# Presentation: 010652

## FINDINGS OF A PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION ON THE FEASIBILITY OF USING ABANDONED PIPELINES IN COASTAL LOUISIANA 

## ABANDONED PIPELINE FEASIBILITY STUDY
STUDY ORIGINATION
In 1992, Louisiana Senate Resolution No 164 was passed.
Resolution directed the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources to develop and implement a pilot project to determine the feasibility of using abandoned pipelines for sediment diversion in the coastal restoration program.
Resolution stated that many such abandoned pipelines existed.
Resolution stated that pipeline owners were willing to work with the state to allow use of pipelines for sediment diversions.

**STUDY ORIGINATION**
**In 1992, Louisiana Senate Resolution No 164 was passed.**
**Resolution directed the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources to develop and implement a pilot project to determine the feasibility of using abandoned pipelines for sediment diversion in the coastal restoration program.**
**Resolution stated that many such abandoned pipelines existed.**
**Resolution stated that pipeline owners were willing to work with the state to allow use of pipelines for sediment diversions.**

## WHO PERFORMED THE STUDY?

Pyburn & Odom, Inc.
Provided engineering services for study
Project Director: Charles H. Coates, P.E.
Team of 9 engineering, environmental and dredging technical personnel

McGlinchey Stafford Lang
Provided legal research
Contact lawyer: Richard Curry

**Pyburn & Odom, Inc.**
**Provided engineering services for study**
**Project Director: Charles H. Coates, P.E.**
**Team of 9 engineering, environmental and dredging technical personnel**
**McGlinchey Stafford Lang**
**Provided legal research**
**Contact lawyer: Richard Curry**

## PYBURN & ODOM, Inc:  SCOPE OF WORK

Part I:  Perform investigation to determine the potential feasibility of using abandoned oil and gas pipelines for sediment diversion to marshes.

Part II:  If the Part I investigation is found feasible, prepare a conceptual design and an estimated cost   for a pilot project to demonstrate practical feasibility

	Note:  Canvassing the oil and gas companies for abandoned pipelines was not a task for Pyburn & Odom.   

**Part I:**  **Perform investigation to determine the **_**potential **_**feasibility of using abandoned oil and gas pipelines for sediment diversion to marshes.**
**Part II:  If the Part I investigation is found feasible, prepare a conceptual design and an estimated cost   for a pilot project to demonstrate **_**practical**_** feasibility**
**	****Note:  Canvassing the oil and gas companies for abandoned pipelines **_**was not**_** a task for Pyburn & Odom.   **

## 
DELIVERABLES

Capacities of abandoned pipelines for various pipeline lengths, diameters, slurry concentrations, slurry compositions, and other variables.

Projected erosion and corrosion rates for pipelines.

Preliminary designs and cost estimates for potential slurry pipeline systems. 

Results of feasibility analysis.

5.	Preliminary design and cost estimate of a prototype pipeline slurry project.

**DELIVERABLES**
**Capacities of abandoned pipelines for various pipeline lengths, diameters, slurry concentrations, slurry compositions, and other variables.**
**Projected erosion and corrosion rates for pipelines.**
**Preliminary designs and cost estimates for potential slurry pipeline systems. **
**Results of feasibility analysis.**
**5.****	****Preliminary design and cost estimate of a prototype pipeline slurry project.**

## TASKS

Task 1.  Pipeline Capacities.   Capacities of pipelines were  evaluated as to :

Lengths:  Abandoned pipeline lengths of 5, 15 & 30 miles in length were examined.

Diameters:  Diameters similar to those in the oil and gas  pipeline industry were used:  8, 12, 16, & 24-in diameter pipe.  

 c.     Slurry concentration:   Slurry concentrations of 10, 20, 30 and 40 % solids were analyzed.  A slurry content of 30% was used for cost estimate.

 d.     Slurry composition:    Typical sediment compositions found on the Lower Mississippi River were used in calculations.  Median grain size of 0.182 mm used to prepare cost estimates.

**Task 1.  **_**Pipeline Capacities. **_**  Capacities of pipelines were  evaluated as to :**
**	**
_**Lengths**_**:  Abandoned pipeline lengths of 5, 15 & 30 miles in length were examined.**
_**Diameters:**_**  Diameters similar to those in the oil and gas  pipeline industry were used:  8, 12, 16, & 24-in diameter pipe.  **
** ****c.     **_**Slurry concentration: **_**  Slurry concentrations of 10, 20, 30 and 40 % solids were analyzed.  A slurry content of 30% was used for cost estimate.**
** ****d.     **_**Slurry composition:   **_** Typical sediment compositions found on the Lower Mississippi River were used in calculations.  Median grain size of 0.182 mm used to prepare cost estimates****.**

## 
Task 1 - Continued

e.   Pumping capacity:   Operating velocities were assumed to  be at least 10% above the minimum velocity to establish flow with a heterogeneous mixture.   Booster pumps  placed at about one mile intervals for cost estimates.

f.    Allowable pressure:  A design operating pressure of 165 psi (310 feet of head) was used for costing.  

