Pipeline Explosion in Deer Park

[Foosters 17,843]

just wait until we have flying cars

[Captainant 27,640]

11 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

Yes, I'm being hyperbolic, but the absurdity of it is equivalent to your wanton blame-casting....which is of no surprise.  

It really is incredible how much y'all are able to whip yourself into a frenzy with shit you only imagine I said. What is wanton about blaming the owners of a valve that's burned for more than 3 days now next to a 4 land road for not protecting it with more than a chain link fence? 

I cited the safety reg, it's pretty clear it's the pipeline/valve owners responsibility to keep it safe by placing it a safe distance from traffic or putting up barricades. Are you really arguing that a plain jane chain link fence is sufficient barricading for a vehicle for a site adjacent to a 4 lane public road?

Edited September 19 by Captainant

[Trey3216 15,345]

Just now, Captainant said:

It really is incredible how much y'all are able to whip yourself into a frenzy with shit you only imagine I said. What is wanton about blaming the owners of a valve that's burned for more than 3 days now next to a 4 land road for not protecting it with more than a chain link fence? 

I cited the damn safety reg, it's pretty clear it's the valve owners responsibility to keep it safe by placing it a safe distance from traffic or putting up barricades. Are you really arguing that a plain jane chain link fence is sufficient barricading for a vehicle for a site adjacent to a 4 lane public road?

Perhaps the city shouldn't have allowed traffic so close to it...

 

[Trey3216 15,345]

5 minutes ago, Foosters said:

just wait until we have flying cars

Captainant will be pissed there aren't geofences that drop your UberAir like a stone if you get too close to one of the windmills.  

[PTINS 3,466]

1 hour ago, Captainant said:

 

I cannot believe that a chain link fence is the standard of protection for extremely dangerous machinery that is (1) next to an active roadway (2) in the middle of a residential area and (3) going to impact the health and homes of thousands of families should ANYTHING happen to it.

I don't know exactly what was damaged and ignited.

I agree with the notion in other posts that the block valve was buried, and the blow down valves were above ground. In that event, the actuator for the block valve would be above ground, along with the blowdown valves.  If the Deer park vehicle went through a fence along line property line and a fence around the valve site, that says a lot.

With that said, the primary concern with protection and security is to keep people and animals away from it. Not fortified bunkers, but a chain link fence with a locked gate. (This probably also meets a minimal threshold for insurance requirements, though I've never heard that brought up in any meetings or discussions I've been involved in.)

Equally important, there has to be access to operate and maintain the equipment, including access to the buried lines, if necessary. "Permanent" concrete-filled steel pipes creates obstacles for people (technician and welders) and equipment (back hoes, cherry pickers, etc.). Buried steel structures also impacts the cathodic protection of the pipelines.

The chain link fence will keep 100% of the honest people out. From people, vandalism and theft is the primary concern. The fact that the equipment inside the fence keeps the hazardous material inside the pipes and away from people keeps a lot of the less than honest people out. There are a lot of Darwin candidates that accidentally or intentionally did some really stupid things around facilities.

Anybody that wants to get in and damage the facility can do it, whether there is nothing at all, or a fence, bollard (never used that word, we used pig pen), wall, or a building.

I am sure when this site is repaired, they will have steep pipes around it. Just like they put up deer crossing signs where there have been accidents.

[Captainant 27,640]

8 minutes ago, Foosters said:

just wait until we have flying cars

 

1 minute ago, Trey3216 said:

Captainant will be pissed there aren't geofences that drop your UberAir like a stone if you get too close to one of the windmills.  

Lol yes, it's too expensive and onerous to protect these sites in residential areas because of flying cars.

[Brisketexan 105,082]

36 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

It's like what was said up above, if you build things that can withstand every possible scenario that can fuck it up, planes would be too heavy to fly, and cars would be too expensive to buy. Making everything idoit proof is a very expensive and wasteful endeavor. Ultimately it comes down to risks people are willing to accept, like people living  close to pipelines to save money on their housing location. People living close to petrochemical plants because they work there, and want to be 10 minutes from work. The Polly Anna-ish take that any and all hazards must be eliminated or mitigated in all aspects of everyone's daily lives is asinine. I know most on here accept that, but not all.

CHIEF

Straw man -- that's not what I'm saying.  Nobody is talking about "every possible scenario."  Traffic strikes aren't a "crazy, remote scenario that amounts to making everything idiot proof."  Instead, they are a common enough risk that they actually have a specific regulation that speaks to what to do with respect to that specific risk.

Oh, and someone above mentioned that developers "encroached on the pipeline ROW."  I strongly doubt that is the case - had they actually encroached on the ROW, the pipeline co would have sent lawyers out there to whoop ass and take names, and they would have won, quickly.  It is almost certain that all structures and the like are adjacent to the ROW, as allowed by law.  And if traffic patterns in the area change (a road is put in where none existed), the "which came first" is not part of the calculus in the applicable regulation.  If the facility is in a high traffic area, then safety measures have to be considered and applied.

