oil to the Midwest triggered strong criticism from Republicans at a time when energy prices are surging because of tight supplies."









						White House says it's not considering Line 5 shutdown - BNN Bloomberg
					

The White House isn’t considering a shutdown of an oil pipeline between Canada and Michigan that the state’s governor wants shuttered, a spokeswoman said.




					www.bnnbloomberg.ca


----------



## Brad Sallows (11 Nov 2021)

As usual, media have a hard time getting the simple details out correctly.  First stories were about shutting down the pipeline, but at least got the part about "just looking at it for now" correct.  The most likely candidate for triggering the new headlines is the environmental impact studies being conducted by Corps of Engineers (for proposed replacement).  A flat-out statement "we support the continued existence of a pipeline" would help, but they obviously prefer not to do that if they can just refocus the discussion on the replacement studies and drop having to take a strong stand on a contentious issue.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (11 Nov 2021)

I'm freaking glad I loaded up on O&G investments when the market tanked and everyone was jumping on the "oil is dead" bandwagon.  

Demand is going to continue to climb and with little to no investment in infrastructure or exploration, the value of the existing assets is going up.

Couple this with energy companies transitioning from a "growth" model like they had in the 2000s to a "value for shareholders" model and I'm going to enjoy seeing the printer go brrrrrggghhh!


----------



## Brad Sallows (11 Nov 2021)

O&G, and all the other existing energy companies, are going to want to continue being energy companies.  Investing in energy is approximately like investing in telecom at this point in human history.   People do not want less of either.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (11 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> O&G, and all the other existing energy companies, are going to want to continue being energy companies.  Investing in energy is approximately like investing in telecom at this point in human history.   People do not want less of either.


At the end of the day, they provide a service people want and also need.  Government intervention and interference will just cause the the Energy Companies themselves to download costs to the customer. 

People have shown time and again that they will continue to pay.  As long as the demand is there, Energy Companies will continue to provide the product.

The thing that people don't understand about Energy Companies is they make money on every aspect of the process of bringing product to the market, especially those companies that are vertically integrated.  

OPEC+ is going to milk this oil boom for a while to make up for the losses of the past year and a half.  It is not in their strategic interest to see prices decline, eapecially when Saudi and others are making money @$10 a barrel of Brent.  

As for Canadian Companies like Suncor, CNR,, they have enough existing capacity to last for the next 25 years on existing Reserves with no new exploration or development.  Now is the time to reap the rewards of the hardwork of the previous development cycle.


----------



## Brad Sallows (11 Nov 2021)

Also, as some investors decide to invest more "ethically", there will be opportunities to make a few bucks by investing "profitably".


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Nov 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> At the end of the day, they provide a service people want and also need.  Government intervention and interference will just cause the the Energy Companies themselves to download costs to the customer.



And they're the safest way to shift carbon products around:

Oil and Natural Gas Pipelines​Pipelines are a critical part of Canada’s oil and natural gas infrastructure. Pipelines are the safest and most efficient way to move large volumes of oil and natural gas from development areas to refineries, petrochemical plants and even to our homes and businesses for use.
There are more than 840,000 kilometres (km) of pipelines cross Canada, and they are all regulated (source: *Natural Resources Canada*). The federal government regulates about 10% of Canada’s pipelines, or more than 73,000 km, which are primarily large transmission pipelines. The remaining pipelines are regulated provincially.









						Canada Pipeline Maps & Facts | Trans Mountain Pipeline, Keystone XL, Enbridge Line 3
					

Canada's pipelines deliver energy to Canadians and export markets like the United States. Pipelines are the safest way to move large volumes of oil and natural gas.




					www.capp.ca


----------



## Remius (15 Nov 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> And they're the safest way to shift carbon products around:
> 
> Oil and Natural Gas Pipelines​Pipelines are a critical part of Canada’s oil and natural gas infrastructure. Pipelines are the safest and most efficient way to move large volumes of oil and natural gas from development areas to refineries, petrochemical plants and even to our homes and businesses for use.
> There are more than 840,000 kilometres (km) of pipelines cross Canada, and they are all regulated (source: *Natural Resources Canada*). The federal government regulates about 10% of Canada’s pipelines, or more than 73,000 km, which are primarily large transmission pipelines. The remaining pipelines are regulated provincially.
> ...


You would think that with exploding trains that people would have gotten the hint that pipelines are safer but I guess not.  My guess is that it has less to do with safety and more to do with *any* oil and gas extraction.