**Task 1 - Continued**
**e.   **_**Pumping capacity**_**:**   **Operating velocities were assumed to  be at least 10% above the minimum velocity to establish flow with a heterogeneous mixture.   Booster pumps  placed at about one mile intervals for cost estimates.**
**f.    **_**Allowable pressure:**_**  A design operating pressure of 165 psi (310 feet of head) was used for costing.  **

## Task 2.  Pipeline Erosion and Corrosion Rates.

Projected erosion rates:   Erosion rate is high and will be highest on pipe bottom.  Rough estimate of 1/8 inch of wear per 500,000 – 2,000,000 cubic yards of dredged material.  Liners?

Projected corrosion rates:  Negligible compared to erosion.

_**Projected erosion rates:**__ _  **Erosion rate is high and will be highest on pipe bottom.  Rough estimate of 1/8 inch of wear per 500,000 – 2,000,000 cubic yards of dredged material.  Liners?**
_**Projected corrosion rates: **_** Negligible compared to erosion.**

## Task 3.  Potential Slurry Pipeline Systems. 

        Basic Conceptual Design Components
	      1. 	Sediment source.  
		-  Miss. R. used for cost estimates
2.  Sediment pipelines
3.	 Sediment deposition  
-	Volumes of deposited sediment are based on 9 feet of  height, including compaction, settlement, and sediment loss, in  3 feet of water. 

-         **Basic Conceptual Design Components**
**	****      ****1. ****	****Sediment source.****  **
**	****	****-  ****Miss. R. used for cost estimates**
**2.  Sediment pipelines**
**3.****	**** Sediment deposition  **
**-****	****Volumes of deposited sediment are based on 9 feet of  height, including compaction, settlement, and sediment loss, in  3 feet of water. **

## TASK 3 – CONTINUED
Additional Cost Assumptions

 1.	Residual condition of abandoned pipelines is expected to be good in   respect to erosion, corrosion, and presence of contaminants.

  2.  Type of dredges = cutterhead and hopper.

  3.  Temporary & distribution pipeline material will consist of HDPE pipe.

  4.  Temporary pipelines to be two miles in length.

  5.   Marsh areas are 10, 50, and 100 acres.

  6.   Pumping time = 18 hours & pumping efficiency = 60%

  7.   Barge transportation distances will be 50, 100, and 200 miles.

**Additional Cost Assumptions**
** ****1.****	****Residual condition of abandoned pipelines is expected to be**_** good**_** in   respect to erosion, corrosion, and presence of contaminants.**
**  **
**  ****2.  Type of dredges = cutterhead and hopper.**
**  ****3.  Temporary & distribution pipeline material will consist of HDPE pipe.**
**  **
**  ****4.  Temporary pipelines to be two miles in length.**
**  **
**  ****5.   Marsh areas are 10, 50, and 100 acres.**
**  ****6.   Pumping time = 18 hours & pumping efficiency = 60%**
**  ****7.   Barge transportation distances will be 50, 100, and 200 miles.**
**  **

## Task 3 –Continued

    Pipeline systems to transport sediment.  Three scenarios:
          1.   Direct connection:  Pipeline System No. 1A
          2.   Indirect connection:  Pipeline System No. 1B
          3.   Bank storage and Barge/Truck Transport System 2A

**    ****Pipeline systems to transport sediment.  Three scenarios:**
-           **1.   Direct connection:  Pipeline System No. 1A**
**          ****2.   Indirect connection:  Pipeline System No. 1B**
**          ****3.   Bank storage and Barge/Truck Transport System 2A**

## Slide 12

##  
Cost Estimate Summary
Pipeline Slurry Transport System 1A – Direct Connection

                            Pumping                                
 Marsh    Pipe      Time                                                            Unit Costs
 Area       Size      (Days)      Opn. Cost       Total Cost             $/yd.        $/Acre   
 10 ac.      8-          112.8-      $1,815,000-       $1,815,000-         $12.50-       $181,500-
                  24”            7.2           508,200              508,200              3.50            50,820

  50           8-          564.1-         9,075,000-         9,075,000-          12.50-        181,500-
                  24”          36.0          2,541,000           2,541,000             3.50           50,820

 100           8-         1128.2-       18,150,000-        18,150,000-        12.50-       181,500-
                   24”          71.9          5,082,000           5,082,000            3.50          50,820 

    Notes:  1.  Total abandoned pipeline lengths = 5 miles.  No temporary pipeline construction necessary.