29 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

But that isn't the issue here. Cheap and solved solutions are available to mitigate this risk. This isn't about "every possible scenario" or "any and all hazards," and it isn't about perfect protection. It is about a solution that (1) is already employed in many locations, (2) is extremely cheap and easy to implement, and (3) addresses a demonstrable risk in certain more highly developed areas. What you're talking about is protecting pipelines from something like meteor impacts, missile strikes, or cloned dinosaur attacks.  I agree, those would be silly and uneconomical to mitigate against. This situation isn't that. Just because it is relatively rare, doesn't mean mitigation is not worthwhile. 

This. This is the issue.

24 minutes ago, Captainant said:

That's literally not what I or brisket or Dahobbs are saying. Y'all are running it to the extreme and then tilting off on that straw man and then insinuating I'm a communist pollyanna. 

This too.

8 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

It's merely an example.  Hell, most military base perimeters are primarily chain link fencing.   Most gas stations only have bollards at either end of the fuel pump with 10-15 feet in between where the pump actually sits.  Let's start a bollard war against every small time business owner who doesn't have enough bollards or only employs chain link fence.

 

Yes, I'm being hyperbolic, but the absurdity of it is equivalent to your wanton blame-casting....which is of no surprise.  

More straw man.

The applicable regulation discusses protecting structures in high traffic areas.  So, right off the bat, stuff that's not in a high traffic area -- no/minimal protection needed.  

And Trey's gas station example is a GREAT example.  The "standard of care" is not "anti-tank barriers surrounding every square inch of a gas pump."  The standard is bollards at either end, because that's generally where any traffic moving at any speed (drive by or in the parking lot) would come from.  It's not that it's IMPOSSIBLE for a car to hit pumps from a horizontal angle (it has happened), it's that it is statistically a much lower risk, and the calculus if close to the "protect against a meteor strike" level.

The straw manning here is amazing.  NOBODY is taking the position that an aboveground structure in the middle of a ranch in Andrews County needs to be surrounded by bollards, concrete walls, and pillows.  Yet the industry defenders are repeatedly and consistently taking the position that "requiring us to install bollards, concrete walls, and pillows on every last structure is insane - you can't idiot proof everything!"  You are arguing against an argument that isn't being made.  You should stop that.

[SarkAfterDark 1,688]

Some of you sound like you would fit right in working for Centerpoint

[TwiceHorn 31,440]

8 minutes ago, Captainant said:

It really is incredible how much y'all are able to whip yourself into a frenzy with shit you only imagine I said.

Nowai.  😬😬

[TwiceHorn 31,440]

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Straw man -- that's not what I'm saying.  Nobody is talking about "every possible scenario."  Traffic strikes aren't a "crazy, remote scenario that amounts to making everything idiot proof."  Instead, they are a common enough risk that they actually have a specific regulation that speaks to what to do with respect to that specific risk.

Oh, and someone above mentioned that developers "encroached on the pipeline ROW."  I strongly doubt that is the case - had they actually encroached on the ROW, the pipeline co would have sent lawyers out there to whoop ass and take names, and they would have won, quickly.  It is almost certain that all structures and the like are adjacent to the ROW, as allowed by law.  And if traffic patterns in the area change (a road is put in where none existed), the "which came first" is not part of the calculus in the applicable regulation.  If the facility is in a high traffic area, then safety measures have to be considered and applied.

This. This is the issue.

This too.

More straw man.

The applicable regulation discusses protecting structures in high traffic areas.  So, right off the bat, stuff that's not in a high traffic area -- no/minimal protection needed.  

And Trey's gas station example is a GREAT example.  The "standard of care" is not "anti-tank barriers surrounding every square inch of a gas pump."  The standard is bollards at either end, because that's generally where any traffic moving at any speed (drive by or in the parking lot) would come from.  It's not that it's IMPOSSIBLE for a car to hit pumps from a horizontal angle (it has happened), it's that it is statistically a much lower risk, and the calculus if close to the "protect against a meteor strike" level.

The straw manning here is amazing.  NOBODY is taking the position that an aboveground structure in the middle of a ranch in Andrews County needs to be surrounded by bollards, concrete walls, and pillows.  Yet the industry defenders are repeatedly and consistently taking the position that "requiring us to install bollards, concrete walls, and pillows on every last structure is insane - you can't idiot proof everything!"  You are arguing against an argument that isn't being made.  You should stop that.

Edit to Add I fucked it up.

B*P < L

B < P * L

The classic Coase Learned Hand economic theorem of fault.

Where the burden (cost) of protective measures is less than the probability of an accident happening multiplied by the liability or cost of the accident, the fault lies with the party that failed to take the protective measures.

My memory for shit 30+ years old is slipping.

Edited September 19 by TwiceHorn

[Brisketexan 105,082]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

B*P < L

The classic Coase economic theorem of fault.

Where the burden (cost) of protective measures multiplied by the probability of an accident happening is less than the liability, the fault lies with the party that failed to take the protective measures.

And where a regulation exists that highlights that specific risk (e.g., there is literally a regulation that requires owners of aboveground facilities to consider the risk of traffic, while there is no regulation that requires them to consider meteor strikes, catapult attacks, etc.), then the owner is not going to do well arguing that "this is an insanely unlikely risk, nobody could predict it happening!"