----------



## YZT580 (15 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> You would think that with exploding trains that people would have gotten the hint that pipelines are safer but I guess not.  My guess is that it has less to do with safety and more to do with *any* oil and gas extraction.


Unless they actually live in an area where there is gas extraction I doubt if they even think about where it comes from but they do listen to the news and spend hours on google.  Pipelines are bad, the internet says so.  Trains are Canadian and they are already there and visible.  Nobody thinks about them except when they go off the rails and that is always due to Human error: nobody thinks about the pipelines being inherently safer it was just a mistake that the brakes didn't hold in *Lac-Mégantic.  *


----------



## lenaitch (15 Nov 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> And they're the safest way to shift carbon products around:
> 
> Oil and Natural Gas Pipelines​Pipelines are a critical part of Canada’s oil and natural gas infrastructure. Pipelines are the safest and most efficient way to move large volumes of oil and natural gas from development areas to refineries, petrochemical plants and even to our homes and businesses for use.
> There are more than 840,000 kilometres (km) of pipelines cross Canada, and they are all regulated (source: *Natural Resources Canada*). The federal government regulates about 10% of Canada’s pipelines, or more than 73,000 km, which are primarily large transmission pipelines. The remaining pipelines are regulated provincially.
> ...


The problem is too many noisy voices want that infrastructure to end - now.  I think is it fairly clear that its heyday as the default transportation fuel, particularly for light personal transportation, is passing. How fast ?  Who knows.  I may not own an EV but I am sure my kid will.  As well, possibly as a grid power source.  But anyone who thinks petroleum will end completely has not explored the vast array of products and systems that depend on it.  Nor have they considered the social disruption.  Without some significant scientific breakthroughs (I know, the next 'great battery breakthrough' is just around the corner), anyone who thinks we can continue anywhere close to our current economy without it is, in my opinion, delusional.  We will all be living closer to the early 1800s.


----------



## YZT580 (15 Nov 2021)

lenaitch said:


> anyone who thinks we can continue anywhere close to our current economy without it is, in my opinion, delusional.  We will all be living closer to the early 1800s.


Except you will need a permit to cut down a tree to provide fuel for your fireplace that you will need because the electric heaters only work when the windmills are spinning.  The Brits and the Germans have discovered that in the last few months.  But it will take care of the population growth. I think that 45 was an old age back then.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Nov 2021)

Be a while before there is surplus power and stable grids capable of powering warfighting  equipment.


----------



## YZT580 (15 Nov 2021)

There are proven designs available for the navy already.  HMS Victory, Old Ironsides for two.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (15 Nov 2021)

YZT580 said:


> There are proven designs available for the navy already.  HMS Victory, Old Ironsides for two.


Then the Chinese show up with a coal fired ironclad and take them as prizes.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (15 Nov 2021)

This is a gas pipeline crossing I reviewed and worked on. The original crossing had been buried, but a very strong freshet wiped out all the bank armouring the proponent had done the season before and exposed the gas pipeline and the two oil pipelines (one which had previously broke about 6 years previous a ways upstream) As the regulator I told them "Start fixing it now and we get the paperwork started" Luckily I was working with a proponent rep who I had a lot of trust in to do the right thing. The Gas pipeline was to big to do a HDD for, so they built this 400m pipeline bridge and the oil lines were done with HDD, for about 800m as I recall to avoid further exposure. HDD has come a very long way, to the point where almost every larger crossing is done that way as opposed to the two stage cofferdam method. Generally most pipeline failures happen at waterway crossings on the older pipes, due to bends, and bed movement/exposure. Ironically, opposing new pipelines means the old ones with higher risks stay in service. The goal should be to replace all of the major pipelines laid before the 1980's with new pipe, built and laid to modern standards.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (15 Nov 2021)

I don't  see Line 5 being shut down. It is the line that brings propane to Michigan. Michigan is the #1 user state of propane. More homes are heated with it than anywhere else. There are also a number of court challenges surrounding the issue. After the last election the democrats are on extremely thin ice.
As well, not that it matters to most Americans, Line 5 supplies Chemical Valley in Sarnia. The majority of aviation fuel in Ontario is produced there from oil running in L5. L5 runs under the river bed between Michigan and Sarnia. L5 supplies about 4,700 miles of pipelines and around 60 pumping stations supplying refineries around the Great Lakes, the Midwest and Ontario. It is the main line supplying these areas.
L5 originates in Wisconsin and also carries crude from North Dakota.
Enbridge reversed L9 (now 9B) that used to flow from Montreal to Sarnia. It now carries crude east from Sarnia to Montreal to supply refineries there.

