Alberta Energy Regulator says pipeline spills 60,000 litres of crude into muskeg

The Alberta Energy Regulator says close to 60,000 litres of crude oil have spilled into muskeg in the province's north.

An incident report by the regulator states that a mechanical failure was reported Thursday at a Canadian Natural Resources Limited pipeline approximately 27 kilometres north of Red Earth Creek. Red Earth Creek is over 350 kilometres northwest of Edmonton

The report says there are no reports of impact to wildlife and that a cleanup has begun. Carrie Rosa, a spokeswoman for the regulator, says officials have been delayed reaching the scene due to poor weather in the last few days.

No one from Canadian Natural Resources could be reached on Saturday for comment.

Alberta Energy Regulator says pipeline spills 60,000 litres of crude into muskeg

Alberta’s had an average of two crude oil spills a day, every day for the past 37 years. That makes 28,666 crude oil spills in total, plus another 31,453 spills of just about any other substance you can think of putting in a pipeline – from salt water to liquid petroleum.

According to a database of spills recorded by the Energy Resources Conservation Board, the number of spills, leaks and other unintentional releases of material by the oil and gas industry has been declining over the past decade or so.

But maybe more telling is what it doesn’t include: The regulatory body’s database is messy and missing data in many places; it doesn’t include any spills from some of the biggest pipelines – those crossing provincial or national borders. These fall under National Energy Board jurisdiction. For the 53 per cent of spills from somewhere other than a pipeline, such as oil wells and pumping stations, anything under 2 cubic metres (2,000 litres, or about twelve and a half barrels) doesn’t get counted.

Now tell me how safe it is going to be to be with 2.5-million barrels of oil flowing through 400,000 kilometres of pipeline every day on top of Enbridge’s Gateway sending up to 525,000 barrels a day of oil sands-derived bitumen to the West Coast?

We'd like to think that we are great at transporting oil, that there are next to no spills but as you can see, the Energy Resources Conservation Board, doesn't mind leaving some information out so that we, as Canadians, don't pull the rug out from under their feet.

Not sure if you remember this juicy story from last year:

Underground oil spills at an Alberta oilsands operation have been going on much longer than previously thought, according to new documents. Files released to the Toronto Star show the spills were discovered nine weeks ago, but new documents show that bitumen has been leaking since the winter.

Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. operates the Primrose oilsands facility three hours northeast of Edmonton where four ongoing underground oil blowouts have contaminated forest, muskeg, a lake and have already killed dozens animals including beavers, ducks and birds. According to a government scientist who has been to the site, neither government or industry are able to stop the spills.

An engineering field visit conducted by CNRL in June to examine impacts from one of the four spills show oil staining over two feet up the trunks of trees, and some completely coated in oil. And based on winter snow coverage, CNRL itself estimates that oil has been leaking for over four months.

The first two underground spills began on May 20 and according to an incident report filed by CNRL, the oil plume was about 200-feet long. The third incident was reported on June 8, but documents suggest the oil has been leaking for months longer.

The Alberta Energy Regulator first put out its first press release about any of the spills on June 27 in response to a fourth spill at Primrose South over a body of water. It was not until July 18 that the Regulator reported all four spills, nine weeks after the first spill was reported. Then the Alberta Energy Regulator was asked why it failed to notify the public following the first three spills, AER spokesman Bob Curran said, “The first three incidents were quite small compared to this last one. There were no public impacts, there were negligible environmental impacts. No real trigger to put out a news release.”

This contradicts the Energy Resources Conservation Board (now the AER) who ordered CNRL to “immediately suspend steam injection operations at Primrose East” on June 14, “given the potential environmental risks” of the first three spills.

Cold Lake oil spill leaking for months

According to publicly available AER documents filed by the company, CNRL had 18 reportable spills in 2012 in addition to 18 confirmed well casing failures in 2012.

Critics are now looking for answers about the spills. How long have they been going on? Why have local First Nations and the public been kept in the dark? And finally: Isn’t it time for a full examination of the dangers of CSS and in-situ oilsands production to measure and understand its real impacts?

As industry and government scratch their heads about the identity of scientist who leaked the documents, the scientist notes, “I really hope I don’t lose my job, but I really felt that this was too important to sit on.”

I hope that scientist didn't get fired, this is something that is super important and more Canadians need to know about this.

Ottawa is giving the National Energy Board power to take control of oil-spill cleanups and says pipeline companies must set aside $1-billion to cover costs of a major rupture regardless of fault. Mr. Rickford insisted the measures were not linked to any specific project, But they include widening companies’ financial liability on projects approved by regulators to $1-billion, regardless of whether a pipeline operator is at fault. The government is also giving the federal energy regulator authority to order reimbursement of any cleanup costs incurred by governments, communities or individuals. The regulator will also obtain new powers to take control of incident response, if necessary.

The announcement follows new rules introduced this week to strengthen oil tanker safety, including removing legal barriers on the use of chemical dispersants to clean up spills and eliminating the per-accident liability limit of a fund used to pay compensation for claims.

Enbridge’s Gateway would send up to 525,000 barrels a day of oil sands-derived bitumen to the West Coast if it gets built. A federal panel approved the project last year with 209 conditions, including a provision to set aside nearly $1-billion in liability coverage to cover costs of a potential spill.

Rival Kinder Morgan said Wednesday it holds general liability coverage of $750-million, including $150-million that covers all of the company’s assets in Canada.

Canada’s new pipeline safety rules widen firms’ oil spill liability to $1-billion

Despite the recent development, Canadians are still against the pipelines. We know they aren't safe, there are going to be spills and we don't want Canada to be destroyed all because we must stick with oil and can't go for better resources.

When we were concerned about the Humpback Whale because it is an endangered species and it needs to be protected from oil spills, what did Harper do? He took the Humpback Whale off the endangered species list. Seriously, wtf Harper!

This is going to be used by those trying to sop the XL pipep9me.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Yes it is one more piece of ammunition for those who are against the pipelines.

a reply to: Sabiduria

Alberta’s had an average of two crude oil spills a day, every day for the past 37 years. That makes 28,666 crude oil spills in total, plus another 31,453 spills of just about any other substance you can think of putting in a pipeline – from salt water to liquid petroleum.

Wow, I didn't know spills happened that often.

Don't forget all the train derailments that happen across Canada that spill toxic stuff. I was listening to CBC radio last winter and they had a guest on who was talking about train derailments (after the major train derailment in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec.) and they said that a good chunk of CN train derailments weren't being made public.

A WHOLE 60,000 liters? Wow. Oh wait. That less than two tanker trucks.

www.ehow.com...

Puts things in a little better perspective.

ONE railroad car on the other hand contains over twice that amount. 130K liters:

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: intrepid

Yes it isn't a lot but the fact still stands that spills happen & we don't need more pipelines.

Yes train derailments can be more damaging, it's another reason why we don't need more pipelines.

If we can't properly handle the pipelines & trains carrying toxic stuff, we don't need more.

originally posted by: Sabiduria
Yes train derailments can be more damaging, it's another reason why we don't need more pipelines.

Um, that's an oxymoron and I think you just made my point.

a reply to: intrepid

It doesn't matter if oil is being spilled into the environment from pipelines, trail derailments or big oil tankers, it's bad for the environment period. Again, the bottom line is we don't need more pipelines.

originally posted by: Sabiduria
a reply to: intrepid

It doesn't matter if oil is being spilled into the environment from pipelines, trail derailments or big oil tankers, it's bad for the environment period.

Yup.

Again, the bottom line is we don't need more pipelines.

Why is a pipeline worse than rail distribution? If one thinks that crude is just going to STOP that naive to the max.

a reply to: intrepid

I never said that pipeline is worse than rail distribution, I even agreed with you that train derailments are worse. Again, It doesn't matter if oil is being spilled into the environment from pipelines, trail derailments or big oil tankers, it's bad for the environment period.

No I don't think crude is just going to stop. Instead of wasting billions on more pipelines, why don't we invest billions into better alternative resources? Especially when we know oil/crude is so damaging to the environment and we still can't manage it no matter what stage it is in: oil wells, pipelines, trains carrying oil or on tankers.

www.cbc.ca...

Milkweed touted as Oil Spill Super Sucker With Butterfly Benefits

Milkweed has long been considered a rural pest. But Simard, a former chemical engineer, says the plant's unusual qualities caught his interest.

The white fibres that you can often see floating in the fall breeze are light and hollow and able to absorb four times more oil than polypropylene, the artificial product now used to clean up spills.

Simard has set up a co-operative of 20 farmers in Quebec to grow 325 hectares of milkweed. He says there are another 35 growers on a waiting list.

The OP's list of spills is appalling. Found this as just a little bit of better news in relation?

For the most part, it's people that live in the areas that oppose pipelines. If the pipeline was rerouted to go through the big cities, I am sure all the city slickers that think it's no big deal would be OK with that, right?

originally posted by: TKDRL
For the most part, it's people that live in the areas that oppose pipelines. If the pipeline was rerouted to go through the big cities, I am sure all the city slickers that think it's no big deal would be OK with that, right?

Only if it didn't back up traffic.

a reply to: Caver78

My Grandma's boyfriend has stocks in this company that is supposed to have this device or something that cleans up oil in water and other chemicals. He didn't go into more detail than that because he was too mad it wasn't being used for a spill that happened this summer. I wonder what he was referring to?

I also read the following article, here is an excerpt from it:

... Writing in the journal Science, the researchers report they also found the microbes were actively degrading oil in the asphalt, suggesting a similar phenomenon could be used to clean up oil spills.

Water 'microhabitats' in oil show potential for extraterrestrial life, oil cleanup: Extremophilic ecosystems writ small