Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    8:33 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: Daily News Article Discussions > Topics Add to favorite topics  
Author Topic: Arkansas residents evacuate as Exxon-Mobil tar sands pipeline ruptures Back to Topics
N4PIP

Champion Author
Miami

Posts:1,971
Points:727,730
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 12:55:38 PM

An Exxon-Mobil oil pipeline ruptured Friday afternoon in the town of Mayflower, Arkansas, forcing the evacuation of 20 homes and shutting down sections of interstate highway. According to Little Rock’s KATV, a hazardous materials team from the Office of Emergency Management has contained the spill and is currently attempting a cleanup.

The burst pipe is part of the Pegasus pipeline network, which connects tar sands along the Gulf coast to refineries in Houston. Thousands of gallons of crude oil erupted from the breach around 3:00 p.m. on Friday, spilling through a housing subdivision and into the town’s storm drainage system, fouling drainage ditches and shutting down Highway 365 and Interstate 40.

Visit RawStory.com for full article
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:11,519
Points:1,077,875
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Apr 6, 2013 12:08:50 AM

DocV, "Then again, it was reversed in 2006 and that allowed it to carry dilbit from Canada, so maybe that was too much for it."
=======================
Why would dilbit be too much for it? There is absolutely no case in which dilbit has caused internal corrosion resulting in a spill, ever.
Profile Pic
DoctorV
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:3,513
Points:518,735
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 5, 2013 10:53:42 AM

CdnLynx:

Mayflower fact sheet

Someone at Exxon needs to get a PR campaign going explaining that this is not tar sands oil.

The crux of the story is that a pipeline broke in Arkansas. So why all the fuss over it being labeled tar sands oil?
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:11,519
Points:1,077,875
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Apr 5, 2013 9:44:40 AM

CdnLynx "The source of the crude is a red herring designed to sway the populace against the source, there is no other point!"
======================
Bingo!
Profile Pic
CdnLynx
Champion Author Ontario

Posts:1,220
Points:791,450
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Apr 5, 2013 12:15:23 AM

Doc V - Tks for the third name, however its not really relevant, what he stated ,regarding the assay quality. The only point, is that there were three spokespersons in 2/3 days for EXXON.
The other problem was the lack of actual verifiable citations (quotes); EXXON did not post on their website, it was left to a inferred comment to Reuters and picked by every news outlet (copy and paste; great reporting).
The main crux of this story is a 60+ yr crude oil pipeline, closely aligned with a modern suburb of homes, being involved in a pipeline break causing a crude oil failure.
The damage done, to man & environment, is the deplorable damage, done by an oil spill. A oil spill on water (oceans etc), are far worse, as they are infinity harder to clean, if they ever can be!
The source of the crude is a red herring designed to sway the populace against the source, there is no other point!
Profile Pic
DoctorV
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:3,513
Points:518,735
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 4, 2013 11:40:54 PM

Well, I guess it's getting whittled down to whether or not Wabasca Heavy dilbit contains oil produced from tar sands or not. I've just been responding to the furor over the media reporting this as tar sands oil, and I'm not convinced that they're not wrong. Now, whether or not it was the cause of the leak is yet to be known, and I wouldn't be surprised either way. It's a 65-year old line so maybe it was due. Then again, it was reversed in 2006 and that allowed it to carry dilbit from Canada, so maybe that was too much for it.
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:11,519
Points:1,077,875
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Apr 4, 2013 5:18:56 PM

I don't think anyone is dismissing folks concerns DocV.

Look, the Arkansas pipeline had a spill and the pipeline industry should expect its share of criticism. But when you consider the political public battles over Keystone XL the facts should prevail. On one hand you have the major majority of the press allowing the public to think that "tar sands oil" CAUSES pipelines to leak, yet there has never been a documented case of of internal corrosion from "tar sands oil" resulting in a spill.

Do you not think the debate should be confined to the facts? And at this point, it appears the facts of the Mayflower spill do not include Alberta oil sands crude.
Profile Pic
DoctorV
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:3,513
Points:518,735
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 4, 2013 4:34:16 PM

Right, the Pegasus can carry a variety of crudes, although since it has been reversed, it can now carry crude from tar sands that has been delivered at Patoka.

Seems like Pelican Lake is a tar sands deposit regardless of the method of recovery. Wabasca may be a blend, including tar sands oil. If people have concerns about it, for whatever reason, that's their business and I'm not going to dismiss them.

