Pipeline For The Transportation Of Crude Oil

Almost 95 million barrels of oil and fuel are produced each day in order to provide energy and fuel to people the world over. A major component of the oil industry is the transportation of oil through various means including oil pipelines. These pipelines are capable of transporting thousands of barrels of oil thousands of miles per day. In the United States one possible pipeline has caused a lot of controversy and discussion on the impact it will have on the United States. The difficulty in deciding if the Keystone XL Pipeline should be built is in whether the possibility of economic growth outweighs the possibility of environmental destruction. In order to make a decision, one must first look into the history of oil pipelines. It is crucial

Opponents of the use of the pipeline mode to transport fuel claim that it is responsible for numerous deaths that occur annually. The rate of increased accidents is attributable to the fact that as a mode of fuel transportation, minimal oversight, outdated pipes, and insufficient precautions subject

Oil has been an important resource of energy in America “since the discovery of the Spindletop geyser in 1901. It drove huge growth in the oil industry in America. Within a year, more than 1,500 oil companies had been chartered, and oil became the dominant fuel of the 20th century and an integral part of the American economy” (History.com Staff). This had developed the construction of pipelines to move the oil within the country and offshore in coastal waters. Recently, the federal government approved the construction of a new pipeline that would be transporting crude oil from North Dakota to Illinois.

The business is currently opposing, diluting and campaigning against actualizing positive train control innovation that could alarm the specialist prior to make a move or convey a train to a stop before passing a red flag or surpassing his power, and in particular, before an impact (Olszowka 2014). Dismissing positive train control would close our eyes. In March of this current year, the Senate panel that administers rail issues affirmed a bipartisan bill to defer by an extra five years the prerequisite for the new positive train control innovation. Among the areas of the framework that were then still without the wellbeing apparatus: the tracks extending between New York City and Washington. The bill to postpone the positive train control was supported by Senators (Briffault 2014). This has turned into an exceptionally entangled issue and is not independently campaigning against the positive train control command. Gotten some information about the American Association of Railroads, the campaigning gathering restricted to the POSITIVE TRAIN CONTROL due date which considers Amtrak a part. AAR can identify with their

Economist claim that since the United States depends on oil so much, this project would definitely be a huge asset to the country. Right now, oil is usually transferred using the railing system. There have been many accidents involving trains with oil, which have caused explosions, fire and in turn, death. Economists argue that the pipeline would be the safest way to transport the oil without the dangers of trains.

The construction of pipelines means that companies would have to dig up ground, which could lead to several issues. The most notable issue of the oil pipelines is the destruction of the life cycle. Deforestation, homeless wildlife, and soil erosion are the main factors that would be greatly affected in the life cycle. (Williams, 2012). Although this issue is of great concern, there is not a more effective, efficient, and safer way to transport oil across the country. All other modes of transportation cause greater emissions of detrimental gases to the environment from the pulling of the heavy amounts of oil. Lastly, pipelines have valves that can block off spillages, while other methods have no possible way of stopping these spillages, causing the same environmental defects as the construction of the

It does not matter what mode of transportation gets used, there will always be some level of risk when transporting crude oil. In this case the construction company is attempting to choose the most effective way to move the oil, but they are not listening to everyone’s concerns about the environmental impact. In order to invalidate the tribe’s concerns O’Sullivan wrote that “the Corps district office has already determined the project would not cause significant environmental harm.” It is hard to believe that if there was an oil spill that began a half mile away from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s land that the damage done to their water supply would be insignificant. The original route for the pipeline crossed the Missouri River near Bismarck.

Imagine living in a third world country with overcrowded houses and no job. That is how, “about 22% of our country’s 5.2 million Native Americans live” (A Program of Partnership With Native Americans). Right now Native American people take up about 2% of all land in North America, most of it being around the area of North and South Dakota. Over the past week there have been protests over the insertion of an oil pipeline through the Native American people, mainly the Standing Rock tribe’s, sacred land. This new pipeline would, “threaten water supplies for the Standing Rock Sioux and millions of others downstream, and its route would destroy tribal burial grounds and sacred cultural land” (Healy). Many of the Native American people, along

