TransCanada natural gas pipeline explodes near Winnipeg.
Source: Al Jazeera America
A natural gas pipeline operated by TransCanada exploded and caught fire in a rural part of western Canadan early on Saturday, putting fresh focus on the firm's safety record ahead of a crucial White House decision over a controversial cross-border project. The explosion happened near Otterburne, Manitoba, about 15 miles south of the provincial capital, Winnipeg. The area was evacuated as a precaution, said the National Energy Board (NEB), which oversees parts of Canada's energy industry. No injuries were reported but the fire burned for more than 12 hours.
The explosion comes as some environmentalists are raising concern about the safety of TransCanadas pipelines. The company is currently making a big lobbying push to convince the U.S. government to allow TransCanada to deliver oil from Canadas oil sands through the United States in its controversial Keystone XL pipeline. After the explosion, pictures of balls of flames poured into Twitter and television stations. The line was shut down and depressurized to contain the fire, the NEB said, adding it would work with the federal Transportation Safety Board to determine the cause. A TransCanada spokesman could not be immediately reached for comment. About 4,000 residents and other customers may be without natural gas for at least a day, according to Manitoba Hydro, the provincial government-owned energy utility. Temperatures in the province are well below freezing.
"We could see these massive 200- to 300-meter high flames just shooting out of the ground and it literally sounded like a jet plane," said resident Paul Rawluk to the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. "The police were by [Highway] 59 and you could just see little cars out there and you could see in comparison how big the flame was. It was just literally 200 to 300 metres in the air. And bright, I mean lit up the sky." The incident comes as the safety record of all pipeline operators face increased scrutiny as they build infrastructure across the continent for natural gas and oil. In addition to the Keystone XL, plans are under way for construction of several export terminals on the Pacific Coast, with the aim of making Canada, the world's third largest producer of natural gas, an exporter of liquefied natural gas to Asia.
Read more: http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/1/25/transcanada-naturalgaspipelineexpodesnearwinnipeg.html
Coming soon to a pipeline near you! Is it just me, or do these "incidents" seem to be happening more and more often? If we keep on building these accident-prone pipelines, how long will it be before we have a truly devastating accident near a major population center?
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)[img][/img]
Berlum
(7,044 posts)of the first rank.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)But we're going to help Canadian corporations build this kind of monstrosity all across our country? Our national priorities need to be reevaluated.
New Orleans Strong
(212 posts)Big oil and the NRA... American Exceptionalism! Sigh -
penultimate
(1,110 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)mtasselin
(666 posts)There was a time in America and North America we had exceptional-ism, but since we have let the corporations take control we have gone down hill. We will never get exceptional-ism back until we get control of our country, need to get money out of politics.
paleotn
(17,956 posts)...inside every "hoser" is an Amurakan trying to get out. USA! USA!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)special teams of highly qualified and highly paid pipeline inspectors watch for potential problems around the clock.
Failures are virtually impossible.
Yet, if by some set of extremely rare unforeseen circumstances, there is a failure, it will be contained immediately by state of the art measures.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Those look like some state of the art cleanup measures!
Idiocracy, baby! It has a firm foothold here in the "greatest nation on earth".
Theyletmeeatcake2
(348 posts)They factor in accidents and if they save money on reducing precautionary measures what do you think will happen ?
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)I was wrong, again.
valerief
(53,235 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)xocet
(3,872 posts)cinnabonbon
(860 posts)"We could see these massive 200- to 300-meter high flames just shooting out of the ground and it literally sounded like a jet plane," said resident Paul Rawluk to the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. "The police were by 59 and you could just see little cars out there and you could see in comparison how big the flame was. It was just literally 200 to 300 metres in the air. And bright, I mean lit up the sky."
Why wouldn't you want this near your community? This of all the cheap gas you'll get.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)anything to keep the costs down and profits high.
looks like they are losing that bet
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Seems like there have been more and more frequent accidents of sensitive computer dependent large scale systems such as rail, energy supplies, financial records and even gmail.
I wonder if these are cyberattacks, about which HSA is suppressing information, and whether they will simply increase in frequency and/or if we are headed for an Event.
Please excuse my morning paranoia.
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)to destroy our water supplies and air quality. How many of these pipelines and dangerous chemical tanks are positioned near a river or the ocean (in or near). There are all kinds of energy routes that could be coordinated by location via train, truck, barge, ship, etc., to explode and/or contaminate water, land and air...kill large populations by traversing thru the middle of towns/cities, etc. We can no longer depend on decent people to own/operate these pipelines or other infrastructure to insure that everything goes smoothly. The country could be destroyed in minutes.
My little town is a good example with trains going thru the middle of town all day and night. We have no clue what they are carrying.
They've polluted our politics...think about it.
paleotn
(17,956 posts)...there's been pipeline explosions and leaks as long as there's been pipelines. Mainly because one of the first areas owners cut costs is in maintenance and monitoring since those cuts are relatively invisible and have no immediate impact on anyone outside the organization. Then again, with infrastructure control now accessible from anywhere via cyberspace, it's certainly possible. Not only possible, but probable, since if it can be done someone somewhere will do it. Use to be you had to physically go to the damn pipeline or at least some control center to do any mischief. One of the downsides of the digital revolution.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)It's contractors and subcontractors do. To make money they must come in at or under bid. The bid that wins is usually a low ball bid that could not possibly make money without cutting corners to reduce costs. Maximizing profit means getting the job done as cheaply and quickly as possible. The incentives for corruption and for performing substandard work are relentless. The bigger and more costly the job the worse it is.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)It would have been more expensive to build it along high, rocky terrain, so they chose to run it through lower areas, where the farms, ranches and streams will be most impacted by a spill.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)is only about making as much money as possible as soon as possible, regardless of collateral damage to non-investors and the environment.
durablend
(7,464 posts)The CEOs and other bigwigs won't be affected by any spills. Isn't that's what's important to point out here?
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)my ex did a lot of work for big oil companies selling different chemicals that get injected into the pipeline to keep it free of corrosion (among other things). So many times he would come home frustrated because some operator for some huge company would decide they just couldn't spend as much on chemical anymore, so could they use half of the corrosion inhibitor from now on? My ex would say, Um, no, not unless you want a blow out. There were a lot that just didn't care, as long as they cut costs. Every time there was a blow out, my ex would get on the phone quickly to find out if it was one of 'his' pipelines. Thankfully, it never was, because he was very persistent about his operators sticking to the treatment plan. The treatment plan is devised by constantly sampling of the oil or gas in the pipeline and doing a lot of testing to determine if there was anything in it that could compromise the pipe. But if your client won't buy the chemical, there's not much you can do about it.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Sure the sociopath reckless assholes are going to cut corners because they want to get rich but they also blame us for the demand side. You can't have your cake and eat it too with this. We have to convert to a better way. Oil and natural gas resources are finite.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)A great many people would stop driving if they had a viable alternative.
Bennyboy
(10,440 posts)bad pun aside, the whole "See what happens when you use trucks to transport oil instead of pipelines" every time an oil tanker loaded with crude poisons the earth in a fiery explosion.
sakabatou
(42,174 posts)Joe Shlabotnik
(5,604 posts)glinda
(14,807 posts)becasue of this. It is supposed to be possibly 50 below tomorrow in some places.