CdnLynx, here is one more spokesman: "The pipeline, which was built in the 1940s and was recently expanded, was carrying low-quality Wabasca Heavy crude oil from Alberta, Exxon Mobil spokesman Alan T. Jeffers said."
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:11,519
Points:1,077,875
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Apr 4, 2013 12:59:20 PM

DocV, not quite....Arkansas residents evacuated (true) as Exxon-Mobil tar sands pipeline (NOT TRUE ON 2 COUNTS) ruptures (true).

COUNT 1: According to the website crudemonitor.ca, “Wabasca Heavy is a blend of heavy oil production obtained by polymer injection and water flooding.” It comes from the Wabasca field, which is nearby the Athabasca oil sands region and it shares a similar formation, but Wabascan is sub-surface. Polymer injection and water flooding are production techniques usually associated with oil production from conventional reservoirs, not the oil sands, which uses mining and steam assisted gravity drainage techniques.

Now, oil sands critics, specialists in yellow journalism, such as Inside Climate News, are stating that Wabasca Heavy is a type of dilbit produced from the Alberta oil sands. This is unverified information that has been passed off as fact when it is not.

Crudemonitor.ca says the principal producers of Wabasca Heavy are Cenovus Energy and Canadian Natural Resources, both of which have operations at Pelican Lake in the Wabasca field. Both use polymer injection, but NEITHER project is considered to be oil sands production.

COUNT 2: The Pegasus line can is not strictly a "tar sands pipeline".

Profile Pic
CdnLynx
Champion Author Ontario

Posts:1,220
Points:791,450
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Apr 4, 2013 12:48:55 AM

DocV - I will answer your direct question! First I will preface it with it doesn't really matter whether or not it is "Tar Sands".
Answer > I do not know! I live in Ontario and do not work the oil patch!
Additionally, I suspect the the assays with the heavier densities/gravities could possibly be from "tar sands"; the individual assays contained in those other categories (sweeter) (if you click on them, will give a description and a map of western Canada; I can't say definitely that they are in the "tar sands". There may even be conventional rigs within that same area. There is natural gas wells also in the oil area and vice verse, depends on what they hit, sometimes they hit both!

Doc V - thanks for those two names, actually there were three spokespersons during this episode with Exxon/Pegasus/Arkansas, particularly "Kimberly Brasington" (1st spokesperson, I could not remember).
Reuters was the first to run the story and other news orgs picked it up and continued with "tar sands" "Heavy crude". Subsequently both CBC and CTV in Canada then changed to stating Canadian crude and removed reference to Heavy or tar sands!
It would have been nice if EXXON-Mobil had actually made those quotes directly on their websites, like they do presently with news they want etc.
Reuters and all others that followed suit, really did not use citations/ actual verifiable quotes.
It is probably, heavy crude; as it has been alluded/inferred to by two Exxon spokespersons, albeit not certifiable citations!
Corection - Pegasus pipeline is not dedicated to "tar sands" crude, it can carry any type of crude.
Doc V - If you open your preference, you could allow people to direct comments direct to your whiteboard!
Tks Doc V, Regards Cdn Lynx!

Think I may have to change my moniker to "Johnny Canuck come lately"
Profile Pic
DoctorV
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:3,513
Points:518,735
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 3, 2013 3:28:35 PM

"Starting with the headline of the story" which says: Arkansas residents evacuated (true) as Exxon-Mobil tar sands pipeline (true) ruptures (true). The story makes no claim that the crude is more corrosive or that this is the cause of the leak.
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:11,519
Points:1,077,875
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Apr 3, 2013 1:31:43 PM

DocV, it most certainly is yellow journalism. When a 'report' leaves out certain facts relating to a story.

You see, industry has shipped diluted bitumen in pipelines safely for decades, and never has one internal corrosion-related leak from a pipeline carrying dilbit has been documented in the United States. And this only makes sense when you consider that pipeline operators aren’t likely to put anything in their lines that will harm their huge investments.

Starting with the headline of this story and leaving out the fact that dilbit does not CAUSE the leak is but one of the facets of yellow journalism.
Profile Pic
DoctorV
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:3,513
Points:518,735
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 3, 2013 11:56:51 AM

Two different ExxonMobil spokesman have said it was carrying Wabasca - Charlie Engelman and Kimberly Brasington. I highly doubt they or any journalist pulled the label Wabasca Heavy out of their ass. Reporting about a pipeline leak is not yellow journalism, nor is reporting about people's concerns about the nature of the crude being carried. The yellow part comes in with editorials and opinion pieces.

