Canadian Occupational Safety

22 Canadian Occupational Safety www.cos-mag.com By Vanessa Chris W hether you're educated on the topic of the Keystone Pipeline or not, you likely have some sort of opinion on it — even if it's as simple as being for it or against it. When it comes to oil, it seems, there's no middle ground. e pipeline — which would essentially transport diluted bitumen from the Alberta oil sands all the way down to refi ner- ies in Texas, and eventually to markets overseas — would mean great things for the Canadian economy. It would also help the U.S. eliminate its reliance on foreign oil. On the downside, transporting oil — regardless of how it's moved, or what type of oil it is — is a risky endeavour. One that's not immune to spills, explosions and other hazards. But regardless of which side of the argument you fi nd your- self on — regardless of your views on politics, economics or the environment — the crux of the Keystone pipeline argument essentially boils down to safety. Opponents of the project typically argue that it's unsafe — it's a danger to the environment, the communities it passes through, and even its workers. Proponents will highlight that most forms of transporting fuel are unsafe, and pipelines are by far the safest option. New advances in pipeline technology — from construction to operation prac- tices — have made it even safer. And Canada's recent push toward tougher regulations is designed to make sure that accidents, if they do happen, are handled as effi ciently as possible. But are the benefi ts enough to out- weigh the risks? And are they enough to warrant an investment in a fuel source that many argue is going the way of the dinosaur? The issues One of the biggest arguments in favour of pipelines is that they're typically safer than any other mode of transport. One only has to look as far back to July's Lac- Mégantic train derailment in Quebec — which caused the crude oil tanks it was carrying to explode killing dozens of people — to see merit in that point of view. Today's pipelines are diff erent than those installed 50 years ago. For start- ers, they're now made of high-strength, low alloy steels that feature improved toughness, weldability, ductile frac- ture resistance and cost eff ectiveness, according to the Oil and Gas Journal. While there was some controversy sur- rounding how these pipeline materials interact with diluted bitumen, a recent report by the National Research Coun- cil of the Sciences Academy (NAS) reveals that transporting bitumen via pipeline is no more dangerous than transporting crude oil. e ways in which pipelines are con- structed and operated are also changing. When it comes to construction, mech- anized and automated techniques are 1920s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1990s During the first major pipeline boom, pipe was formed with electric resistance-welded or flash-welded processes — a significant advance in the reliability of the longitudinal seam. Older pipelines were equipped with cathodic protection systems, and welder qualifications and procedure qualification standards were imposed, to improve the reliability of girth welds. Anti-corrosion coatings evolved even further and in-line inspection tools can locate corroded areas before they fail, allowing the industry to inspect pipelines of any age. Pipeline operators found a way to control corrosion in a way they never had before — by employing cathodic protection for new pipeline construction. A big decade for pipelines as low alloy and low carbon steels came into the picture, and were immediately used exclusively by manufacturers, ensuring steel with fewer defects. High-frequency electric resistance welds were also used at this time, to ensure an increased reliability in the longitudinal seal. New coatings were introduced to prevent corrosion and new "in line" tools (also known as "smart pigs") were introduced to identify defects in pipes that were already in service. Unravelling the issues surrounding Alberta's controversial Keystone Pipeline project and what's fueling the opposition OIL AND GAS

• Cover