Operators all over the country consider and predict it happening.  And for those of you who say "look how far away from the road and parking lot it is!  Nobody would think they need a safety structure to protect from vehicle strikes there!"....I'll bet you tree fiddy that we could drive around SETX and find numerous aboveground gas structures that 1) are as far or farther away from a traffic area that 2) have more robust protective measures (bollards/pipe etc.) than this structure had.  In other words, OTHER owners/operators have done the math, and determined that a preventative measure is warranted.  Care to take that bet?  Remember, that's a whole tree fiddy of American dollars, not pesos or Stanley Nickels.

[CHIEF 5,079]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Straw man -- that's not what I'm saying.  Nobody is talking about "every possible scenario."  Traffic strikes aren't a "crazy, remote scenario that amounts to making everything idiot proof."  Instead, they are a common enough risk that they actually have a specific regulation that speaks to what to do with respect to that specific risk.

Oh, and someone above mentioned that developers "encroached on the pipeline ROW."  I strongly doubt that is the case - had they actually encroached on the ROW, the pipeline co would have sent lawyers out there to whoop ass and take names, and they would have won, quickly.  It is almost certain that all structures and the like are adjacent to the ROW, as allowed by law.  And if traffic patterns in the area change (a road is put in where none existed), the "which came first" is not part of the calculus in the applicable regulation.  If the facility is in a high traffic area, then safety measures have to be considered and applied.

This. This is the issue.

This too.

More straw man.

The applicable regulation discusses protecting structures in high traffic areas.  So, right off the bat, stuff that's not in a high traffic area -- no/minimal protection needed.  

And Trey's gas station example is a GREAT example.  The "standard of care" is not "anti-tank barriers surrounding every square inch of a gas pump."  The standard is bollards at either end, because that's generally where any traffic moving at any speed (drive by or in the parking lot) would come from.  It's not that it's IMPOSSIBLE for a car to hit pumps from a horizontal angle (it has happened), it's that it is statistically a much lower risk, and the calculus if close to the "protect against a meteor strike" level.

The straw manning here is amazing.  NOBODY is taking the position that an aboveground structure in the middle of a ranch in Andrews County needs to be surrounded by bollards, concrete walls, and pillows.  Yet the industry defenders are repeatedly and consistently taking the position that "requiring us to install bollards, concrete walls, and pillows on every last structure is insane - you can't idiot proof everything!"  You are arguing against an argument that isn't being made.  You should stop that.

My point isn't really IF they should be reinforced, but who is responsible for paying for it. And who was there first should get the benefit of the doubt. When the city, and the residential developers decided to construct roads and houses adjacent they should have had their engineers come up with a design to protect the pigging station and got permission from the pipeline owner to install it and the city/developers pay for it.

Not being privy to the contract, I'm not sure who is responsible for added reinforcement due to the suburbanization of the pipeline ROW boundaries. But all future contracts should have those responsibilities clearly defined. Like if a road is built within a certain distance, or housing.

CHIEF

 

[elfenix 34,227]

1 hour ago, CHIEF said:

But, I can guarantee you that the cost will ultimately be passed to the consumers. As much as you hate it, earnings goals will still be met.

that's not how economics works. costs cannot entirely be passed onto consumers absent perfectly inelastic demand.

 

 

anyway, anyone know if texas is a strict liability state in this area or no?

[Brisketexan 105,082]

Just now, CHIEF said:

My point isn't really IF they should be reinforced, but who is responsible for paying for it. And who was there first should get the benefit of the doubt. When the city, and the residential developers decided to construct roads and houses adjacent they should have had their engineers come up with a design to protect the pigging station and got permission from the pipeline owner to install it and the city/developers pay for it.

Not being privy to the contract, I'm not sure who is responsible for added reinforcement due to the suburbanization of the pipeline ROW boundaries. But all future contracts should have those responsibilities clearly defined. Like if a road is built within a certain distance, or housing.

CHIEF

 

But.....that's not how it works.  That's not how the regulation works.  That's not how property law works.  Any of it.

The regulation at issue doesn't say anything about "you're only responsible for facilities in high traffic areas as of the date of construction."

Easements (the real property document governing the ROW) do not and cannot impose obligations on property owners outside the easement area.  We're talking about an easement, not a contract.  It's a property document, recorded in the property records of the county.  If a pipeline ROW owner wants to impose an additional requirement on the owners of adjacent property, then the ROW owner needs to condemn my property in part and impose that condition.  Pipeline companies do have the power of eminent domain, but that carries with it the obligation to pay for any encumbrance of all property condemned.

Think of it this way, private property types: I am a landowner adjacent to a pipeline ROW.  TODAY, I have the full right, with no additional costs or obligations, to build 10 houses on my property.  Then TOMORROW, you condemn the ROW (which is not ON my land, but merely adjacent to it).  What you are arguing is that TOMORROW, I no longer have a "no additional costs or obligations" right to build 10 houses on my property.  My right is NOW limited to "sure, you can build 10 houses on your property like before, but YOU need to pay for the ROW owner's costs to come into regulatory compliance because now there are houses/roads nearby."  If you are going to limit my property right, then you need to pay me for that when you condemn the ROW.

