Keystone Pipeline

[charby]

Warren Buffett spent billions in buying CSX railroad which would be used to transport crude to refineries.  He has a vested interest in not seeing the pipeline constructed.  How difficult do you think it would be for Warren to whistle up some aggrieved environmental fax machine to file suit to stop whatever it is congress wants to do. 

Berkshire Hathaway bought BNSF, but I agree with you on he (and Berk) don't want the railroad built.

CSX is a Eastern US Class 1 railroad, doesn't serve the areas where the pipeline would be.

[Scout26]

Visually restoring farm ground easy, soil properties/fertility/structure not so much. Soil is way more complex then people give it credit for.

If I owned prime farm ground, something that consistently produced 250-300 bu/ac of corn, I'd be very hesitant to allow the construction activity of burying a pipeline. Pasture (not hay) ground not so much.

Actually soil properties wise it would be easier to bury a pipeline in a housing development that was already highly disturbed from the construction activity.

They actually do a nice job of it.  They strip off the topsoil and pile it up, then they dig the trench.  Refill the trench with the dirt/clay that removed from the trench, then replace the top soil.   Like I said, when the corn or beans are growing, you can't tell it's there.   And our lease holder hasn't complained about reduced yields, only wants us to kill more deer.

Berkshire Hathaway bought BNSF, but I agree with you on he (and Berk) don't want the railroad pipeline built.

FTFY   

[just Warren]

What if you already have a pipeline on your property? Do they go under or try to squeeze it in just under the topsoil?

How come they are burying it? The Alaskan Pipeline looks like it is all above ground. Isn't that cheaper? And when crossing land that is not suitable for agriculture isn't that the best way?

[charby]

They actually do a nice job of it.  They strip off the topsoil and pile it up, then they dig the trench.  Refill the trench with the dirt/clay that removed from the trench, then replace the top soil.   Like I said, when the corn or beans are growing, you can't tell it's there.   And our lease holder hasn't complained about reduced yields, only wants us to kill more deer.

What time of year did they do the pipeline work?

Like I said if I had really productive farm ground I'd be really hesitant. Screwing up the profile which developed over 10's of thousands of year can lead to fertility issues due to cation exchange being disrupted. This depends upon how wide a trench they dig. 

My biggest concern would be that the construction equipment can create compaction which leads to poor soil porosity, which inhibits drainage and root growth. Then you could get crusting that can cause poor emergence in dicot plants (soybeans). Clodding is a concern if the soil is too wet.

Tillage doesn't always fix compaction.

FTFY   

Thanks

[Scout26]

What if you already have a pipeline on your property? Do they go under or try to squeeze it in just under the topsoil?

How come they are burying it? The Alaskan Pipeline looks like it is all above ground. Isn't that cheaper? And when crossing land that is not suitable for agriculture isn't that the best way?

The reason parts of the Alyeska Pipeline is above gound is that the oil flowing through it is warm/hot and would melt the Perma-frost. 

[zahc]

And during earthquakes, the pipe can move around on the tower things,so that it doesn't break. What happens to buried pipes in earthquakes?

[charby]

The reason parts of the Alyeska Pipeline is above gound is that the oil flowing through it is warm/hot and would melt the Perma-frost. 

There a 1 or 2 hour show on the History Channel several years ago about the Alaskan pipeline and the construction process, very interesting show.

[MechAg94]

What if you already have a pipeline on your property? Do they go under or try to squeeze it in just under the topsoil?

How come they are burying it? The Alaskan Pipeline looks like it is all above ground. Isn't that cheaper? And when crossing land that is not suitable for agriculture isn't that the best way?

I am thinking they normally bury the line several feet down at a minimum.  It is deep enough a farmer can plow and such without worrying about the pipe.  They normally set a base material around the pipe and it is heavily wrapped with insulation.  If the galvanic protection is properly maintained, I think it is better to put it underground than below.

My employer bought an older pipeline from someone years ago and had to replace a section of it after a farmer practically pulled up a section with his plow.  I don't know if the pipe got shallower due to settling or if it was erosion.  There were a lot of other problems with that line that cost money.

Remember that there are near millions of miles of pipelines crossing back and forth across the US.  If you don't have pipeline on your land, there is likely one not far away.  There are also a number of regulations governing installation and maintenance. 

[charby]

I am thinking they normally bury the line several feet down at a minimum.  It is deep enough a farmer can plow and such without worrying about the pipe.  They normally set a base material around the pipe and it is heavily wrapped with insulation.  If the galvanic protection is properly maintained, I think it is better to put it underground than below.

My employer bought an older pipeline from someone years ago and had to replace a section of it after a farmer practically pulled up a section with his plow.  I don't know if the pipe got shallower due to settling or if it was erosion.  There were a lot of other problems with that line that cost money.

Remember that there are near millions of miles of pipelines crossing back and forth across the US.  If you don't have pipeline on your land, there is likely one not far away.  There are also a number of regulations governing installation and maintenance. 

18" will get you below almost every Ag plow. Most plows are under 8".

Some soils have a lot of freeze/thaw pushing, that may have pushed the pipeline up the soil profile. Need to put the pipe below the deepest frost line in those soils.

[brimic]

Some soils have a lot of freeze/thaw pushing, that may have pushed the pipeline up the soil profile. Need to put the pipe below the deepest frost line in those soils.

That's what I thought.
In my area, that would be about 4' down*.


*last year with sustained negative double digit temps, water lines were freezing up, even buried to that depth, though I don't think that would be a problem with pipelines with a constant flow- just the potential for frost moving the lines.

[charby]

That's what I thought.
In my area, that would be about 4' down*.


