|WikiProject Energy||(Rated Start-class, Top-importance)|
|WikiProject Engineering||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
|The content of Environmental risks of the Keystone XL pipeline was merged into Pipeline transport. That page now redirects here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see ; for its talk page, see here. (2013-03-14)|
Much of this page was clearly written by someone whose first language is not English. It needs to be cleaned up. If you don't speak English, contribute to your own language's Wikipedia pages, please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 14:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Has anyone studies the feasibility of pipeline transport for water into interior Africa?
If we can build a pipeline across Rusia for oil?
Can we not irrigate Africa with water? In California dessert has been made some of the most remarkable farmland..
Can anyone point me towards anyone that has looked into the problems with this approach?
184.108.40.206 (talk) 14:51, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- Do we really need a study to do a rough calculation? Aside from the billions needed for the construction, who would be willing to sell that much water? Who would pay to pump it? Could anyone afford to buy it? Why not do a better job of managing the local water resources instead?
Time to build
Does anyone know how long does usually tike to build a pipeline(by mileage)
I think the "list of pipelines" section should be removed and instead just point to category:pipelines so that it is more complete. I'm going to do that now. --20:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
In this page, oil and natural gas pipelines should be created into different category or into a special group. Because, there are many issues in Oil & Gas Pipelines. In addition, the meaning of "pig" as "pipeline inspection gage" is not sure. Even it is not sure that "pig" is an acronym. Historically, what I have learned is that during the early years of oil and gas production, the pipelines were aboveground. At that time, the operators used the balls to clean the pipeline internal. When they launched it into the pipeline, it started to sound like a pig. And that is the reason why it is called "pig". I am not so sure how solid this statement is and I am still trying to search for confirmation. 10:00, 16 August, 2006 [Harry Lwin]
North American natural gas pipelines
It might be informative to include the historic growth of natural gas pipelines in North America which led to the change in the majority of US southern, midwest and western home heating from coal and oil to natural gas. I don't know the details of gas pipelines, but know that the city I grew up in converted from town gas to natural gas in about 1947. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TGC55 (talk--TGC55 16:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC) • contribs) 16:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC).
Outstanding Pipeline Reference Book
One of the best reference books regarding oil and gas pipelines is Oil and Gas Pipelines in NonTechnical Language by T. Miesner and B. Leffler. Released by PennWell Publishing in 2006 it is clear enough for the nontechnical audience but comprehensive enough even experieced pipeliners find the book fascinating. Copies can be ordered from Miesner, LLC
FIX - Pipelines as targets
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipeline_transport#Pipelines_as_Targets The following sentence is too confusing, fix it for me please since I can't afford the time for it, now. Thanks. «Leaky tubes can cause mass floods in places that have been affected around the globe that are short of water.» —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 16:01, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Lists of pipelines and companies
I don't think that this article should include lists of pipelines and companies. If necessary, it always possible to create separate lists (and we already have some of them). Right now these lists in this article are really messy and there is no clear criteria, which pipelines and companies should be included and which not. In general, to improve the quality of this article, I propose to remove list of pipelines and list of companies.Beagel (talk) 10:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Does it transport in a LIQUID form in case of natural gas?
I heard that from a chemistry major friend though he wasn't sure himself. Could it be included - and sourced - in the article if it's the case, it seems like important and interesting information. --AaThinker (talk) 08:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Transportation of solid minerals
Pipelines are also used for transportation of raw minerals such as iron ore (if previouslymixed with water). This use is commercially important, but there is not a single mention to it in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 18:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
"when in the 90s the brewery moved out of the city, Thor beer replaced the centre of a star with a giant tank." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cs302b (talk • contribs) 04:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Separate subsections for oil vs. gas?
The "For oil or natural gas" section would probably read much better if presented as two sub-sections, better describing the technology used for: "Gas" then "Oil" (or the opposite order, although putting Gas first, may make more sense from a historical viewpoint). Doing so should make it easier to add pertinent references to the text as well...--BobC32 (talk) 21:54, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
The whole oil and gas section reads like an advertisement for propane...
This article needs some serious work in this section. The majority of the text is talking about propane and other gases, not pipelines.Danbert8 (talk) 18:49, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- I've made some edits to the propane language, but you're right that the article needs much more work. See my comments below. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 18:07, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Edits to Propane Language
I removed the following language for being inaccurate, non-sourced, and generally all kinds of ridiculous:
"Propane is considered the greenest transportation fuel because it does not require refining like gasoline or diesel fuel. Propane is just separated, not refined from methane and butane and other lesser gases at a processing facility which saves energy and time getting the final products to market. Propane mixed with sand, known as propant, is used for WATERLESS fracking, as it does not pollute water tables or soil and is recovered."
Goodness, where to begin?
1. "Greenest" is a weasel word with no concrete definition; however, it's used here to imply carbon dioxide emissions, as the author references the additional energy required to refine other liquid fuels. Published sources from the California Air Resources Board, the U.S. Energy Information Administration, and others show the wide range of transportation fuels with lower emissions than propane, on both direct emissions and full life-cycle basis.
2. "...methane and butane and other lesser gases": There's no scientific justification for a claim that these are "lesser gases" than propane. That's certainly not the case based on energy content (per Oak Ridge National Laboratory), nor relative physical structure. Perhaps the author was implying that propane comes from a more respectable family?
3. "used for WATERLESS fracking, as it does not pollute water tables or soil and is recovered.": There's no reason to include this information. It has nothing to do with the article topic (Pipeline Transport), it's not necessary to preempt some discussion of the relative merits of different hydrofracturing methods, and it reads like an advertisement.
This article needs cleanup overall, but I don't currently have time to look over the rest. I'll address the other problems later if I get a chance. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 18:06, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
First person usage on the article
"t 6 years, i would estimate that now about 70 percent of propane-butane mixed with other NGL's, is produced from oil and gas fields, with the balance of 30 percent of propane-butane produced from oil refineries when oil is cracked"
Can someone fix this? maybe check the sources that this person is using. I don't think it's a good idea to use "someone's estimate" with no backing up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:41, 10 May 2013 (UTC)