tdmidget http://www.alliedenergycorp.com/transmix-processing.php Nothing at all to indicate that this is a problem. It is standard equipment at every pipeline terminal. This is like saying that the hose on a gas pump is a "problem".
http://www.alliedenergycorp.com/transmix-processing.php
Nothing at all to indicate that this is a problem. It is standard equipment at every pipeline terminal. This is like saying that the hose on a gas pump is a "problem".
The link that the other poster provided shows a facility with a petroleum heating vessel, a fractionation tower, storage tanks (another page within the link shows 50,000+ barrels capacity) and all the piping and controls necessary to run it. This is all overhead costs caused by pipeline product intermixing. To any oil company people I know, this is a problem. To trivialize these costs as like a "hose on a gas pump" is dismissive.
My original post was in answer to someone who suggested locating the refinery in the oil sands area to save the cost of transporting the crude. I think in subsequent posts, most people have grasped the idea that its cheaper to transport the crude in bulk, than all of the multiple and diverse products of the refinery. If you are still having a problem with this, than please supply us with your own links to show us otherwise.
An odd, related, tidbit in out local news: A lawmaker in the S.D. legislature is introducing a bill that bascially says "Hey everybody- fracking is certainly NO PROBLEM in S.D. . Come on down! Bring your oil rigs and your development money.". Realistically, the northwest corner of S.D. touches the corner of N.D. and Montana where some of the oil is being drilled. It's also very sparsely poulated and dry as all get out. The BNSF (former Milwaukee Road transcon) also runs right along the border.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
This whole thing has become a political circus rife with lies and other deceptions and misunderstandings. The project is several years in the forming; Congress forced Obama to make a quick dicision by packing legislation with a directive rather than drawing things out a little;, the Repulican Governor of Nebraska asked that President Obama hold it up while a certain environmental safety issue be looked at more closely, which he did. The opposition is lying that Obama nixed the whole deal when in fact it is not over at all, just suspended.
As for fracking, the way it has been presented and practiced in PA and elswhere in the east, it should be stopped or never started until many, many, many aspects of the process, of environment concerns, of the ethical and legal practices of the companies, of the real impact on the economy and tax situations, of the real social impact it all will have. There has been a lot of cheating, lying, ignoring, and underhanded play by the gas and drilling companies and by the politicians. It has been pushed so far so fast that no one really knew what was happening. Even the companies anxious to get into it have found that drilling into the ground for gas often finds they have actually taken a giant step into a dung heap up to their ears much to their surprise and regret. It just don't glitter for real, not as sparkling as the rhetoric.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
henry6 As for fracking, the way it has been presented and practiced in PA and elswhere in the east, it should be stopped or never started until many, many, many aspects of the process, of environment concerns, of the ethical and legal practices of the companies, of the real impact on the economy and tax situations, of the real social impact it all will have. There has been a lot of cheating, lying, ignoring, and underhanded play by the gas and drilling companies and by the politicians.
As for fracking, the way it has been presented and practiced in PA and elswhere in the east, it should be stopped or never started until many, many, many aspects of the process, of environment concerns, of the ethical and legal practices of the companies, of the real impact on the economy and tax situations, of the real social impact it all will have. There has been a lot of cheating, lying, ignoring, and underhanded play by the gas and drilling companies and by the politicians.
In the State of the Union speech, Obama sounded bullish on the potential of new natural gas to meet our energy needs. He did not say anything about needing time to review the environmental or ethical concerns.
He was avoiding the Keystone controversy and giving gas a broad smile for some of their programs they have in the wind. However, the further we move along this fracking of Marcellus Shale, the shadier the deal becomes, the more expensive it becomes, the less safe it becomes, the less attractive it becomes. If the gas companies had been square and honest upfront, they'd be further into their program than they are. Obama has nothing to do with it, nor will any other state or national leader as hometowns are getting together and doing the Repulican thing: local people determine their own fates instead of governments jamming it down their throats. Of course this does not sit will with the elephants, having their own political mantra turned against them...stay tuned, there is more to blow up than just the wells!
I have seen some of the horror stories in the news regarding some of the Pennsylvania fracking episodes. Usually the spills were shown to come from improper waste pit disposal rather than from the actual underground fracking process. Pa. has had something of a learning curve. This has not been the experience in Michigan where fracking has gone on for years at incrementally increasingly larger scale. Michigan has much better access to deep underground injection wells to take care of the spent frac fluid. (Although the local environmental groups will always point to Pa. as the coming Apocalypse.)
