North America | pipelines
or larger transmission lines, only 24,000 miles are federally regulated. The National Wildlife Federation argued in a 2012 report ‘After The Marshall Spill: Pipelines in The Great Lakes Region’ that federal laws are inadequate in a number of respects and that state legislatures have not covered the gaps. Until this year, the US public had no free right to access
the industry standards incorporated into the regulations. There is also no opportunity for the public to comment on the safety of individual lines during their construction or operation, except when an operator applies to obtain a waiver from general requirements. Furthermore, the public does not have an opportunity to comment on operators’ spill response plans. Public scrutiny and access to requisite information is constrained. As US oil and gas production has grown, US pipeline
plans have become a political hot potato. Despite a string of high profi le accidents and the growing effectiveness of anti-pipeline pressure groups, US public opinion remains mixed. In September 2013, Pew Research Centre carried out a survey of public attitudes towards the Keystone XL pipeline project. It found 65% in favour; 30% against, and 5% don’t knows. However, it also found a sharp division by political views. An overwhelming majority of Republicans (82%) favoured construction of the pipeline, as did 64% of independ- ents, but only around half of Democrats (51%). Pipeline developers are having to take such fi ndings into account – the public has to be won over and strong political support gained if large pipeline projects are to be realised in a democracy. Rail has benefi ted from booming shale oil extraction and public opposition to new pipelines. However, a surge in accidents of rail oil-tanker traffi c has attracted the attention of the regulatory authorities and a tightening of regulations. State emergency planning agencies are responsible
US Refi nery receipts of crude oil by mode of transportation
Source: Wikipedia Commons
for co-ordinating emergency response during a major accident. In addition, there are Federal-level mandatory requirements. First, the Department of Transport requires rail cargoes to be tested for classifi cation purposes. Second, the PHMSA has introduced new safety design standards for crude oil rail tanker specifi cations to reduce the risk of explosion caused by derailment and collision. The Federal Rail Administra- tion has also begun unannounced spot inspections of crude suppliers and transporters. Public anxiety has been fuelled by rail accidents
involving oil. In North Dakota, for example, the oil train collision of December 2013 was the fourth in just six months. Meanwhile, in Washington State the frequent
Figure 4: North American Class 1 railroad network
Source: Prepared by CRS; data from EIA, Refi nery Capacity Report, T
Notes: Some shipments may involve multiple modes, such as rail to barge. This fi gure
able 9, June 2013
indicates only the mode used for the last leg of such shipments.
May 2014 | PIPELINE COATING 25
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38