Line 5 carries approximately 540,000 barrels, or 22.7 million gallons, of oil and natural gas liquids per day. That's a lot of trucks.

All that to say that L5 is more important in jobs, businesses and votes than Whitmer's green dream of sticking it to the petroleum industry. She's messing with the strategic oil distribution.


----------



## lenaitch (16 Nov 2021)

YZT580 said:


> There are proven designs available for the navy already.  HMS Victory, Old Ironsides for two.


Can you launch a missile from a wooden deck?


----------



## Navy_Pete (16 Nov 2021)

lenaitch said:


> Can you launch a missile from a wooden deck?


At least once!

The exhaust does a U and goes up, but probably bad for sails. Maybe do it like Master and Commander, where they had that tow behind decoy and use something like that as a launching platform? Huzzah!

Reminds me a bit like the Orc warships in Warcraft, where they run on faith and a few hamsters, with geometry that makes no sense (but looks cool). Our ships are also running on faith, but missing the cool paint jobs, occasional decorative spikes and garish paintjobs.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (16 Nov 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> At least once!
> 
> The exhaust does a U and goes up, but probably bad for sails. Maybe do it like Master and Commander, where they had that tow behind decoy and use something like that as a launching platform? Huzzah!
> 
> Reminds me a bit like the Orc warships in Warcraft, where they run on faith and a few hamsters, with geometry that makes no sense (but looks cool). Our ships are also running on faith, but missing the cool paint jobs, occasional decorative spikes *and garish paintjobs*.



Don't we have a couple in Dazzle paintjobs?


----------



## FSTO (19 Nov 2021)

I think that John Oliver is a bit of a twat but he did have a good bit on the need for electrical infrastructure. 

The Power Grid: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)​




The biggest issue is that the green energy is best produced in areas where not many people are but needs to be transported to where the people are. I have a better idea, instead of putting massive solar and wind farms on top of productive farmland why don't we cover the dead zone suburbs with solar panels? They are eyesores anyway and we wouldn't have the massive power loss during the transportation phase. 
Win win!!!


----------



## Kirkhill (19 Nov 2021)

FSTO said:


> I think that John Oliver is a bit of a twat but he did have a good bit on the need for electrical infrastructure.
> 
> The Power Grid: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)​
> 
> ...




Not a big alternate energy fan but this strikes me as doable









						IKEA Is Building Solar Car Parks as a Clean Energy Investment
					

IKEA is investing in clean energy by building solar car parks as canopies for its parking lots, to supply the stores with means of clean energy.




					www.greenmatters.com
				




If nothing else it will keep the rain off.


----------



## QV (22 Nov 2021)

'Pipelines will be blown up,' says David Suzuki, if leaders don't act on climate change
		


The comments suggest a significant number of people believe Suzuki is a fraud. Which is good to see.


----------



## Remius (22 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> 'Pipelines will be blown up,' says David Suzuki, if leaders don't act on climate change
> 
> 
> 
> The comments suggest a significant number of people believe Suzuki is a fraud. Which is good to see.


So he’s basically saying that his side will resort to criminal activity if they don’t get what they want?


----------



## Good2Golf (22 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> So he’s basically saying that his side will resort to criminal activity if they don’t get what they want?


…bet that would be good for the environment…


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> So he’s basically saying that his side will resort to criminal activity if they don’t get what they want?



Basically what I think he's saying is that he desperately wants to be handcuffed immediately, and spend some time in jail, for inciting terrorist activity.


----------



## QV (22 Nov 2021)

I wonder if that huckster keeps the utilities on all the time in all his homes.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 Nov 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Basically what I think he's saying is that he desperately wants to be handcuffed immediately, and spend some time in jail, for inciting terrorist activity.


He wants pictures of himself getting handcuff and put into a van, but not of being released a couple of hours later with conditions to appear. He desperately wants to remain relevant.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> I wonder if that huckster keeps the utilities on all the time in all his homes.


I read he has 4 of them.


----------



## Furniture (22 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> So he’s basically saying that his side will resort to criminal activity if they don’t get what they want?


It's not criminal if it's what your religion demands... and you're a lunatic zealot. 

While I doubt Suzuki is a true believer, he needs the zealots to finance his lifestyle.


