Leakproof Pipeline 5

[dik]

Is it possible to construct a pipeline that is reasonably leakproof. Does it have to be exposed, buried, or whatever? The actual construction? materials? single or double wall? monitors for leakage? inspection both during construction and in service? cost? any other issues?


Dik

 

[IRstuff]

"Is it my imagination, or does the rest of the world's pipelines appear to be safer."

I vote imagination; I think the rest of the world does not play by the same set of rules as the US. Things are less transparent and people don't expect to survive certain things that are a given in the US, nor do they have the same level of influence on regulations.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[BigInch]

I think it is not (entirely my imagination, but don't yet have the stats to prove it. I live in the rest of the world and IMO many nationalities actually have a VERY MUCH higher standard of expectations of many things. We expect national health care, for example. We expect high quality, safety, to have our paid-for seat on the plane w/o violence, clean water and air, personal data protection, no GM foods... even if we don't all the time get it. Why do you think they keep on looking for MH 370 for so long after all hope of finding any traces of it were more than obviously futile. The Malay and Chinese people expected it and the company expected that it was necessary to provide it. The expectations of USA nationals has been low ever since Blackhawk Down was released and worsened when no weapons of mass destruction were ever found in Iraq and those were recent high points.

Technology is stealing American jobs. Stop visas for robots.

 

[LittleInch]

I would like to see whether statistically in terms of incidents per km there is much difference.

It could just be the sheer number and length of pipelines in the US.

However there is something to it I think.

Non US pipeline codes whilst using B31.4/8 as their base add in manufacturing pipe tolerance and, in general, are a bit more conservative.

In Europe and many other countries, the national Gas network started life as government owned companies and naturally tended to a "safer" design and also spent money on maintence and inspection. The root of the magnetic pig design came from the study centre of the UK gas industry where they developed the technology when it was a govt funded business.

when you add in the age of much of the US pipeline network compared to the ROW. the increase in steel quality over time and a higher population density meaning risks need to be lower to be acceptable then overall I suspect the US does have a higher incident rate. That's certainly the impression....

"Things are less transparent and people don't expect to survive certain things that are a given in the US, nor do they have the same level of influence on regulations"
Hmmm, Maybe in Africa and parts of Asia, but not in Europe.



Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[BigInch]

I got it.

I think what makes the biggest difference is that, if a textile factory, or a pipeline blows up and people get killed in Russia, Pakistan, China, India, Indonesia, Bangladesh and many other countries, FIRST they put the owner in jail, then they sort out over the next few months. If the boss is guilty in China, maybe he gets whacked.

Maybe foreign pipe mfg and coating and corrosion control procedures are better.

Technology is stealing American jobs. Stop visas for robots.

 

[LittleInch]

Normally the "sort it out" involves transfer of money from one party to another....

A little off subject, but this was a case in point. $ 190MM apparently though how much ever got to the front line is not available....

https://business-humanrights.org/en/trafigura-lawsuits-re-côte-d’ivoire

They did imprison the chief Exec for a while when he went to visit.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[dik]

Thanks gentlemen... some really great information. It'll take a few days to sift through the answers.

"You've posted a lot. What brings this question?" just curious, and, couldn't answer my son's question (and I thought I knew everything <G>). It, however, was a good question.

Dik

 

[Gator]

Here's what an 'exploding' buried water line looks like:

https://youtu.be/BKryeX6vH6A

 

[dik]

MK3223:
I was going through the responses and came across the following:

"Sorry, not so sure what are the questions.
Everything is possible...."

It being a slow day, I realised that you imply that "Nothing is Impossible"... and then had the thought, "Ever try to get off a mailing list?"

The pipeline repair thread is also pretty good. Have a great day...

Dik

 

[BigInch]

Trying to pay off my taxes, so I called HMRC and got the exact balance. Making the transfer to pay it off took about an hour I guess. Today I received a bill, posted in the mail from HMRC, England. Yes, precisely, a bill for 0.10 GBP. The amount of penalty added for the time it took to make the tranfer. At that rate it'll be awhile before I get off that list.

Technology is stealing American jobs. Stop visas for robots.

 

[cvg]

13 cents...

did the stamp cost more?

 

[dik]

money's no object... intelligence, however, seems to be at a premium.

Dik

 

[BigInch]

Ya it cost them £1.17 to send a bill for £0.10 That's greed at it's worst.



Technology is stealing American jobs. Stop visas for robots.

 

[FIG Journey]

Truck it or train it. Of course this doesn't stop that mode of transport from skidding off the rails and blowing up all over the place. I find it funny how we even need to ship our resources through a pipeline to some other place so they can use it. It is all driven by money hungry mad men. No matter where you go all the natural resources are right in your back yard. But if you want more, which we all do, you will need to get it shipped in from somewhere else. It's too bad the environment is the controlling factor in all this or we could just run all we need down our river systems (leak proof and all if you take out the environment factor). Star Trek might have an answer in one of their episodes.

 

[dik]

The question arose because of a dialogue with my son. We have an issue in Canada with one province wanting to run a pipeline across British Columbia to the Pacific Ocean to supply China. The federal government wants to do the pipeline as well as the source (Alberta tar sands). The route is through pristine natural resource area... I'd mentioned to my son that pipeline is likely the safest method, but, they often leaked, causing problems. Not being a piping person, I had no (little) idea of what could be done to improve this history. I'll summarise the thread and send it on to a couple of people I know for consideration.