Y'all are talking about cost-shifting, skipping over the fact that the law already clearly contemplates this on the front-end.  And I bet dollars to donuts every one of y'all LOVES to fly the "private property rights!" flag high.  Well, that's a two way street, fellas.  You want to impair my private property rights (and that's literally what EVERY pipeline ROW condemnation does -- it condemns an underlying estate)?  Then you have to pay for it.  Want to condemn/limit my rights on adjacent property?  Then the law is clear - you have to pay for it.

 

[Evil Bill Obrien 3,270]

Man this thread went from defining exactly what constitutes “O&G” to debating economic impacts of safety regulations and property law very fast…

[gsoda3 3,251]

Just like Dre the legal eagles didn't want you forgetting about them.

[MonkeyDoughnut 10,230]

pictures of some of the damage to nearby homes: (from https://www.click2houston.com/news/local/2024/09/19/photos-a-closer-look-into-the-damages-left-by-pipeline-fire-in-deer-park/)

[BearMace 2,194]

The playground is Terminator-esque. 

Also the last 3 pages...

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

2 hours ago, Trey3216 said:

It's merely an example.  Hell, most military base perimeters are primarily chain link fencing.   Most gas stations only have bollards at either end of the fuel pump with 10-15 feet in between where the pump actually sits.  Let's start a bollard war against every small time business owner who doesn't have enough bollards or only employs chain link fence.

 

Yes, I'm being hyperbolic, but the absurdity of it is equivalent to your wanton blame-casting....which is of no surprise.  

Most military bases don't have anything of consequence 100 ft from the perimeter.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

1 hour ago, elfenix said:

that's not how economics works. costs cannot entirely be passed onto consumers absent perfectly inelastic demand.

 

 

anyway, anyone know if texas is a strict liability state in this area or no?

I have no idea, but I can imagine what the answer is.

[High Plains Drifter 11,034]

 

Yet another example of privatizing the profit and socializing the cost. 

 

Unless of course the O&G firm that owns the pipeline makes everyone whole. And soon, not after years of legal bullshit where they finally settle for pennies on the dollar. 

 

 

[PTINS 3,466]

 

2 hours ago, Rip76 said:

Han remains found inside SUV that crashed, igniting pipeline fire in Deer Park

 

https://abc13.com/post/energy-transfer-pipeline-fire-vehicle-may-have-ignited-ongoing-flames-pulled-crash-site-deer-parkla-porte-area/15325211/?ex_cid=TA_KTRK_FB&utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+New+Content+(Feed)&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1Q8WGEaM6zZ3bmtw31fNEPFncc3_8hTarIBLUOATOGIuGtFTJ65tuVBkQ_aem_W7wwHGqpPRiIHnFbLd_8Hw
 

Re: Speaking to the press.

Example 1-A. Why you want to make sure the right person is speaking to the press and the public.

I read a statement that clearly stated it was a "Y-Grade NGL" (Natural Gas Liquid) pipeline, and it further defined what that is.

The Mayor giving the Deer Park news conference stated it was "Liquid Natural Gas" (LNG) pipeline.

ABC 13 said the good news it is "Natural Gas" burning

Natural Gas Liquids (NGL), Liquified Natural Gas (LNG), or Natural Gas are not the same thing...220, 221, whatever it takes.

They are similar, but nowhere close to the same thing. 3 completely different products, in composition, physical properties, and in the mitigation of leaks and fires.

Natural Gas is primarily methane, it can be converted to LNG, primarily for export, and is then converted back to natural gas. "Natural Gas" is used for both gas produced at the wellhead, which contains the Natural Gas Liquids, and also the finished product that has had the impurities and NGL removed.

LNG is also primarily methane, which is lighter than air and will dissipate naturally. It is transported and stored at - 200  °F, < 5 PSI, is warmed and vaporized, and transported at ~ 1,000 PSI and ambient temperatures.

NGL Y-grade is a mixture of hydrocarbons, including a nominal 25% propane, which is heavier, than air, and will lay on the ground until if eventually dissipates, or finds an ignition source. It is transported at ~1,000 PSI and ambient temperatures.

In this case, I would believe the OIL & GAS COMPANY and not the government officials or the press, but you be you.

From the video;

This is a well defined utility corridor, including high power electric lines and a number of pipelines, which may include gas, oil, NGL, purity products, or specialty chemicals. In similar pipeline corridors, companies are usually granted construction easements (25-50 feet wide) and will revert to a permanent easement upon completion (some as narrow as 2 feet.) In some cases, the ROW also has a depth requirement.

I wouldn't be surprised if some these original agreements are 100+ years old. Obviously in a shared ROW, the wants of a individual company must be tempered with the needs of the others. While pipeline companies needs and wants are similar, the power line owners are different, and somewhat unique. They have exposed high voltage lines and any thing that may cause an electric arc (like a steel pipe) is a primary consideration.  Power lines falling on top of pipes and other structures is always a big concern. Note the power lines on the ground in the pictures and videos.

 

In the picture below, you can see the two above ground block valves (red & white) in the fenced locations behind the fire. Interesting that the fence towards Wal-Mart appears to be intact.

There is/was a set of power lines going directly over the fire location, with a power pole inside the fence. There are a lot of different facilities, fences, bollards, power poles, telephone poles within the ROW. 