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Nov 2021)

FSTO said:


> I think that John Oliver is a bit of a twat but he did have a good bit on the need for electrical infrastructure.
> 
> The Power Grid: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)​
> 
> ...


I thought solar farms were prohibited from being on anything better than class 4 farmland?


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 Nov 2021)

Which speaks to our Infrastructure Hardening requirements. 

We're focused right now on dealing with client change but should also take in account terrorism/ aggressive activism, of course:

Time to overhaul infrastructure​ 
Climate specialists say a major overhaul of infrastructure in communities across Canada is needed to make homes, buildings, roads and rail lines more resilient to extreme weather events, as climate change makes those events more likely.

"Infrastructure decisions in Canada are not accounting for a changing climate," said Ryan Ness, research director for adaptation at the Canadian Institute for Climate Choices. 




			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/british-columbia-infrastructure-flooding-sainte-marthe-1.6258594?ref=mobilerss&cmp=newsletter_CBC%20British%20Columbia_1633_338980


----------



## OldSolduer (23 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> I wonder if that huckster keeps the utilities on all the time in all his homes.


A few years ago - ten or more IIRC - he went on a cross Canada climate change tour - in a big giant diesel burning bus. 

Oh and to top it off he demanded his personal security bodyguards be made up of attractive women. It was reported but no one said much about it.

Now if Harper had made that request.....


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Dec 2021)

Not a pipeline, but welcome to BC








						VIDEO: First Nations land dispute breaks out at open house for proposed fish farm site - Campbell River Mirror
					

The second engagement session was held in-person at the Port McNeil Community Hall




					www.campbellrivermirror.com


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Dec 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Not a pipeline, but welcome to BC
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is why I feel sorry for a few of my clients, who have to run these things


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Dec 2021)

Remius said:


> So he’s basically saying that his side will resort to criminal potentially terrorist activity depending on how it's prosecuted if they don’t get what they want?


FTFY

Let's see if he and/or his allies/supporters reject the idea of such activity ....


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Dec 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> FTFY
> 
> Let's see if he and/or his allies/supporters reject the idea of such activity ....



He's apologized now, which makes everything OK right?

Statement and apology from Dr. David Suzuki​

On Saturday, Nov. 20, during a media interview with CHEK News after a protest in Victoria, B.C., David Suzuki gave the following answer when asked what might happen if government leaders don’t urgently address the ever-worsening climate crisis:

“We’re in deep, deep doo doo. And the leading experts have been telling us for over 40 years. This is what we’ve come to. The next stage after this, there are going to be pipelines blown up if our leaders don’t pay attention to what’s going on.”

Dr. Suzuki’s comments were born out of many years of watching government inaction while the climate crisis continues to get worse. He has issued this apology:

“The remarks I made were poorly chosen and I should not have said them. Any suggestion that violence is inevitable is wrong and will not lead us to a desperately-needed solution to the climate crisis. My words were spoken out of extreme frustration and I apologize.

“We must find a way to stop the environmental damage we are doing to the planet and we must do so in a non-violent manner.”

The work of the David Suzuki Foundation is driven by dozens of experts from across Canada in the disciplines of science, policy, law, communications and public engagement. Since 1990, the Foundation has produced credible and reliable evidence-based environmental information, and worked with all levels of government (including Indigenous leadership), business and communities to resolve critical environmental issues.






						Statement and apology from Dr. David Suzuki - David Suzuki Foundation
					

On Saturday, Nov. 20, during a media interview with CHEK News after a protest in Victoria, B.C., David Suzuki gave the following answer when asked what might happen if government leaders don’t urgently address the ever-worsening climate crisis: “We’re in deep, deep doo doo. And the leading...




					davidsuzuki.org


----------



## suffolkowner (4 Dec 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> FTFY
> 
> Let's see if he and/or his allies/supporters reject the idea of such activity ....


I can't see that, there's always been a radical environmental fringe group that promoted property destruction. That fringe is bound to grow larger and more radical with time


----------



## Kirkhill (4 Dec 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> He's apologized now, which makes everything OK right?
> 
> Statement and apology from Dr. David Suzuki​
> 
> ...



Sounds like a serious own goal.  Must have upset his financial backers.  The only thing he contributes is his reputation and if he goes "fringe" they lose the middle.


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Dec 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> He's apologized now, which makes everything OK right? ...


Well, his lawyers can now say, "he's not the one who lit the fuse, Your Honour", right?


Kirkhill said:


> Sounds like a serious own goal.  *Must have upset his financial backers.*  ...


That right there.


----------