I know you keep pounding the issue of the many different Canadian assays, but we're agreed that Wabasca is heavy (20° or less) and that it's diluted bitumen. I don't care if it's from tar sands or not, and I'm not worried in the least bit about shipping it through pipelines, I'm just asking you where it comes from. Let me take a different approach; tell me which assays contain oil produced from tar sands and which ones do not?
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:11,519
Points:1,077,875
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Apr 3, 2013 10:25:07 AM

Agreed on the yellow journalism, exactly what we found from "Gasland" was it not?

[Edited by: drpepperTX at 4/3/2013 10:25:36 AM EST]
Profile Pic
CdnLynx
Champion Author Ontario

Posts:1,220
Points:791,450
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Apr 3, 2013 1:17:58 AM

Doc V
Cdn Categories of Crude oil Assay/Grades classed by Density & Gravity!

These categories, have particular assays/grades; Wabasca, is in the Heavy Sour Dilbit category!
There are three categories (have different assays), that have heavier Densities and Gravities; there are seven categories that have less Densities and gravities!
Profile Pic
CdnLynx
Champion Author Ontario

Posts:1,220
Points:791,450
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Apr 3, 2013 12:56:47 AM

Doc V
I have some serious concerns regarding journalism, particularly yellow journalism!
1. I started seeing reports that it was Wabasca Heavy Crude, which is one of nine(9) possible assays within the Heavy Sour - Dilbit Category; this category (all grades) have the same Density and Gravity!
Curious why they were inferring this as I had seen no citations!
2. I noticed that it was inferred by a EXXON-MOBIL spokesperson, still without any quotes/citations.
3. After my 02 Apr@12:27 AM post, I noticed the EXXON-MOBIL was identified as "Female" spokesperson (I can no longer find her name and I did not record it). They continued to infer this persons name and that it is Wabasca!
4. Noticed that original reports by both CBC and CTV Television News orgs also reported that it was "Heavy" Cdn crude.
5. These Cdn TV News org, then began to state Cdn Crude and did not refer to it as "HEAVY".
6. New spokespersons have since represented EXXON and the original spokeswoman; I can find no inferences, attributed to her comments now.

It very well could be Wabasca Heavy crude, as EXXON alludes to, however it would be nice if news org's could get verifiable citations, otherwise it leaves doubts!

It is because of the afore mentioned that I have serious concerns re: Journalism (yellow), if it is used to sway public opinion against a particular stance/group/thought etc.

Regarding this spill, it's really immaterial what the assay/grade (quality) of crude or even the source is. Crude oil spill, is just that; hazardous to man/animal/environment. The only reason to bring in that inference, that it is Canadian Crude (Heavy or whatever), is to influence the populace to reject the US/Cdn shared Keystone XL pipeline.
It doesn't really matter where it comes from, the correct issue is that, first place, there was an oil spill and secondly, a sixty year old EXXON pipeline!

That is wrong and it is yellow journalism!
Journalism should only report facts with verifiable quotes etc and not infer and inflame!
Profile Pic
DoctorV
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:3,513
Points:518,735
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 2, 2013 9:21:33 AM

Sorry CdnLynx, I read your first post complaining about the article referring to the crude as tar sands oil. But before I read your post, I had read a different article which said Exxon confirmed the line was carrying Wabasca Heavy dilbit. I didn't realize you weren't aware of that. I was asking where it comes from since Wabasca is in the tar sands area and it was dilbit. Is there heavy crude from the region that isn't from the tar sands but still requires diluent?
Profile Pic
CdnLynx
Champion Author Ontario

Posts:1,220
Points:791,450
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Apr 2, 2013 12:27:50 AM

Doc V - Sorry I wasn't around to explain my viewpoint!

Your totally missing my point, Canada carries many different assays (grades) of crude oil, yes there is wabasca heavy crude however this is ONLY ONE grade!
My point, is that Canada has many grades of crude, including conventional grades; more then just tar sands! see the link!

Have noticed one thing that has changed, Canadian TV has CEASED CATEGORIZING the crude as Heavy, they now only refer to it as Canadian Crude. The press should report and not generated news!