Deer Park Pipeline Fire

I am sorry there was a fatality in this accident. It is never a good thing.

I've seen pictures, before and after, NGL and Natural Gas pipeline accidents.

I have done repair work on an NGL pipeline leak. Even though all the pressure gauges read "0", there was still pressure inside. Run, Forest!!! Run!!!

I have seen a pipeline that was severed by a construction crew and was de-pressuring at sonic velocity with the sound of a jet engine, that dropped the surrounding temperatures ~ 20-30 °F where we were standing.

I have seen gas pipeline fires, some of which we started so the gas didn't explode.

I have seen a pipeline test blowdown with 2,000 PSI of nitrogen behind it.

I have even seen a man pleasure a camel.

But, I have never seen a high pressure NGL line (~1,000+ PSI), leaking, vaporizing and burning, releasing that much pressure and energy at one time.  (Insert South Austin Mom joke here.)

Not unlike the fingers of God. (Go to 0:55 of the video)

Looking at the video, my reaction was this does not look look like a leak from a vent valve. Not sure what was there before, but it appears there was a riser (2-4" ?) coming off the below ground mainline. Above ground, there would be line with a smaller valve that could be opened to atmosphere. 

From the video, there does not appear to be a pipe or a valve, just a big hole (10-20") with a tremendous amount of Natural Gas Liquids, leaking, vaporizing and igniting. (I know ET has a 20" NGL line in the general area.). My guess would be that the car hit the riser, damaged the pipe, which was sheared off by the pipeline pressure, which tossed the car, and the product ignited ( from sparks, or the catalytic converter.)

Edit; in the later video's, you can see some kind of pipe or something at ground level that wasn't obvious in the earlier videos.

As bad as this is, it could have been much worse.

 

 

2 hours ago, Captainant said:

That's literally not what I or brisket or Dahobbs are saying. Y'all are running it to the extreme and then tilting off on that straw man and then insinuating I'm a communist pollyanna. 

We would use Extreme Theory in our planning; What is the wort thing that can happen? What is the best thing that can happen? Where is the reality within that spectrum?

[PTINS 3,466]

1 hour ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Most military bases don't have anything of consequence 100 ft from the perimeter.

Reminds me of that time, after baseball practice at Bergstom AFB (Pre airport), we went off chasing Jack Rabbits along Hiway 71. We got about halfway down, adjacent to the apron where they parked the planes. Out of nowhere, 2 jeeps full of GI's w/ M-16's came speeding towards us, and influenced us to get the hell out of there.  

For any of you near Houston, consider taking a drive to Mont Belvieu, on FM 146 (state highway?) from I-10 North about 2-3 miles. Probably the highest concentration of pipelines in the world, mostly NGL pipelines. First time i went there in 1980, I thought it looked vulnerable.

Given what happened in Deer Park, they will probably end up building a wall or barrier along the highway. The industry "bought" the town a long time ago.

I'm out. I might be un-retiring here for a bit.

[Captainant 27,640]

30 minutes ago, PTINS said:

I have seen a pipeline that was severed by a construction crew and was de-pressuring at sonic velocity with the sound of a jet engine, that dropped the surrounding temperatures ~ 20-30 °F where we were standing.

I have seen gas pipeline fires, some of which we started so the gas didn't explode.

I have seen a pipeline test blowdown with 2,000 PSI of nitrogen behind it.

I have even seen a man pleasure a camel.

But, I have never seen a high pressure NGL line (~1,000+ PSI), leaking, vaporizing and burning, releasing that much pressure and energy at one time.  (Insert South Austin Mom joke here.)

Not unlike the fingers of God. (Go to 0:55 of the video)

Looking at the video, my reaction was this does not look look like a leak from a vent valve. Not sure what was there before, but it appears there was a riser (2-4" ?) coming off the below ground mainline. Above ground, there would be line with a smaller valve that could be opened to atmosphere. 

From the video, there does not appear to be a pipe or a valve, just a big hole (10-20") with a tremendous amount of Natural Gas Liquids, leaking, vaporizing and igniting. (I know ET has a 20" NGL line in the general area.). My guess would be that the car hit the riser, damaged the pipe, which was sheared off by the pipeline pressure, which tossed the car, and the product ignited ( from sparks, or the catalytic converter.)

Edit; in the later video's, you can see some kind of pipe or something at ground level that wasn't obvious in the earlier videos.

As bad as this is, it could have been much worse.

Right..... So considering that this COULD have been much worse, you call it an overreaction to add something more substantial than a chain link fence to protect it from the roadway direction? Or is it that since bollards won't stop an airplane, we shouldn't do anything at all?

Edited September 19 by Captainant

[Rex Kramer 1,334]

4 hours ago, Captainant said:

Last time I checked, those don't explode and aren't in residential areas. C'mon, man. That's apples and oranges. Although both can give you cancer depending on who you ask...

Wind turbine manufacturers are oil and gas companies. 

[Captainant 27,640]

3 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

Wind turbine manufacturers are oil and gas companies. 

AHCKSHUALLY that's an energy company 

[Rex Kramer 1,334]

15 minutes ago, Captainant said:

AHCKSHUALLY that's an energy company 

Yes, just like a midstream company or refiner. 

