Diluted bitumen, a controversial form of heavy Canadian oil, poses no more risks to
pipelines than conventional oil, according to a long - awaited report released Tuesday by the National Academy of Sciences.
Environmentalists have expressed concerns about the impact of developing the oil sands and say the crude is more corrosive to
pipelines than conventional oil.
Not exact matches
Bitumen is more corrosive on
pipelines and it is more toxic and more difficult to clean up
than conventional oil.
Critics of the TransCanada
pipeline have warned of potential spills in America's heartland as well as the climate impacts of allowing more tar sands
oil, which has a higher carbon footprint
than conventional sources, into the US and other markets.
Jeannie Layson, PHMSA's director of governmental, international and public affairs, said the agency is also reviewing the document and has commissioned the National Academy of Sciences to study whether dilbit is more corrosive to
pipelines than conventional crude
oil.
Environmental groups say that's one of several reasons why dilbit corrodes
pipelines more easily
than conventional crude
oil, although the
oil industry says dilbit poses no more risk
than other oils.
The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service found in a survey of published literature that because tar sands
oil is more carbon intensive
than conventional crude
oil, the Keystone XL
pipeline would increase U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by the equivalent of «approximately 558,000 to 4,061,000 passenger vehicles» annually:
Both were shocked during yesterday's testimony by TransCanada (the company who wants to build the Keystone XL tar sands
oil pipeline across the US) officials who said, «Diluted bitumen [tar sands
oil] is not any more corrosive
than conventional crude.
We have two main concerns: the risk of
oil spills along the
pipeline, which would traverse highly sensitive terrain, and the fact that the extraction of petroleum from the tar sands creates far more greenhouse emissions
than conventional production does.
Tar sands
pipelines are also far more likely to leak
than conventional oil pipelines, which spells bad news for Sebago Lake, Casco Bay, and 11 pristine New England rivers.
But it specifically limited the scope of the report to an examination of whether
pipelines carrying dilbit are more likely to leak
than pipelines carrying
conventional crude
oil.
Despite the rapid growth of the
oil sands industry, and plans to build or expand more
than 10,000 miles of
pipelines in the next few years, federal
pipeline regulations don't distinguish between dilbit and
conventional crude
oil.
Studies also indicate that
pipelines operating at temperatures above 100 degrees Fahrenheit spill up to 23 times more often due to external corrosion
than conventional oil pipelines.
A new study by the National Academy of Sciences found that «
pipelines carrying heavy Canadian
oil sands fuel are at no greater risk of a spill
than those running
conventional crude.»