                  2.  Costs increase rapidly as pipe diameters decrease.

**Cost Estimate Summary**
**Pipeline Slurry Transport System 1A – Direct Connection**
**                            ****Pumping                                **
** ****Marsh    Pipe      Time                                                            Unit Costs**
_** **__**Area**_**      **_** Size**_**      **_**(Days)**_**      **_**Opn. Cost**_**       **_**Total Cost**_**             **_**$/yd**_**.        **_**$/Acre   **_
** ****10 ac.      8-          112.8-      $1,815,000-       $1,815,000-         $12.50-       $181,500-**
**                  ****24”            7.2           508,200              508,200              3.50            50,820**
**  ****50           8-          564.1-         9,075,000-         9,075,000-          12.50-        181,500-**
**                  ****24”          36.0          2,541,000           2,541,000             3.50           50,820**
** ****100           8-         1128.2-       18,150,000-        18,150,000-        12.50-       181,500-**
**                   ****24”          71.9          5,082,000           5,082,000            3.50          50,820 **
** **
**    ****Notes:  1.  Total abandoned pipeline lengths = 5 miles.  No temporary pipeline construction necessary.**
**                  ****2.  Costs increase rapidly as pipe diameters decrease.**

## Slide 14

## Pipeline Slurry Transport System 1B – Indirect Connection
Cost Estimate Summary

Total                       Temp.                 Pumping      
Pipeline   Pipe        Pipeline              Time             Operating          Total                             Unit Costs
Length     Size        Const. Cost         Days             Cost                  Cost                       $/Yd             $/Acre
7 mi.       8-             $242,880-         564.1-       $12,705,000-        $12,947,880-      $17.83-           $259,500-
                24”            950,400            36.0            3,557,400             4,507,800            6.21                 90,150

17           8-              242,880-          564.1-         30,855,000-           31,097,880-         42.83-            621,950-
                 24”           950,400            36.0             8,639,400              9,589,800           13.21             191,800

32           8-              242,880-           564.1-         58,080,000-          58,322,880-         80.33-          1,166,500-
                24”            950,400              36.0          16,262,400           17,212,800          23.71              344,250

Note:  50 Acre Marsh Areas would be created for each example.

**Cost Estimate Summary**
**Total                       Temp.                 Pumping      **
**Pipeline   Pipe        Pipeline              Time             Operating          Total                             Unit Costs**
_**Length**_**     **_**Size **_**       **_**Const. Cost**_**         **_**Days**_**             **_**Cost   **_**               **_**Cost        **_**               **_**$/Yd **_**            **_**$/Acre**_
**7 mi.       8-             $242,880-         564.1-       $12,705,000-        $12,947,880-      $17.83-           $259,500-**
**                ****24”            950,400            36.0            3,557,400             4,507,800            6.21                 90,150**
**17           8-              242,880-          564.1-         30,855,000-           31,097,880-         42.83-            621,950-**
**                 ****24”           950,400            36.0             8,639,400              9,589,800           13.21             191,800**
**32           8-              242,880-           564.1-         58,080,000-          58,322,880-         80.33-          1,166,500-**
**                ****24”            950,400              36.0          16,262,400           17,212,800          23.71              344,250**
**Note:  50 Acre Marsh Areas would be created for each example.**

## Slide 16

## 

Cost Estimate Summary
Pipeline Slurry Transport System 2A-
Bank Storage and Barge Transport

Barge                           Bank               Barge                  Trans.                 
Trans.        Pipe          Storage           Load &                To Dep.                 Total                       Unit Costs
Dist.           Size          Cost                 Trans. Cost        Area Cost              Cost               $/Yd               $/Acre
50 mi.         8-           $1,452,000-       $2,178,000-          $9,075,000-        $12,705,000-       $17.50-        $254,100-
                     24”           435,600                                       2,541,000              5,154,600            7.10            103,100

100             8-            $1,452,000-       $3,630,000-           9,075,000-           14,157,000-         19.50-          283,100-                 
                     24”            435,600                                       2,541,000              6,606,600            9.10            132,100

200             8-            $1,452,000-        6,534,000-             9,075,000-           17,061,000-         23.50-         341,200-
                     24”             435,600                                       2,541,000              9,510,600          13.10           190,200

Note:  For each example, marsh areas to be created = 50 acres and pipeline lengths = 5 miles.