[fattyflattie 4,639]

1 hour ago, Captainant said:

Right..... So considering that this COULD have been much worse, you call it an overreaction to add something more substantial than a chain link fence to protect it from the roadway direction? Or is it that since bollards won't stop an airplane, we shouldn't do anything at all?

I’m down for paying for it out of any social fund you want.  I’d be irate as an ET shareholder if they don’t hold the woman’s estate liable. 

[Rip76 4,925]

Interesting.

Edited September 19 by Rip76

[Updawg 2,266]

Criminal investigation? Wonder if that’s just protocol at this point or they information indicating something

[Brisketexan 105,082]

Criminal investigation? Wonder if that’s just protocol at this point or they information indicating something

I’m positive it’s protocol. Got to look into whether the driver hit it intentionally, even if all signs point to it before an accident. Have to run the traps. Insurance sure as hell will insist on it.

[Bevo&Pevo 5,122]

3 hours ago, PTINS said:

 

For any of you near Houston, consider taking a drive to Mont Belvieu, on FM 146 (state highway?) from I-10 North about 2-3 miles. Probably the highest concentration of pipelines in the world, mostly NGL pipelines. First time i went there in 1980, I thought it looked vulnerable.

Given what happened in Deer Park, they will probably end up building a wall or barrier along the highway. The industry "bought" the town a long time ago.

I'm out. I might be un-retiring here for a bit.

I'd have my doubts that a triple row of K rails would stop a semi and trailer combo weighing in at close to 80,000 pounds gross from causing a similar catastrophe.   If you have a P/L running through your property, you just might be surprised how and what you can do on the ROW.   IF you ever decide to do anything, call the P/L operator before you invest any money.  

[DoobieWah 1,435]

Classic Surly - Corporate Suits vs. Ambulance Chasers. 

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4,975]

And remember, because of the adversarial nature of there profession, lawyers are wrong about 50% of the time. 

[Brisketexan 105,082]

And remember, because of the adversarial nature of there profession, lawyers are wrong about 50% of the time. 

But if we accept your premise, one or the other attorney is correct 100% of the time.

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4,975]

Wrong half the time= -50%. -50%+ -50% = -100% . My math is unassailable. 

[Captainant 27,640]

Anyone seen anything yet on the nature of the criminal investigation? I wonder who is the target of the investigation 

[blacklab 11,926]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

I wonder who is the target of the investigation 

hopefully the people who derailed this thread arguing over the definition of oil and gas companies

[Captainant 27,640]

9 minutes ago, blacklab said:

hopefully the people who derailed this thread arguing over the definition of oil and gas companies

I'm sorry about that, I got Rex'd. It's too bad he wouldn't ever engage with the discussion about the disaster itself 

[PTINS 3,466]

15 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

Wind turbine manufacturers are oil and gas companies. 

Companies that own & operate wind farms use their windmill tax subsidies ...

to invest in oil & gas exploration and production... tax free. 

[crash_davis 23,103]

O&G bros trigger alert. Anyone who's driven through Luling sarcastically will say, "NO WAI!" I think the saying in Luling is that's the smell of money. Sure...cognitive dissonance is a great coping mechanism.

 

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/09/20/texas-oil-wells-hydrogen-sulfide-caldwell-county/

Study finds levels of a dangerous gas “off the scales” in Central Texas oilfield

The smell of oil wells has long permeated Caldwell County, near Austin and San Antonio. Now researchers have documented wells releasing dangerous amounts of hydrogen sulfide gas.

The first readings Abigail Edgar took of hydrogen sulfide and methane at oilfields in Caldwell County in 2021 were so high that she thought her equipment was malfunctioning.

“It was off the scales. Methane was off the scales and hydrogen sulfide was off the scales,” said Edgar, a master’s student in geography at Texas State University. “The monitor would immediately start beeping when I crossed the property line.”

Edgar was recording dangerous levels of hydrogen sulfide at wells on private property in Caldwell County, 30 miles southeast of Austin. Hydrogen sulfide is a toxic and highly flammable gas often found in oil and gas formations. During the course of her research, the gas was so potent at three separate wells that Edgar’s respirator did not provide enough protection and she had to leave for her safety.

Edgar teamed up with University of Cincinnati environmental scientist Amy Townsend-Small, an expert on methane, to take another round of measurements in 2023. They found the wells were directly releasing gas — including hydrogen sulfide and methane — into the atmosphere in a process called venting. Some of the wells venting gas were alongside public roads. Others were next to backyards and driveways.

In a paper published in Environmental Research Communications last week, Edgar, Townsend-Small and other authors at Texas State University and the University of Maryland report hydrogen sulfide readings at 46 wells around Caldwell County. Hydrogen sulfide concentrations at 13 of the wells were at least 300 parts per million (ppm) — the maximum reading on the measuring device. Eight other sites had readings over 100 ppm. Exposure to 100 ppm of hydrogen sulfide is immediately dangerous to life or health, according to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. The study warns these hydrogen sulfide levels are a hazard for people living and working in the area.

“Here in Texas we rely heavily on the oil industry and protect the oil industry. And I think rightfully so,” Edgar said. “But there has to be something done for these neighbors. We’re slowly poisoning these communities.”

