Energy: Out with the Dirty, In with the Clean

Sandy Levine | @CLFLevine

Come join Conservation Law Foundation and our allies THIS SATURDAY in Burlington, Vermont for a discussion on Vermont’s Energy Choices.

Vermont’s Energy Choices: Old Dirty Problems and Clean Energy Solutions
Saturday, April 27th, 1:30 PM at the Billings Auditorium at UVM in Burlington

The time is NOW to move away from dirty sources of energy such as tar sands, nuclear, oil and coal. Solutions are available now to move us away from expensive, dangerous and polluting energy.

Come hear national and international experts on the problems of dirty energy – from fracking to tar sands – and  the real-world successes of renewable power – including community based renewable power in Europe.

Throwing up our hands is not an option. Come find out how to make a clean energy future our reality.

You can sign up and more information here:  See you Saturday!

Focus Areas

Climate Change




Vermont Yankee

2 Responses to “Energy: Out with the Dirty, In with the Clean”

  1. pete blose

    In 2008 the Portland Pipeline Company was issued a Notice of Amendment by PHMSA for violation of (among other things) 49 CFR 95.583 which requires coating of pipe exposed to the atmosphere. See CFRs below. The violation was supposedly corrected. However it is apparent that the violation continues at present. The pipeline remainss exposedat a number of locations.

    If nothing else, these violations could form a legitimate basis for a civil action under 49 USC 60121. I suspect that additional grounds would be revealed in the discovery process.

    Well that’s my two cents.

    Pete Blose

    Barnet, Vermont

    49 CFR
    . . .
    § 195.581
    Which pipelines must I protect against atmospheric corrosion and what coating material may I use?
    (a) You must clean and coat each pipeline or portion of pipeline that is exposed to the atmosphere, except pipelines under paragraph (c) of this section.
    (b) Coating material must be suitable for the prevention of atmospheric corrosion.
    (c) Except portions of pipelines in offshore splash zones or soil-to-air interfaces, you need not protect against atmospheric corrosion any pipeline for which you demonstrate by test, investigation, or experience appropriate to the environment of the pipeline that corrosion will—
    (1) Only be a light surface oxide; or
    (2) Not affect the safe operation of the pipeline before the next scheduled inspection.

    § 195.583
    What must I do to monitor atmospheric corrosion control?
    (a) You must inspect each pipeline or portion of pipeline that is exposed to the atmosphere for evidence of atmospheric corrosion, as follows:

    If the pipeline is located:
    Then the frequency of inspection is:

    At least once every 3 calendar years, but with intervals not exceeding 39 months.

    At least once each calendar year, but with intervals not exceeding 15 months.

    (b) During inspections you must give particular attention to pipe at soil-to-air interfaces, under thermal insulation, under disbonded coatings, at pipe supports, in splash zones, at deck penetrations, and in spans over water.
    (c) If you find atmospheric corrosion during an inspection, you must provide protection against the corrosion as required by § 195.581.

    § 195.585
    What must I do to correct corroded pipe?
    (a) General corrosion. If you find pipe so generally corroded that the remaining wall thickness is less than that required for the maximum operating pressure of the pipeline, you must replace the pipe. However, you need not replace the pipe if you—
    (1) Reduce the maximum operating pressure commensurate with the strength of the pipe needed for serviceability based on actual remaining wall thickness; or
    (2) Repair the pipe by a method that reliable engineering tests and analyses show can permanently restore the serviceability of the pipe.
    (b) Localized corrosion pitting. If you find pipe that has localized corrosion pitting to a degree that leakage might result, you must replace or repair the pipe, unless you reduce the maximum operating pressure commensurate with the strength of the pipe based on actual remaining wall thickness in the pits.

    • Sandy Levine

      CLF remains concerned about the environmental impacts of the tar sands pipeline especially in the areas where it is exposed. We are pleased that the recent decision by the Act 250 District Coordinator that any use of the pipeline for tar sands will require review by Act 250. You can read that decision here.

Leave a Reply

About the CLF Blog

The views and opinions expressed on this blog do not necessarily represent the opinions or positions of Conservation Law Foundation, our boards, or our supporters.