Dik

 

[BigInch]

The Gateway. You can probably understand why Keystone and Dakota Access have had the same problem. Pipeline are the best way, at least the safest and by far the cheapest form of overland transport and they are the most environmentally friendly way to move large quantities of most fluids. Trees must be removed, but other than temporary construction activities, there is little remaining impact on nature, if things go as planned. One large pipelines can take 10s of thousands of trucks off the roads, reducing emissions and improving road safety. They also put thousands of truck drivers off the roads too ... but their biggest problem yet is that they need lots and lots of land, that they supposedly can't afford to buy outright. They only lease the rights to use the land ... basically forever .. at a relatively low cost. So, they are essentially able to operate cheaper than railroads for example, because they use cheap public and private lands. Now after using all that cheaply obtained land, they want the public to accept the risks of operating the pipeline on top of it. True, pipelines create jobs, at least some somewhere, and pay taxes, at least some somewhere, however they don't create a whole lot of employment, after subtracting the truck drivers out of work it's probably negative, and some pay very little tax, especially if partnerships are structured the right way in the USA. So what remains in many peoples minds is, should we let them use cheap land in return for the limited environmental benefits of reduced trucks and emissions, or not. If we do, will the benefits of that compensate for the risk we take of leaks and line breaks on our lands. Many people think not. This is especially true for BC, since little or none of the oil production benefit will go to BC, yet BC will have more miles of potentially leaking pipeline risk to accept. On top of that, there will be quite a few more oceangoing tankers operating in the Sound. On top of that, will BC get much tax revenue from the oil companies that operate and pay taxes in Alberta. Will BC get the benefit of burning that oil as fuel? No, it's going to Japan. Considering all those items on the wrong side of the list, the whole risk-reward scenario of the Gateway project from BC's perspective is tilted very much towards Alberta's favour. That's the same reason Keystone had such a hard road to hoe in the USA. USA gets the risk and pollution, but not much else. Gateway is best from a USA standpoint, as BC would get the risk and pollution. Can we build a leakproof pipeline to eliminate the potential risk of leaks? I think it's a tall order. Better to study the statistical leak rate and see if you can successfully mitigate the effects of that, or ... take the best route for BC, which could be send it through Keystone.

Technology is stealing American jobs. Stop visas for robots.

 

[FIG Journey]

Here might be the beginning of the answer to your question. (

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/leakless-pipelines-university-of-calgary-1.4127888

).

 

[BigInch]

Double walled pipe has been done many times ... for short pipelines.
PROBLEM: VERY EXPENSIVE, esp for long pipelines.


"He's declaring war on the planet itself."- Vicente Fox

 

[dik]

Thanks FIG Journey... I'll follow up on the article.

BigInch... cost, although an issue, has too often resulted in 'skimpy' designs and subsequent failures. It's an issue, albeit, a minor one.

Dik

 

[LittleInch]

Nothing new there I'm afraid.

It is essentially a leak detection process, not a preventative system.

Such systems actually encourage corrosion because the outer surface of the inner pipe is not protected by your cathodic protection system which actively prevents corrosion.

If you don't make the outer pipe pressure containing, then the stuff in the inner pipe still comes out, especially if a major fault develops.

Then it starts to cost an awful lot more than 25% more.

The ability now of fibre optic cable detection systems far outstrips this student project. They really do prevent leaks by warning of land movements, 3rd party interference and also detect a leak with pin point accuracy. They are not cheap, but pays dividends in the long run.

Combine it with a well executed internal inspection system every 5 years and then doing something about the things it finds and you're a long way towards your goal of no leaks and no harm the environment.

A well designed, well installed and well inspected pipeline is the safest and cheapest means of transporting fluids long distances. The key is the "well" bit.

Yes, the issue of risk vs reward will always appear. The Chad Cameroon pipeline had and maybe still has the same issues - Chad gets all the revenue and Cameroon, which has 3/4 of the length of the export pipeline, was only getting cents per barrel until very recently. Oil companies hate paying per barrel extra tariffs so this sort of arrangement is not common, but is one way of sharing the risk reward issues around.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[BigInch]

Right. Exactly part of my argument. The higher the cost, as they are for pipe-in-pipe welding, the more tendency there is for contractors to find those cheaper, and more risky, work-arounds.

Pipe-in-pipe has it's issues as well. Temperature differences between inside and outside pipes mean compression inside, tension outside, or maybe the reverse in summer. Sometimes the component pipes need to be prestressed before welding up. You can see that pipe-in-pipe involves welding the inside pipe together with the outside pipe ... at each end. Just trimming and keeping that end dimensioning tolerance while welding is difficult. Now do the same to the next length of pipe-in-pipe. You've made 8 welds already; an inside weld and an outside weld at both ends for two pipe lengths already now. Now hold those two lengths together and weld them to each other. AS you can see, when I said expensive, I meant expensive. 25% more? NO WAY! I meant Project-Killing expensive. This is large diameter. Say tripple the usual single wall pipe cost, the outside pipe is larger, otherwise I would have simply doubled it. 10x more for welds alone. QA/QC, Shipping handling. Carrying cost of the much longer construction time will be huge. I was thinking at least 5 times as expensive. Gateway has two parallel large diameter - pipelines. What's the estimated cost of Gateway now, 6 billion, 8 billion, 10B? OK now call them up and tell them it's going to cost them 30-50 BILLION and let me know how the rest of that conversation goes. I think they'll be looking at exporting via Keystone before end of business today. No worries, that's the best outcome for BC. If that's what you want, might be a good strategy to ask for pipe-in-pipe.



"He's declaring war on the planet itself."- Vicente Fox