[Rex Kramer 1,334]

1 hour ago, Captainant said:

I'm sorry about that, I got Rex'd. It's too bad he wouldn't ever engage with the discussion about the disaster itself 

You have continually gotten it wrong with your labels. I will continue to not engage because I have no opinion, as I’ve said. Your absurd posts on a wide range of topics have left me leaning heavily toward whomever you’re arguing with. 

[Rex Kramer 1,334]

26 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

O&G bros trigger alert.

Nothing triggering about the article, except I’ve never heard of really any hydrocarbons in Caldwell County. 

[RPM 26,318]

If you've ever driven through Andrews, Jai or Eunice there is no doubt Hydrogen Sulfide is being released. It's so thick you can taste it.

[bolverk 29,657]

12 hours ago, crash_davis said:

O&G bros trigger alert. Anyone who's driven through Luling sarcastically will say, "NO WAI!" I think the saying in Luling is that's the smell of money. Sure...cognitive dissonance is a great coping mechanism.

Luling is the Dutch oven of Central Texas.

12 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

Nothing triggering about the article, except I’ve never heard of really any hydrocarbons in Caldwell County. 

If you've ever been to Luling on one of those humid, stagnant air, it's-already-85-degrees-at-9am mornings, the sulfurous odor is about as bad as it can get. 

One of the most significant events in Luling's history was the discovery of oil by Edgar B. Davis.[7] Davis mortgaged everything he owned to finance drilling operations around Luling. On August 9, 1922, the Rafael Rios No. 1 well struck oil at 2,161 feet (659 m), producing 150 barrels per day (24 m3/d). To repay his loans, Davis contracted 2 million barrels (320,000 m3) each to Atlantic Oil and Magnolia Oil at $.50 a barrel, plus another 2 million barrels (320,000 m3) to Magnolia at $.75 per barrel.[9]

Davis' discovery opened up an oilfield 12 miles (19 km) long and 2 miles (3 km) wide. The economy quickly moved from the railroad and agriculture to oil. The population of the town rapidly increased to over 5,000. By 1924, the Luling Oil Field was producing over 15 million barrels (2,400,000 m3) of oil per year, and oil formed much of Luling's economy for the next 60 years.[9]

As oil grew in importance in the 1930s and 1940s, the railroads that helped form the town declined and largely pulled out of Luling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luling,_Texas

10 hours ago, RPM said:

If you've ever driven through Andrews, JAL or Eunice there is no doubt Hydrogen Sulfide is being released. It's so thick you can taste it.

Fify. The sulfuric miasma lingering around Forsan off US 87 manages to infiltrate the nostrils in the same way.  

[PTINS 3,466]

21 hours ago, crash_davis said:

O&G bros trigger alert. Anyone who's driven through Luling sarcastically will say, "NO WAI!" I think the saying in Luling is that's the smell of money. Sure...cognitive dissonance is a great coping mechanism.

 

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/09/20/texas-oil-wells-hydrogen-sulfide-caldwell-county/

Study finds levels of a dangerous gas “off the scales” in Central Texas oilfield

The smell of oil wells has long permeated Caldwell County, near Austin and San Antonio. Now researchers have documented wells releasing dangerous amounts of hydrogen sulfide gas.

The first readings Abigail Edgar took of hydrogen sulfide and methane at oilfields in Caldwell County in 2021 were so high that she thought her equipment was malfunctioning.

“It was off the scales. Methane was off the scales and hydrogen sulfide was off the scales,” said Edgar, a master’s student in geography at Texas State University. “The monitor would immediately start beeping when I crossed the property line.”

Edgar was recording dangerous levels of hydrogen sulfide at wells on private property in Caldwell County, 30 miles southeast of Austin. Hydrogen sulfide is a toxic and highly flammable gas often found in oil and gas formations. During the course of her research, the gas was so potent at three separate wells that Edgar’s respirator did not provide enough protection and she had to leave for her safety.

Edgar teamed up with University of Cincinnati environmental scientist Amy Townsend-Small, an expert on methane, to take another round of measurements in 2023. They found the wells were directly releasing gas — including hydrogen sulfide and methane — into the atmosphere in a process called venting. Some of the wells venting gas were alongside public roads. Others were next to backyards and driveways.

In a paper published in Environmental Research Communications last week, Edgar, Townsend-Small and other authors at Texas State University and the University of Maryland report hydrogen sulfide readings at 46 wells around Caldwell County. Hydrogen sulfide concentrations at 13 of the wells were at least 300 parts per million (ppm) — the maximum reading on the measuring device. Eight other sites had readings over 100 ppm. Exposure to 100 ppm of hydrogen sulfide is immediately dangerous to life or health, according to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. The study warns these hydrogen sulfide levels are a hazard for people living and working in the area.

“Here in Texas we rely heavily on the oil industry and protect the oil industry. And I think rightfully so,” Edgar said. “But there has to be something done for these neighbors. We’re slowly poisoning these communities.”

A few observations,

Having witnessed resume padding by others for a good many years, the term "an expert on methane", is a pretty low bar to step over. Once you understand a few physical properties and characteristics of methane, there is not much else.  Perhaps that expert could add expert on Hydrogen Sulfide to their credentials.