**Cost Estimate Summary**
**Pipeline Slurry Transport System 2A-**
**Bank Storage and Barge Transport**
**Barge                           Bank               Barge                  Trans.                 **
**Trans.        Pipe          Storage           Load &                To Dep.                 Total                       **_**Unit Costs**_
_**Dist.   **_**        **_**Size  **_**        **_**Cost   **_**              **_**Trans. Cost**_**        **_**Area Cost   **_**           **_**Cost    **_**           **_**$/Yd **_**              **_**$/Acre**_
**50 mi.         8-           $1,452,000-       $2,178,000-          $9,075,000-        $12,705,000-       $17.50-        $254,100-**
**                     ****24”           435,600                                       2,541,000              5,154,600            7.10            103,100**
**100             8-            $1,452,000-       $3,630,000-           9,075,000-           14,157,000-         19.50-          283,100-                 **
**                     ****24”            435,600                                       2,541,000              6,606,600            9.10            132,100**
**200             8-            $1,452,000-        6,534,000-             9,075,000-           17,061,000-         23.50-         341,200-**
**                     ****24”             435,600                                       2,541,000              9,510,600          13.10           190,200**
**Note:  For each example, marsh areas to be created = 50 acres and pipeline lengths = 5 miles.**

## 
Cost Estimate Summary
Range of Estimated Costs

                      					 Unit Costs                                                
System                       Total Cost             $/cu yd           $/Acre     
1A-Direct Connection         $18,150,000-                $12.50-               $181,500- 
                                                      508,200                     3.50                     50,180

1B-Indirect Connection         58,322,880-                   80.33-             1,166,500-
                                                    4,507,800                      6.21                   90,150

2A-Bank Storage and            17,061,000-                    23.50-                341,200-
     Barge Transport                  5,154,600                        7.10                 103,100

**Cost Estimate Summary**
**Range of Estimated Costs**
**                      ****	****	****	****	****	**** ****Unit Costs                                                **
_**System   **_**                    **_**Total Cost**_**             **_**$/cu yd**_**           **_**$/Acre     **_
**1A-Direct Connection         $18,150,000-                $12.50-               $181,500- **
**                                                      ****508,200                     3.50                     50,180**
**1B-Indirect Connection         58,322,880-                   80.33-             1,166,500-**
**                                                    ****4,507,800                      6.21                   90,150**
**2A-Bank Storage and            17,061,000-                    23.50-                341,200-**
**     ****Barge Transport                  5,154,600                        7.10                 103,100**

## Legal, Environmental, and Regulatory Factors

	1.	Legal
		 - Servitude
		 -  Ownership
		 -   Liability

	2.	Environmental
		 -  Contaminants

	3.	Regulatory
		 -  Permits

**	****1.****	****Legal**
**	****	**** ****- ****Servitude**
**	****	**** ****-  Ownership**
**	****	**** ****-   Liability**
**	****2.****	****Environmental**
**	****	**** ****-  Contaminants**
**	****3.****	****Regulatory**
**	****	**** ****-  Permits**

## Task 4.  Feasibility Analysis of Using Abandoned Pipelines
		 a.  Technical
		 b.   Legal			
		 c.   Cost
            d,   Environmental
		 e.   Regulatory

**	****	**** **a.  Technical
- 		 b.   Legal
- 		 c.   Cost
-             d,   Environmental
- 		 e.   Regulatory

## Conclusions of Study

1.   The use of abandoned pipelines to transport sediment to create or restore marshes in Coastal Louisiana was reported to be potentially feasible.

2.   The study recommended that a pilot project be undertaken to demonstrate practical feasibility.

- 1.   The use of abandoned pipelines to transport sediment to create or restore marshes in Coastal Louisiana was reported to be potentially feasible.
- 2.   The study recommended that a pilot project be undertaken to demonstrate practical feasibility.

##  Pilot Project

To demonstrate practical feasibility of using abandoned pipelines
Conceptual design by Pyburn & Odom
 - Tiger Pass near the Tidewater facility
 - Abandoned Exxon 8” diameter pipeline 
 - Dewatering and  reslurrying of dredged material required
 - Estimated cost = $1,028,000 for 10 acres of restored marsh

- To demonstrate practical feasibility of using abandoned pipelines
- Conceptual design by Pyburn & Odom
-  - Tiger Pass near the Tidewater facility
-  - Abandoned Exxon 8” diameter pipeline
-  - Dewatering and  reslurrying of dredged material required
-  - Estimated cost = $1,028,000 for 10 acres of restored marsh

## ABANDONED PIPELINE AVAILABILITY

	Oil companies canvassed and showed interest
      Abandoned pipelines exist
      No pipelines were found to be unconditionally available
      Pipelines that were conditionally available were of less than optimum size

- 	Oil companies canvassed and showed interest
-       Abandoned pipelines exist
-       No pipelines were found to be unconditionally available
-       Pipelines that were conditionally available were of less than optimum size

## Summary 

Use of abandoned pipelines was found to be feasible on a technical, legal, environmental, and regulatory basis 
Practical feasibility was not proven
Cost per acre created was high
   Abandoned pipeline availability was a question

- Use of abandoned pipelines was found to be feasible on a technical, legal, environmental, and regulatory basis
- Practical feasibility was not proven
- Cost per acre created was high
-    Abandoned pipeline availability was a question