Article Analysis – Statistical Analysis Of Environmental Consequences Of Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Accidents

Article Analysis – Statistical Analysis Of Environmental Consequences Of Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Accidents

What the article Says

Belvederesi, Thompson, and Komers (2018) evaluated the environmental consequences of hazardous liquid pipeline accidents. They used data from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) to analyze a dataset of over 1100 accidents between 2010 and 2017. The authors found that the cost of environmental damage and remediation due to hazardous liquid pipeline accidents is, on average, almost one-third of the total costs of pipeline failures (Belvederesi, Thompson, & Komers, 2018). The frequency and magnitude of environmental impacts vary depending on the type of environment affected. The soil and wildlife were most affected, while the water was the least common. The authors suggest that more information about the receiving environment be included in historical databases to improve risk analysis and reduce errors in risk evaluation modeling.

The Key Statistics Cited

The average pipeline spillage volume was 287 barrels (bbl) in 1986, and it increased to 443 bbl in 2016. Pipeline accidents caused an average of $17 million in damages each year from 2010 to 2016, where $27 million was the largest amount reported (Belvederesi, Thompson & Komers, 2018). The soil damage costs the most, averaging $6.06 million per year (36% of the total damages), followed by wildlife damage at $4.37 million per year. There were 1101 hazardous liquid pipeline accidents between 2010 and 2016 in the United States. The average cost of environmental damage and remediation due to hazardous liquid pipeline accidents is $32 million.

Statistical Evidence to Back up their Conclusions

The authors used credible sources and data to support their claims. They used the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) dataset of over 1100 accidents between 2010 and 2016. They also collected data from the US Department of Transport (DOT) and NEB (National Energy Board) to support their study. The study considered offshore and onshore accidents, which helps to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the issue. Furthermore, they looked at different environments that could potentially be affected by a pipeline accident and how often they were impacted. The criteria used in the study were well-defined, and all potential impacts were considered. They used statistical methods such as regression analysis to examine the trends in pipeline accidents and their environmental impacts over time. The visual aids such as tables and graphs helped explain their findings further. Overall, the study was well-designed and used credible data sources to support the authors’ conclusions.

Overstated the Issue

The authors did not overstate the issue. They were clear about what they were trying to study, and they used data from credible sources to support their claims (Belvederesi, Thompson & Komers, 2018). The inclusion and exclusion criteria were well defined, and the study provided a comprehensive understanding of the environmental impacts of hazardous liquid pipeline accidents. They categorized data in a way that was easy to understand, and the visual aids helped illustrate their points. The only potential limitation of the study is that it only looked at data from 2010-2016. However, they used various methods to compensate for this shortcoming. Overall, I do not think that the authors overstated the issue.

The Perception of the Issue

The study results could lead to a better understanding of the environmental impacts of hazardous liquid pipeline accidents. This information can improve risk analysis and reduce errors in risk evaluation modeling (Ioannidis, 2019). The statistics in the article help paint a more accurate picture of the issue, which can positively impact public perception. The stakeholders can use this information to make informed decisions about preventing and mitigating the impacts of pipeline accidents.

References

Belvederesi, C., Thompson, M. S., & Komers, P. E. (2018). Statistical analysis of environmental consequences of hazardous liquid pipeline accidents. Heliyon, 4(11), e00901.

Ioannidis, J. P. (2019). The importance of predefined rules and prespecified statistical analyses: do not abandon significance. Jama, 321(21), 2067-2068.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Statistical Analysis Of Environmental Consequences

We hear and see statistics in the media all the time. Examples include statistics about crime rates, children killed by handguns, pool drownings, people struck by lightning, and causes of car accidents.

Locate an article that provides statistics on an issue of your choice. Respond to the following questions in a paper.

What is the article trying to say?
What are the key statistics cited?
Is there enough statistical evidence to support the author’s conclusions?
Do you think that the author overstated the issue?
How do you think the statistics used in the article impact the perception of the issue?
Your paper should be two double-spaced pages. Use current APA formatting to cite your sources.