The wells in Luling have produced oil (and small amounts of natural gas) that contains sulphur compounds, including hydrogen sulfide (H2S), since they were drilled 100 years ago. That is a fact. That fact is the reason the wells have posted signs warning people there is "H2S" or "Poison Gas" present, and the reason why the all the above ground surface equipment is designed to be used in a dangerous, corrosive, hazardous environment. 

Apparently the recent testing confirmed that the gas wells producing methane and H2S contained extremely high concentrations of methane and H2S; “It was off the scales. Methane was off the scales and hydrogen sulfide was off the scales,” ... “The monitor would immediately start beeping when I crossed the property line.”  Off site, the monitor wasn't beeping. Ok, all is good. They crossed the property line to the well producing the poisonous gas, and the monitor immediately started beeping. Ok, it looks like the monitor is working. As one would expect, the concentration increases as you get closer to the source. 

One would expect an expert on methane to understand that methane containing elevated levels of H2S requires elevated levels of personal protection (masks and fresh air tanks, not a respirator), especially when directly exposed to the source of the poisonous gas. At "higher" H2S levels, any exposure could be fatal, on contact. You don't need to be an expert to understand that fact.

Every flange, valve, meter and piece of equipment at the well site is a possible fugitive emission source. Oil is stored in atmospheric tanks that breath, or vent, low quantities of vapor (gas) entrained in the oil. The minute quantities of leaked vapors are diluted and dissipate readily. These tanks are designed to hold a column of liquid at atmospheric pressure, not a pressure vessel for storing liquids under pressure. Those locations with elevated levels of H2S are operated and maintained by personnel that have specific training and knowledge and have been equipped accordingly.

At least the reporters eventually recognized the obvious and left for their own safety.

I like to know the rules so I no how far I'm stepping over them. Rules or guidelines on a Poison Gas that can be fatal on contact? Those are absolutes.

[FartingMonk 3,606]

I used to work for Quest and have been all over the country doing smart pigging.  A lot of sites up north that have block valves near the road especially on 2 Lane highways have cables inside the chain link fence to stop things like this.  It won't stop everything but it will slow the car down enough to maybe lessen the damage.  Sometimes that's the only isolation valve for miles.  With an explosion like that.  It looks like the next upstream isolation valve was pretty far and that's why it burned for so long.  

[fattyflattie 4,639]

3 hours ago, PTINS said:

One would expect an expert on methane to understand that methane containing elevated levels of H2S requires elevated levels of personal protection (masks and fresh air tanks, not a respirator), especially when directly exposed to the source of the poisonous gas. At "higher" H2S levels, any exposure could be fatal, on contact. You don't need to be an expert to understand that fact.

We’re talking about a Texas State grad student here…

[High Plains Drifter 11,034]

On 9/21/2024 at 9:58 AM, PTINS said:

A few observations,

Having witnessed resume padding by others for a good many years, the term "an expert on methane", is a pretty low bar to step over. Once you understand a few physical properties and characteristics of methane, there is not much else.  Perhaps that expert could add expert on Hydrogen Sulfide to their credentials.

The wells in Luling have produced oil (and small amounts of natural gas) that contains sulphur compounds, including hydrogen sulfide (H2S), since they were drilled 100 years ago. That is a fact. That fact is the reason the wells have posted signs warning people there is "H2S" or "Poison Gas" present, and the reason why the all the above ground surface equipment is designed to be used in a dangerous, corrosive, hazardous environment. 

Apparently the recent testing confirmed that the gas wells producing methane and H2S contained extremely high concentrations of methane and H2S; “It was off the scales. Methane was off the scales and hydrogen sulfide was off the scales,” ... “The monitor would immediately start beeping when I crossed the property line.”  Off site, the monitor wasn't beeping. Ok, all is good. They crossed the property line to the well producing the poisonous gas, and the monitor immediately started beeping. Ok, it looks like the monitor is working. As one would expect, the concentration increases as you get closer to the source. 

One would expect an expert on methane to understand that methane containing elevated levels of H2S requires elevated levels of personal protection (masks and fresh air tanks, not a respirator), especially when directly exposed to the source of the poisonous gas. At "higher" H2S levels, any exposure could be fatal, on contact. You don't need to be an expert to understand that fact.

Every flange, valve, meter and piece of equipment at the well site is a possible fugitive emission source. Oil is stored in atmospheric tanks that breath, or vent, low quantities of vapor (gas) entrained in the oil. The minute quantities of leaked vapors are diluted and dissipate readily. These tanks are designed to hold a column of liquid at atmospheric pressure, not a pressure vessel for storing liquids under pressure. Those locations with elevated levels of H2S are operated and maintained by personnel that have specific training and knowledge and have been equipped accordingly.

At least the reporters eventually recognized the obvious and left for their own safety.

I like to know the rules so I no how far I'm stepping over them. Rules or guidelines on a Poison Gas that can be fatal on contact? Those are absolutes.

 

22 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

We’re talking about a Texas State grad student here…

 

The point of the article is not to tell OG firms what they already know.

 

 

[Gatorubet 30,189]

On 9/19/2024 at 2:53 PM, BearMace said:

Also the last 3 pages...

Sir….this is a Surlys!