Enbridge
pipeline, unanswered questions.
On November 6th the Enbridge pipeline was in
the news again and it was stressed that acceptance by the public and in
particular by the First Nations is of prime importance. In my 3 emails to the
government and Enbridge I have stressed that far more details on the
development of this project should be readily available to the public. A lot of
positive information on pipelines and carbon tax is hidden on websites and
blogs, leaving the general public in the dark on what is happening. On September
1st I sent Enbridge a copy of my article “the economic impact of
carbon tax”, which is now in the firsts part of my blog. On September 10th
Enbridge replied “thank you Neil, we appreciate your support” You will note
that under point 13 many rules and regulations are discussed along with some explanation
about what went wrong in the past. I hereby repeat the unanswered questions as
I saw them:
14
Pipeline and Tanker transport details yet to be clarified
The general public opposes the Northern Gateway project
because few details of the project can be found in newspapers magazines and
official bulletins. Below are a number of points which have to be answered
before the public can gain more confidence that this project will be much safer
than any previous undertakings:
a)
Leak detection
using internal sensors
Ten days before the Kalamazoo spill Enbridge had told the federal
regulators that they could shut down the line in 8 minutes but yet it took 17
hours.(EP10). Has Enbridge since that time done regular tests by creating
artificial spills as discussed at the Kitimat hearing?(EP26,27). Has it been
confirmed that the instruments can’t detect a leak smaller than 1.5% of the
flow? What is the average response time for more severe leaks? For the Kitimat
line how often and at how many locations will such tests been done?
b)
Leak detection using external instruments
Enbridge improved the leak detection system of their Michigan line
by installing external sensors.(EP26). What type of sensors are these and how
small are the leaks they can detect? Enbridge does a lot of research work in
leak detection (EP29), yet they don’t release any information of how sensitive
some of the options, like the Westminster acoustic system (EP 20,21) (EP28)
are. They mention that there are many vendors from which they will make a
selection.(EP45).Surely those venders have some test data for their products
and an overview could be given about the capabilities This lack of details has frustrated the BC
Environment Minister (EP 27) and is certainly something which makes the public
wonder if there will be hidden surprises.
c)
Previous leaks and new pipeline regulations
It seems logical to have a
summary explanation of all recent major spills. These are 2012 Wisconsin
(190,000 litres) 2012 Red Deer (230,000 litres), 2011 Stingray (gas),2010
Kalamazoo( 3 megalitres) (EP6). Were the design criteria for these lines
different than those of the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association (EP 31). How old were those lines,
how often were they inspected and most importantly how would the spills have
been prevented had the present regulations and proposed technology been in
place. Are the Canadian regulations as strict as the new US regulations. A
summary of the present regulations in particular the maintenance requirements
seems useful to satisfy the public that things have changed as a result of all
those spills.
d)
Explanation of regulatory
violations
In 2008 Enbridge incurred over 500 regulatory violations in one
year during pipeline installation in Wisconsin.(EP6). What type of violations
were those? Was Enbridge not aware of these regulations or was there
insufficient oversight, How are regulations for a new project researched,
recorded and included in bid documents for contractors who do work on the
project? It is noted that on the same project Enbridge had to pay $1.1 million to
settle a lawsuit related to over 100 environmental violations. They violated
numerous permits resulting in impacts on wetlands and navigable waterways.
(EP59) Is Enbridge aware of all the BC regulations and will they be listed to
allow all workers to know about them. Are they included in their design and proposed
construction methods?
e)
Cracks detection
tools
The NTSB report about the Kalamazoo spill shows that the tools
used to measure cracks were inadequate for the type of cracks in pipeline 6B.(EP20)
Why were these tools inadequate, what are the presently available tools, how
accurate are they? SGS uses a pig to measure all types of weld defects
(EP49-50), NDT uses pigs and crawlers(EP 49). What equipment will Enbridge use
for the Kitimat project. Are those tools used by many other companies and what
is their experience? How often will the lines be checked for cracks?
f)
Isolation valves
With reference to 13 j) above the public will want to know what is
the maximum spill which could occur in each section of the line. Many people
may not realize that when a section between two isolation valves has several up
and down segments only one segment will be emptied when the leak is at the
lowest point of that segment. The worst spill can occur when the leak is at the
bottom of a hill just ahead of the isolation valve or anywhere in a perfectly
horizontal segment.
g) Earthquake considerations
Like buildings, pipelines can be designed to withstand
earthquakes. An Alaska line was designed to withstand up to 20 feet lateral and
up to 10 feet vertical movements at known fault lines. In 2002 it withstood a
magnitude 7.9 earthquake.(EP37). Also note that the Westminster leak detection
system monitors vibrations and acoustic at every metre of the pipeline(EP20)
and can detect landslides and earthquakes(EP23). Enbridge describes their
earthquake and tsunami strategies in a 29 October 2012 blog (EP50-51) and a
summary should be published to ensure that the public is aware that Enbridge
has already done quite some pre- engineering work on
this important aspect.
h)
Tanker selection
and sea conditions
At the hearings Captain Walsh gave several reasons why 20 year old
tankers, which are double hulled vessels at the end of their service life,
should not be used (EP6). Transport Canada approved the use of 20 year old
vessels (EP8). Will Enbridge avoid using such old ships considering that tanker
design has changed since that time (CT27,28) Captain Walsh also felt that more
pilots and tugs were required and that details were missing about the treatment
of ballast.(EP7). How has that been resolved?
Mr Sweeny, a retired naval commander reported sea conditions which
rolled his ship 60 degrees to port and another 20,000 ton ship nearly stood on
her nose.(EP3). This must have been very unusual conditions which can with
present weather forecasting be avoided. Even without good forecasting Alcan’s
bulk carriers must have made thousands of trips through these waters. For well
over 50 years they shipped alumina powder, the raw material for their smelter,
from the West Indies to Kitimat. Their logbooks could give an insight of the
sea conditions. There are documentaries of huge tankers being towed and nudged through Alaska waters by powerful tugs. How
comparable is that operation to the present proposal? Have there been any spills? A US Coast Guard
report shows that between 1991 and 2004 roughly36% of spills came from ships
and barges, 28% from facilities, 9% from pipelines, 20% from non tank vessels,
7% from mystery spills and only 5% from
oil tankers.(CT 28). Are there any later figures available?
No comments:
Post a Comment