Environmental Considerations for Pipeline Abandonment: A Case Study From Abandonment of a Southern Alberta Pipeline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the 1920s, over 400,000 km of petroleum pipelines have been installed in Alberta. Pipeline abandonment is an increasingly relevant issue as the pipeline network ages. The full or partial abandonment of pipeline systems is necessitated by factors such as wind or water erosion issues, pipeline integrity issues, changes in source supply and customer demand, urban development encroachment and regulatory requirements. Pipeline abandonment-in-place is generally the preferred option based on the technical condition and environmental sustainability of the pipeline, however, in some cases pipeline removal or partial removal cannot be avoided. In all cases, the planning process for abandonment includes technical evaluation, risk assessment, environmental assessment, landowner consultation and/or evaluation of future land use. Abandonment plans must also include environmental protection measures to be implemented during the removal of any pipeline segment and consideration of the post-abandonment implications of any pipeline left in place. These measures include topsoil conservation, erosion/sediment control and reclamation. This paper discusses environmental protection measures for pipeline abandonment, using issues faced during abandonment of one of the oldest natural gas pipelines in Alberta as a case study. Challenges faced during this project included gathering of appropriate historical information including leak history and maintenance records, removal of all aboveground facilities, accommodations for future land use plans including road development and measures taken to minimize the risk of the abandoned pipeline becoming a water conduit. In addition, the paper will discuss the extensive planning and construction effort required to undertake pipeline abandonment at several fish-bearing watercourse crossings, where pipeline exposures during high water events necessitated pipeline removal. A primary objective in the planning and the removal of the abandoned pipeline was minimal disturbance of the land.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".