I am not happy about the spill into the fragile environment of Arkansas or anywhere on the planet. This was a 60 yr. old pipeline that maybe should have been upgraded by EXXON/MOBILE so that weak sections would not be prone to breaks. Pipeline breaks due to old age or any other reason are totality NOT acceptable!
Your totally correct LetEmEatCake, it does not matter what was in the pipeline is was crude and crude only, as substance that is nauseous to the plant/animal life and the planet.
Doc V, you can't assume that it is tar sands, suspect due to viscosity that it probably not tar sands! Not sure the point your trying to make!


Rest your cursor over left side column, each category will open up showing all the assays(grades) in Canada!


Profile Pic
LetemEatCake
Champion Author Oklahoma City

Posts:5,705
Points:1,360,915
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2013 12:23:13 AM


Don't really care what was in the pipeline! We know it was Oil of some kind...not honey!

This is a good example of when States do not 'do diligence' to regulate pipelines.
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:11,519
Points:1,077,875
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Mar 31, 2013 10:44:24 PM

Good posts CdnLynx.
Profile Pic
Pmgr
All-Star Author San Antonio

Posts:774
Points:348,335
Joined:Jan 2013
Message Posted: Mar 31, 2013 6:59:03 PM

ok
Profile Pic
DanMtz
Champion Author Oakland

Posts:5,002
Points:1,571,440
Joined:Oct 2009
Message Posted: Mar 31, 2013 2:27:24 PM

Doh!
Profile Pic
DoctorV
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:3,513
Points:518,735
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Mar 31, 2013 11:39:25 AM

CdnLynx, where does Wabasca Heavy dilbit come from?
Profile Pic
briinnc
Champion Author North Carolina

Posts:2,705
Points:834,820
Joined:Jan 2010
Message Posted: Mar 31, 2013 10:30:12 AM

Wonder of they'll get hit with fines like BP?
Profile Pic
pepinoNC
Champion Author Raleigh

Posts:3,829
Points:986,585
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Mar 31, 2013 4:33:19 AM

Exxon has apologie for any inconvenience. Wonder how many tax dollars will be used in the cleanup.
Profile Pic
StanleyCup
All-Star Author Chicago

Posts:779
Points:651,255
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Mar 31, 2013 3:58:04 AM

A terrible situation to interrupt those folks lives, and homes.
Profile Pic
mrselfdestruct
Champion Author Arkansas

Posts:1,288
Points:198,700
Joined:Aug 2011
Message Posted: Mar 31, 2013 3:46:00 AM

Oops, on the line and the reporting.
Profile Pic
CdnLynx
Champion Author Ontario

Posts:1,220
Points:791,450
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Mar 31, 2013 1:13:50 AM

All the news organizations, including Reuters.com are INCORRECTLY categorizing the pipeline as carrying "Tar Sands"!
News now has a incorrigible tendency to amplify news by inferring things; as opposed to, just report the news factually!

The Pegasus line actually state "carries Western Canadian Crude", absolutely no mention of Tar Sands!

ExxonMobil Pipeline Company Expands Capacity on Its Pegasus Pipeline to Gulf

Pegasus Crude Oil Pipeline

Neither of the above sites states Tar Sands! Report news!
Do Not Infer info that has never been stated! Poor Journalism!
Profile Pic
kkimes
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:2,341
Points:1,802,855
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Mar 31, 2013 12:04:41 AM

I hate to say 'I told you so', but......
Profile Pic
kidrockjohnson
Champion Author Arkansas

Posts:23,742
Points:2,352,270
Joined:Mar 2005
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 11:26:01 PM

This happened near our house, but we have some friends that actually live in the neighborhood and the smell is nasty. A lot of workers from Texas are in the area. And I hope and pray that everything gets back to normal very soon.
Profile Pic
doeslayersr
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:11,178
Points:1,199,755
Joined:Dec 2010
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 10:54:37 PM

It happens.
Profile Pic
NHLiveFree
Champion Author New Hampshire

Posts:12,854
Points:1,935,355
Joined:Jun 2008
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 10:39:28 PM


The competition escalates between Exxon and Chevron. Which one will prove to be the world's worst at pipeline maintenance, lack of adequate safety equipment and procedures, and super slow emergency response?

