I can’t get my head around anyone making a pipe like that within a another pipe like that in the field. EPA rules for underground systems carrying just about anything other than water require secondary containment, including petroleum.
As far as single pipe, something field-fabricated would save a ton of money in terms of labor and logistics. But I’m not sure how the expense of carbon fiber would fit into that equation. What I meant earlier is that if they used fiberglass which is cheaper with a stronger fiberglass process (centrifugal casting) then they would ahve something really cool ... but still the whole idea just seems like a pipe dream. And I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. ;^)
“I can’t get my head around anyone making a pipe like that within a another pipe like that in the field. EPA rules for underground systems carrying just about anything other than water require secondary containment, including petroleum.”
and with that comment you clarified for me the image of a “secondary containment” pipe; eureka, I see
and your right, the scientists nor the authors addressed that point, at least not directly
but, in their defense, it was I not them, in my comments alone, where I made a connection to the fossil fuels industry; so maybe, at this point anyway, the inventors are not looking at that industry for their pipes; and that would leave what, water??, drainage, sewer & flood control systems?? any guesses?