sylvar: (Default)
sylvar ([personal profile] sylvar) wrote2005-01-26 04:00 pm

What's with this pipe?


What's with this pipe?

Does anyone know why this pipe has its own bridge? What does it probably carry?

ximinez: (Default)

[personal profile] ximinez 2005-01-26 01:24 pm (UTC)(link)
Could be anything. I think blue usually means water, though. The significant factor is that somebody decided that it would be easier and/or cheaper to build a new bridge than to dig a trench, or reroute the pipe to another bridge...
ximinez: (Default)

[personal profile] ximinez 2005-01-26 01:28 pm (UTC)(link)
PS. Better hope the Department of Homeland Security doesn't read your blog. ;)

...Oh, wait, nevermind. You're white...
(deleted comment)

[identity profile] sylvar.livejournal.com 2005-01-26 01:34 pm (UTC)(link)
What gives you that idea? Did I miss a hazmat-1971 sign?

(I don't doubt that it's a reasonable guess, but I'm interested in how you reached it.)

[identity profile] sylvar.livejournal.com 2005-01-26 01:35 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh, I see [livejournal.com profile] cbustapeck deleted his post to which I was replying...

[identity profile] cbustapeck.livejournal.com 2005-01-26 01:37 pm (UTC)(link)
There were some pictures of CNG pipelines going into and out of Manhattan posted a while ago on cryptome.org. These appeared to be then same. Then I tried to find the photographs, and have not been able to, which is why I deleted my comment, because I'm not feeling so sure.

[identity profile] osh1013.livejournal.com 2005-01-27 09:50 am (UTC)(link)
Very likely either freshwater or sewage. Lack of 'giveaway' hazmat signs makes me think freshwater. "Light Blue Paint" only makes me think that the local municipality didn't want a huge eyesore of a pipe painted 'Day-Glo Emergency Orange' or 'Nuclear Meltdown Green'. No regs on these things that I'm aware of.
Saw 'em all over the place in S. Miami/Perrine/Cutler Ridge/&c area where I grew up. Pretty much anywhere a pipe had to cross a canal.
It has it's own bridge to provide support. "Liek, duh?" ;)

It's a maintenance thing. If the pipe is in the air it will not corrode as quickly as when it is submerged. It can also be painted, and repainted, much easier. It can also be inspected much easier on a regular basis, and if it should burst it will not only be bleeding obvious where the break in the pipeline is, it can be repaired much easier. Contrast all of these to 'if it were underwater', in which case any/all of these things would start with "First, get a team of qualified Divers..." which jacks your costs up by a factor of A-Lot before you've even started.

If it's under the surface of the canal at the same depth that it is under the ground, it will be nigh-invisible to any boatcraft, but sooner or later one of them will come along and burst it. Yes, they're not supposed to be there in the first place, but since when has that ever stopped anyone? To go deeper than that involves digging under the bottom surface of the canal, which suxorz.

Ergo, put the pipe above the surface of the water, which means raising it high enough that gators, canoes, small repair boats can navigate under it. Which means it gets its own bridge.

[identity profile] sylvar.livejournal.com 2005-01-27 09:52 am (UTC)(link)
Makes sense to me. Thanks!

[identity profile] osh1013.livejournal.com 2005-01-27 09:53 am (UTC)(link)
freshwater or sewage

Because if it was a natural gas line it would likely be festooned with "Don't Even THINK About Bringing A Flame Within A Thousand Yards Of This Pipe" signs, plus the odd emergency pressure release valve or three that gas lines always seem to have.