A thought about the keystone pipeline

[Texashiker]

Ever seen a 500-1000 ton crane?

Fina in Groves Texas (now called Total) had one when they were setting the new towers.

Just getting the crane in place took a couple of weeks, maybe even a month? If I remember right, the refinery had to pour a special reinforced concert slab "just" for the outriggers of the crane. Then the slab had to cure for a couple of weeks, then the crane was moved into place.

Then there are the cranes that help build the offshore drilling rigs, talk about massive.

I would imagine for a refinery of that size to be built inland they would have to actually fabricate those absurdly large sections on or very close to the site which would increase the cost so much that it just isn't feasible.

One of the shops I worked at had a 500 ton lifting capacity (2 - 250 ton overhead cranes), and the shop was right at 1/4 mile long. Part of the shop went over the ship channel. When we shipped really heavy parts out, a barge was brought in, parked under the shop in the water, then the overhead cranes would set the tower in the barge.

Anything up to 50 tons should be fine to transport over the road, but 50 tons is not "that" big of a part.

One heat exchanger shop I worked at, we built a hydrogen service shell and tube heat exchanger for Exxon. The shell was 3 1/2 inches thick, was only about 3 feet in diameter, the exchanger was about 30 feet long, and weighed right at 30 tons. The flanges were something like 18 inches thick.

 

[nobodyknows]

I was wrong about the coke, so what.

You have contributed nothing to the discussion, besides a couple of links.

Just because my opinion is differEnt from yours doesn't mean i haven't contributed to thIS thread. And if your were wrong about the coke, what else are you wrong About?:\

Nobody ever said its impossible to build refineries inland, it is very possible.

But, the refineries are not going to be the size of the ones along the gulf coast.

Unless you can get a shipping channel to a refinery, its going to be physically impossible for an inland refinery to produce the same amount of product as a refinery on the coast. Its just not going to happen.

I am not talking about the refinery being on a small river, the refinery needs to be on a ship channel. The channel will have to be dredged from time to time, and the mud from dredging the ship channel will have to be disposed of.

There are massive amounts of logistics involved that you probably have no idea about.

There is no way 18 wheelers and train cars can transport the same amount of cargo that a tanker or super tanker can. Unless you have been next to a tanker or super tanker, its difficult to imagine how large those ships are.

And its not "just" the refineries we are talking about, its the economy that supports that refineries - being able to rent a crane, skilled workers, welding supplies, heat exchanger repair shops,,,,,.

If someone wanted to build a small refinery, yea, you can do that inland and way from a ship channel. But is it going to be worth it to setup dozens or hundreds of those small refineries all over the nation?

lol@u

 

[SkullWalker]

So then Canada should build there pipeline to their own port and sell the crude to China. Problem solved.

It is difficult, if not completely impossible, to build a pipeline all the way to the West Coast because this would need an agreement from all the aboriginal nations living on the land where the pipeline is projected.

And Canada is very strict about these laws, so the future of the pipeline leading from the Alberta tar sands to the West Coast is very uncertain.

And personally I am against using unprocessed materials for export, because this usually creates less income than selling finished and processed goods with added value. I really do not like how China is getting more and more energy and power hungry. Canada's energy resources should stay in North America so we effectively use it when it still lasts and slowly prepare our countries for the transition to the alternative energy resources.