Astonishing how the black crude crowd and industry shills continue to reverse the blame to all that are concerned over the horrendous effect these preventable 'accidents' have on the environment, wildlife, and our health!
Profile Pic
N4PIP
Champion Author Miami

Posts:1,971
Points:727,730
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 6:20:42 PM

jimgraham, are you kidding me? Talk about living in denial! I guess the Deepwater Horizon and Exxon Valdez were conspiracies, too! Take off your extreme right-wing tin foil hat!
Profile Pic
Eugenian
Champion Author Oregon

Posts:2,785
Points:540,645
Joined:Oct 2009
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 5:20:44 PM

Here we go again.
Profile Pic
jimgraham
Champion Author Akron

Posts:12,043
Points:2,308,990
Joined:Oct 2007
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 5:12:03 PM

Explosive headline - that oil looks just like the crude I have seen down in Tennessee.. Would "RawStory.com embellish the truth - or just flat lie?

Got to wonder if this was a true accident or if some greenies sabotaged the line??
Profile Pic
ktbaeohana
Champion Author Las Vegas

Posts:3,628
Points:711,380
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 5:03:48 PM

again EX-Mobil. watch and see.
Profile Pic
Night Owl
Champion Author Toronto

Posts:9,135
Points:2,110,700
Joined:Jul 2004
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 4:24:26 PM

Oh no!
Profile Pic
ErnieK9LO
Champion Author North Dakota

Posts:3,931
Points:785,820
Joined:Nov 2010
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 3:57:31 PM

Another bad news item courtesy of an oil company
Profile Pic
Zuegma
Champion Author Nova Scotia

Posts:2,594
Points:577,680
Joined:Aug 2012
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 3:38:31 PM

Not good news indeed.
It will certainly make for a lot of green fodder. Worth following to get all the facts of what exactly was spilt (looks lighter than tar sands oil), how much and of course: why.
Some might advocate "no pipeline is 100% safe" and they are right. Do you really want thousands of trucks and hundreds of rail cars near your neighborhood instead?
The timing adds to the controversy of the Keystone, but now is a good time to come to terms with it or its alternatives.
Profile Pic
Rockyguitar
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:4,222
Points:1,521,170
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 3:26:33 PM

WOMP, there it is.......again!
Profile Pic
Coco0828
Champion Author Dallas

Posts:2,466
Points:444,340
Joined:Aug 2012
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 3:15:54 PM

wow
Profile Pic
CocoPaz
Champion Author Santa Barbara

Posts:4,718
Points:651,305
Joined:Jun 2012
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 3:07:29 PM

PDQBlues: good post

To fellow Christian GasBuddies: may you have a Blessed Easter.
To all Jewish GasBuddies: may you have a Sweet and Happy Passover.
Profile Pic
PDQBlues
Champion Author San Diego

Posts:8,705
Points:1,773,375
Joined:Jan 2009
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 2:39:22 PM


It's a good thing those tar sands pipelines are completely safe, just like the oil corporations tell you. They lie, of course.

Wonder why so many citizens are against tar sands pipelines running through their areas? Now you know.
Profile Pic
USMCturtlehead
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:251,108
Points:432,775
Joined:Feb 2013
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 2:26:17 PM

Sounds worst then posted earlier today.
Profile Pic
humblepie
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:48,568
Points:2,701,290
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 1:56:56 PM

i bet those folks are cheesed eh ?
Profile Pic
qwerty17
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:5,001
Points:1,428,760
Joined:Oct 2009
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 1:47:36 PM

yuck.
Profile Pic
cdrrod
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:5,598
Points:1,087,335
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 1:38:19 PM

Here we go again, only on land this time...
Profile Pic
steve3356
Rookie Author Fort Worth

Posts:48
Points:226,720
Joined:Dec 2012
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 1:32:56 PM

Solar energy is 100% safe to transport, just wear your SPF
Profile Pic
DoctorV
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:3,513
Points:518,735
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 1:29:10 PM

"connects tar sands along the Gulf coast?"
Profile Pic
cwashi3324
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:3,508
Points:733,525
Joined:May 2009
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 1:28:46 PM

Watch for higher prices!
Profile Pic
YumaFellow
Champion Author Arizona

Posts:2,921
Points:938,870
Joined:Jan 2011
Message Posted: Mar 30, 2013 1:22:28 PM

These things do happen, and they indicate why the oil industry's "What Me Worry?" stance when it comes to building pipelines is misleading at best.
Post a reply Back to Topics