yup, the slow down in units is not the best when the margin is so high. I think their report should say that the impact is threefold rather than twofold being that they have just put in resource consent for bringing in larger ships. An environmental disaster on their doorstep is not going to help that process much. I wonder if the guy digging out swamp kauri has got his public liability insurance up to date.
10 - 15m hit yuk , lucky margins are high so might not look to bad overall and if they pump the throughput up could easily make back.
wonder if business interruption insurance covers the 10 - 15m?
Won't be that cheap. Cleaning up diesel spillages is expensive and always costs more than you hope. As well - we probably should ask the question whether it is responsible to run an old and rusty pipeline though 170 km of pristine "clean and green" NZ without sufficient monitoring and maintenance. Having an oil pipeline leaking for days before they notice and do something about is unacceptable.
Expect operating costs of the pipeline to go North ...
----
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)
Won't be that cheap. Cleaning up diesel spillages is expensive and always costs more than you hope. As well - we probably should ask the question whether it is responsible to run an old and rusty pipeline though 170 km of pristine "clean and green" NZ without sufficient monitoring and maintenance. Having an oil pipeline leaking for days before they notice and do something about is unacceptable.
Expect operating costs of the pipeline to go North ...
Don't let facts get in the way of a good rant BP. Nothing to do with being old and rusty. More to do with munter men and their diggers.
Sure - apparently a digger started it by "scratching" the pipe some time ago. However - the leak was apparently caused by corrosion started by these scratches.
The damage had caused corrosion and ultimately "a small tear" on the pipeline, McNeill said.
Not noticing a damaged pipeline and waiting for corrosion to create a leak is clearly irresponsible ... or how would you call that?
Now - how is something like that going unnoticed on a well maintained pipeline?
----
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)
anyway i read nz refining are not responsible for maintenance on the pipeline a third party is that is contracted
Better check the contracts who is carrying ultimate responsibility if there are environmental issues. Unlikely the owner can weasel out of that unless the contractor did not fulfill its contracted obligations.
And looking into the future would this only mean that NZR needs to pay more to any contractor for outsourcing the maintenance of the pipeline.
Last edited by BlackPeter; 18-09-2017 at 10:15 AM.
Reason: spelling
----
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)
Better check the contracts who is carrying ultimate responsibility if their are environmental issues. Unlikely the owner can weasel out of that unless the contractor did not fulfill its contracted obligations.
And looking into the future would this only mean that NZR needs to pay more to any contractor for outsourcing the maintenance of the pipeline.
im sure insurance comes into play somewhere, someone from loyds is flying over now
And you sure they will pay for everything including the increased maintenance cost?
Sounds like wishful thinking to me ... this will be dear for NZR ...
10 - 15m not chump change for sure 4% revenue but if insurance covers some and extra throughput in coming mths would easliy make it back , definately not the end of the world
Originally Posted by bull....
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks