Oil Pipeline Transport

Comments debate the advantages of pipelines over rail or trucks for oil transportation, highlighting pipelines as safer, cheaper, and more efficient while criticizing alternatives for higher risks, costs, and emissions.

📉 Falling 0.2x Politics & Society
2,241
Comments
19
Years Active
5
Top Authors
#2962
Topic ID

Activity Over Time

2008
4
2009
7
2010
169
2011
19
2012
24
2013
46
2014
33
2015
64
2016
92
2017
118
2018
94
2019
209
2020
231
2021
345
2022
334
2023
203
2024
121
2025
110
2026
18

Keywords

overcast.fm huffingtonpost.ca e.g US BP HQ mexico.php wikipedia.org worldoil.com LEAST oil pipelines pipeline spill crude gas rail trucks fuel drilling

Sample Comments

cperciva Sep 7, 2017 View on HN

This is weird. Pipelines are the cheapest, most efficient, and safest way to move large amounts of oil. How is something which renders oil impossible to transport via pipeline a step forward?

_hypx Aug 1, 2023 View on HN

You'd likely send via pipelines or tanker trucks instead.

WJW Apr 20, 2020 View on HN

There is a little bit more to an oil tank than just steel walls. You need proper foundations, fire prevention systems, disaster plans, probably get hooked up to the pipeline network, etc etc etc. Even if it were quick, the amount of oil being pumped up is massive and you need more than a few tanks to store it all. Finally, tanks are long term infrastructure and it might not be profitable to build out storage too much just in the hope of catching once-in-a-lifetime negative pricing events.

Cthulhu_ May 10, 2021 View on HN

Armchair take: The pipelines handle a lot of fuel, and the US needs / uses a lot of fuel; to move the same amount, you need a lot of trucks. And if that need is not met, the economy etc will be disrupted heavily, price of fuel will go up, and the price of fuel going up has caused massive issues in the past.

lazyjones Nov 2, 2019 View on HN

Some perspective: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pipeline_accidents_in_... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pipeline_accidents_in_...I'm not sure why this appears to be interesti

wahern Jun 10, 2021 View on HN

Isn't the point of the pipeline to send the oil to Gulf Coast refineries? There's not that many direct uses for dirty Bakken crude, which also happens to be particularly dangerous to ship by train.

jdhn Sep 25, 2019 View on HN

Like others have said, this oil would probably be run to refineries by train. This is inefficient, but until new pipelines are built, it's the best way to get oil from the field to the refinery.

DoctorOetker Aug 14, 2019 View on HN

why can't they use a fraction of the flaring gas to liquify the rest of the flaring gas? then the liquid gas can be transported just like the oil barrels to the pipeline-connected world

dragosmocrii Jun 10, 2021 View on HN

Oil doesn't really have an alternative right now for many of its applications. Plus, at the beginning of the pandemic gas was dirt cheap, yet no one needed it. However, this discussion was about transportation of oil, and the idea is that pipelines are more efficient than rail or trucks (if that even makes sense), so it's a pity the decision to halt the project is more political than even environmental.

gruez Apr 13, 2025 View on HN

That'll just cause the oil to be transported over rail instead, which is more expensive and has an even higher chance of spills.