It is a different kind of fracking....horizontal for a mile or more after almost two miles verticle; special formulat fluids pumped down but not all return; siesmic vibrations not felt before (earthquakes); road kill now means the roads are smashed to smitherines with heavy equipment moves, new water stolen from the aqua firma resource coming in to mix with with the cocktail, dirty and hazerdous water trucked out to wherever; Marcellus shale ain't like other shale they've me, nor are the city slickers who moved to the country to get away from it all; increased crimes from rape, assult, brawls, robbery, vehicle accidents other than fracking vehicles; fracking vehicle accidents and tipovers; onsite accidents causing bad injuries and death; cost of living goes up as housing is rented to itenerant workers at hightly inflated rates forcing locals to move out; no money being spent locally as all workers are itinerant and take the pay checks a 1000 miles to home; locals not hired even after local educational institutions are led into offering the classes to learn as grads are offered jobs thousands of miles away instead. Those are just some of the negative problems being faced but not successfully addressed. On the plus side, local railroads are making money brining in supplies that aren't otherwise trucked.
Haven't we worn this subject out?
We have seen statements made without any substantiation, opinions without significant (or any) expertise and political preferences occasionally coming into play. No one here has the credentials to convincingly answer these questions:
Does this Administration wish to eliminenate the use of petroleum and will seek any means to do it?
Does the petroleum industry currently have the the means to provide safe and cost effective products?
Is the public ready to vote with their pocketbook for continued use of petroleum products?
I know, these questions may elicit more unknowlegable responses. Can we instead just go on to something we may have some expertise about?
diningcar No one here has the credentials to convincingly answer these questions: Does this Administration wish to eliminenate the use of petroleum and will seek any means to do it? Does the petroleum industry currently have the the means to provide safe and cost effective products? Is the public ready to vote with their pocketbook for continued use of petroleum products?
No one here has the credentials to convincingly answer these questions:
Regarding your first question:
Everything this Administration says indicates they want to eliminate the use of petroleum. It is a universal belief of their base, and they say so. What more proof do you need?
Your second question seems to be premised on the assumption that it has not yet been determined whether or not the petroleum industry is currently providing safe and cost effective products.
Your third question is similar to your second question in that it seems to imply that the continued use of petroleum is going to cost the public more, and they might not want to pay the added cost.
Since we've gone completely political here, Who cares? Who cares if we eliminate all Petroleum? It's just a resource to be used or not used, not something magical.
Also, I don't believe you could find any coherent reading of the administration's energy policy that suggests they want to get rid of Petroleum.
And even if there were, who cares, he was backed into a corner by congress. Why should he play their game? Especially when plenty of the actual people affected by this pipeline and petroleum products in general are saying not just no, but hell no? Don't they have a right to their land and a say in the workings of their state?
Is there any Canadian tar sands oil being shipped in railroad tank cars at this time? I am referring to the type of product that the pipeline would have shipped to Texas.
You can't have it both ways Henry. On the one hand you claim that the "itenerant" workers send their paychecks 1000 miles away and on the other you have them paying inflated rent locally. Which is it?
I don't doubt that the ground water in Pennsylvania is contaminated. It has been mixing with oil for thousands of years with no help. That is why Edwin Drake drilled at Titusville in 1859. Every creek in the area had at least a sheen of oil upon it and that is why he struck a pay at 691/2 feet. 50 years ago when I was in school I heard about areas there where the ground had enough dissolved gas to make a flame. So don't blame fracking. By the way the first well stimulation (fancy name for fracking) was near the Drake well in 1865. There is no way that there is any communication between a shale a mile or more down and ground water a few hundred feet down with today's well construction. There are multiple cement seals between the two and steel casing all the way.
The problem here is people who are totally ignorant of their own area's history and of modern well construction. They want to be a victim, after all that's our national pastime. AND they see deep pockets
I'd argue the bigger issues is the Earthquakes being felt now that are at least suspected to be caused by Fraking.
tdmidget You can't have it both ways Henry. On the one hand you claim that the "itenerant" workers send their paychecks 1000 miles away and on the other you have them paying inflated rent locally. Which is it?
They are paying rent and buying food. They are not buying houses, furniture, automobiles, or other discretionary items. They work up 12 to18 hour days, 7 days a week for up to 3 weeks, then go home wherever that is, taking what's left of their paychecks or what they didn't mail home or have directly deposited at home. There are no new retail shopping centers nor theaters or other entertainment venues. Bars are just busier and louder and more likely to be under the watchful eye of local constablulary. No new manufacturing facilities and no gold pavement on the streets as is being promised by politicians and promoters. It ain't like no gold or oil rush of the romantic old west of a hundered or more years ago. Local colleges and business schools were enticed into offering classes aimed at the gas drilling business with the idea the local enomomy would benefit with locals being hired by the gas and drilling companies; instead, those who do make it through the course are offered jobs in the mid and far west and in Canada instead of in the backyard as promised. Some, like me, are against fracking and drilling as much because we have been lied to or otherwise decieved as anyother reason knowing that what we are being told is not the truth. If they were upfront above board in the first place, maybe I'd feel different. But the weren't and I don't.
Since we've gone completely political here,I'm going to lock this one up...
Darren (BLHS & CRRM Lifetime Member)
Delaware and Hudson Virtual Museum (DHVM), Railroad Adventures (RRAdventures)
My Blog
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.