According to a study conducted by Dr. Dagmar Etkin of Environmental Research Consulting, pipelines are not the safest mode of petroleum transportation. In accordance with this information, transportation by train is more effective and safer than using pipelines. The mode of transportation with the highest ratio of oil spillage in waterways is by vehicles such as fuel trucks. Between the years 1980 and 2003, land vehicles were in the lead with 44% oil spillage per transport, while pipelines had 32%. The remaining 24% of oil spills were awarded to train transports. These special train cars are the safest mean of transportation out of the three. Even though the percentages seem to be very close in the spectrum, the total volume of spilled oil from pipelines exceeds road vehicles by over 100,000,000 gallons of oil (Wile). However, a more recent source, the official Dakota Access Pipeline webpage states, “…pipelines are the safest, most efficient method of transporting oil, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation” (“Dakota Access

In North Dakota, oil is a great source of revenue. Since the oil boom, transporting that oil has been done through pipelines as well as rail cars. Recently, the Dakota Access pipeline has attracted attention from celebrities and other civilians that are not even residents of the Dakotas, such as Shailene Woodley, Leonardo DiCaprio, Jane Fonda, and Mark Ruffalo. Pipelines can be both efficient and dangerous. The efficiency can be read in the ability to transport the oil to other states, while the danger can be read in the environmental damage of an oil spill in a river that people depend on for water--in the case the Dakota Access pipeline could damage the Missouri River. No matter all the perks of a pipeline such as Dakota Access, it can be

The Central Railway will make the trip either from Dallas to Houston or Houston to Dallas a much faster and more enjoyable trip. The high speed of the train will make a trip that could be 4 hours down to about “90 minutes by 2021” (Formby). The faster travel will lessen traffic to a dramatic difference. Besides being a fast train, this form of transportation will be environmentally safe. The Central Railway “consumes 1/8th less energy per seat and expends 1/12th carbon dioxide than a Boeing B777-200*” (Texas Central). Jere Thompson Jr. who has served on transportation committees and is currently the Dallas energy executive stated that the Texas Central Railway development “is ‘fantastic’ and ‘a remarkable opportunity,’” according to columnist

Already at 95% completion, the pipeline is scheduled to cross the Missouri River a mere 10 miles upstream from Standing Rock Reservation. The most urgent of the threats this pipeline proposes is the threat of contamination of the Missouri River, a crucial water source to both the Dakotas, particularly the Sioux nation tribes, for whom this river is their only source of water for drinking, irrigation, and fish. The pipeline was originally routed to cross the Missouri River further north, 10 miles upstream from the State’s Capital, Bismarck. However, after a study was conducted about the potential impact of pipeline spills, given the proximity to wellheads serving as the City’s source of drinking water, the route was rejected and moved to Standing Rock. Oil spills are the greatest environmental concern when considering the pipeline’s potential harm. North Dakota has experienced 292 oil spills in the last two years alone, despite those companies who own the various pipelines ensuring that spills are a rarity, citing “safeguards” that prevent them. The reality is that oil spills are a frequent occurrence when transporting oil for thousands of miles, so the matter of oil spills is not a question of if, but rather when, and how many(Mckenna). Of all the nearly 300 spills that occurred in North Dakota

Where this agreement usually ends, however, is with the question of quality control refining processes from my viewpoint. Anotherwords, what control measures are enforced to ensure all contaminants are entirely removed to guarantee a high level of quality assurance and security of the petroleum sectors within the nation’s infrastructures? Are there residual contaminants affecting the quality of fuel supplied to the nation’s energy consumers? From a preceding viewpoint, it can be related to the Colorado Floods that occurred in September 2013. Even the prevailing thought of hazardous waste introduced to the Colorado geographical landscape does not eliminate the second and third order affects imposed on the nation’s petroleum pipeline infrastructure by way of corrosion, introducing chemicals into the pipeline arteries through small cracks that may extend beyond Colorado, an implication that cannot be ruled out. Water contamination prevention-or across the board programs-from the negative effect of hydraulic fracturing should be an expectation from petroleum energy producers. Moreover, it reminds us of an infrastructure security vulnerability, which is not often specified, when hydraulic fracturing is correlated to the role water functions through the conventional petroleum refining process, along with vast arrays of petroleum pipelines that exist across the nation’s geographical landscapes. These concerns should be brought

There is almost nothing in this world where there is no risk involved. Risk involved is a major topic of concern in everyday life more than ever before. This report gives an overview about the risks involved in everyday life and especially in the oil and gas industry.

World oil demand is increasing as emerging economies need more energy to increase their living standards. Estimates, shown below, are that by 2030, China and India as emerging markets will import over 70% to 90% of their fossil fuel needs (1) . Coupled to a continued high and growing demand for oil, makes this a robust market for the next 30 years.