*last year with sustained negative double digit temps, water lines were freezing up, even buried to that depth, though I don't think that would be a problem with pipelines with a constant flow- just the potential for frost moving the lines.

Lack of snow last year pushed our frost down to 5-6' in the rural areas, lots of wells and pipes froze up.

[Regolith]

18" will get you below almost every Ag plow. Most plows are under 8".

Couple months back the neighbor that farms our land ran a sub-soil ripper that got tines a good 24" down. Ended up pulling up part of our septic system. Thankfully he fixed it within a few hours, else that'd have been a really shitty day....

[charby]

Couple months back the neighbor that farms our land ran a sub-soil ripper that got tines a good 24" down. Ended up pulling up part of our septic system. Thankfully he fixed it within a few hours, else that'd have been a really shitty day....

Must have been one helluva tractor to pull that ripper.

[MechAg94]

18" will get you below almost every Ag plow. Most plows are under 8".

Some soils have a lot of freeze/thaw pushing, that may have pushed the pipeline up the soil profile. Need to put the pipe below the deepest frost line in those soils.

This was down South of Corpus Christi, TX.  What is this "freeze/thaw" thing you speak of?  

All the pipelines I have seen being put in were in the range of 4 foot or more deep.  The pipeline through my Grandfather's land is at least that deep. 

Generally, the pipeline companies negotiate with the land owners to run the line through and sometimes pay a good deal of money.  If they were interrupting some sort of farming season, the farmer would probably demand the pay for it. 

[charby]

This was down South of Corpus Christi, TX.  What is this "freeze/thaw" thing you speak of?  

All the pipelines I have seen being put in were in the range of 4 foot or more deep.  The pipeline through my Grandfather's land is at least that deep. 

Generally, the pipeline companies negotiate with the land owners to run the line through and sometimes pay a good deal of money.  If they were interrupting some sort of farming season, the farmer would probably demand the pay for it. 

Yeah but you got a lot of shrink/swell with the Montmorillonite clay, sort of like freeze/thaw swell/shrink.

[just Warren]

So what's the outer limit for pipeline utility? Is there any way of moving non-liquids over a long distance profitably?

What size can a pipeline get to?

[Regolith]

Must have been one helluva tractor to pull that ripper.

It was one of their bigger ones; a tracked John Deere, IIRC. Not sure which model, exactly.

[charby]

Now they are wanting to protest shipment by rail:

Help, protect IOWA, the 'Land Between Two Rivers'.
 PUBLIC MEETING: Monday, January 26, 2015. 6:00pm to 8:30pm
 Reducing the Risks of Tar Sands and Shale Oil Transport through IOWA.
 Aalfs Library, 529 Pierce St, Sioux City, Iowa.
 The Sierra Club of Northwest Iowa is sponsoring a panel on Reducing the Risks to Siouxland from Rail transport of Tar Sands and Shale Oil.
 Serving on the panel will be -
 Gary Brown, Director of Woodbury County Emergency Management Services.
 Jim Clark, Sioux City Assistant Fire Chief and Hazmat Coordinator.
 6:00-Social welcome 6:30—7:15 Panel discussion 7:15-7:45 Questions
 Hosted by the Sierra Club of Northwest Iowa:
 Contact Person - Jim Redmond, Sierra Club of Northwest Iowa - 712-389-0841

[Hawkmoon]

Saw/heard on the news this morning that Congress is going to push this forward again.  Dems claim they have enough votes to uphold a veto if needed but are willing to compromise.  A couple of things they want is that 1) all the steel is American and 2) the oil is to be used here instead of exported.

What are your thoughts about that?  My firsts ones are that by using American steel you just increased the cost of the damn thing and on the oil being used here, not sure that the US is set up to refine the type of oil that would be sent through the pipeline.

I didn't know we produced any steel here any more. I thought all the major steel companies had packed it in and production had shifted to Japan. If we can still produce it, I don't mind paying a bit more to use American steel produced by American workers. Don't get sucked into the globalism Kool-Aid.

[Firethorn]

Now they are wanting to protest shipment by rail:

I'd love to go to that meeting and put up a slideshow that 'eases' them into the best way to reduce the chances of spilled oil.  To wit:  Build a pipeline!

[Hawkmoon]

Our church will lose a very long triangle of property when the city finally improves the road out front.  Base of triangle is 10' and extends a few hundred feet along hte street.  Guy from the city thought he was going to get lynched and had his running shoes on when he came in.  He was pleasantly surprised when we listened to his reasonable plan and did not let slip the hounds.  "So, we get a better-designed roadway and intersections, another lane, new sidewalks with barriers, new power & phone poles, better street lights...and you are still going to pay us for the triangle of land?  We can live with that."  That is hte way it is supposed to work.

That's the way it should work if (a) the application of eminent domain is really for a public works project, and (b) the price offered is a fair price. Look up Kelo v. New London. A few years before Kelo the city I worked in did an even dirtier. They wanted an entire tract of affordable (but privately owned and managed, not Section 8 subsidized stuff) to be developed for commercial purposes. The owners of several apartment buildings didn't want to sell. So the city just stopped providing services -- virtually no trash collection, or at infrequent and unpredictable intervals. No police response for anything other than murder. The streets leading into those properties suddenly became the last ones to be plowed in a snow storm (and seem to have been overlooked more than twice).

The result of all this was that what had been a reasonably safe and clean neighborhood rapidly declined into something a few notches below ghetto. THEN the city brought in the appraisers and played the eminent domain card.

Effers ...

[roo_ster]

Now they are wanting to protest shipment by rail:

Thing is they would protest any and all means that the oil ciuld be made useful.