Christopher Weed

Math 1210
Elizabeth Jones
Pipeline Project
A.) Determine the cost o r!nnin" the pipeline strictl# on $%M "ro!nd &ith t&o dierent
cases.
i. '!nnin" pipeline West( )o!th( and East to the reiner#.
* + ,he cost to r!n pipeline across $%M "ro!nd
* + -.00(000 per mile
C + .*/1.*/00* + 10*
C + 102.00(000)
C+ -30(000(000
ii. '!nnin" pipeline East thro!"h the mo!ntain( then )o!th to the reiner#.
* + ,he cost to r!n pipeline across $%M "ro!nd
* + -.00(000 per mile
-2(000(000 4 one5time cost or mo!ntain drillin"
-320(000 4 impact st!d#
-060(000 4 0 month dela# cost
C + 3.* / 1.* / -2(000(000 / -060(000 / -320(000
Private Ground
5 miles
BLM
Ground
15 miles
BLM Ground
BLM Ground
Well
15 miles
3. Miles
00 miles
C + .0* / -2(600(000
C + .02.00(000) / 2(600(000
C + -27(600(000
$.) Determine the cost o r!nnin" the pipeline8
i. ,he shortest distance rom &ell to reiner# across pri9ate land.
# + ,he cost to r!n pipeline across pri9ate "ro!nd
# + -.00(000 / -3.0(00 + -6.0(000 per mile
z + ,he shortest distance rom &ell to reiner# across pri9ate land
z + 21.:2 / 3.:2) + 1(0.0
C + # 1(0.0
C + 6.0(000 1(0.0
C + -32(317(03..70
Private Ground
5 miles
BLM
Ground
15 miles
BLM Ground
BLM Ground
Well
15 miles
3. Miles
00 miles
ii. ,he shortest distance across pri9ate "ro!nd( then East.
* + ,he cost to r!n pipeline across $%M "ro!nd
* + -.00(000 per mile
# + ,he cost to r!n pipeline across pri9ate "ro!nd
# + -6.0(000 per mile
c + 1.# / 3.*
c + 1. 26.0(000) / 3. 2.00(000)
c + -30(2.0(000
Private Ground
5 miles
BLM
Ground
15 miles
40 miles - BLM Ground
BLM Ground
Well
15 miles
3. Miles
z + 21.:2 / 3.:2)
Private Ground
5 miles
BLM
Ground
15 miles
40 miles - BLM Ground
BLM Ground
Well
15 miles
3. Miles
1. miles
3. miles
C.) Determine the optimal to r!n the pipeline to minimize cost.
;n order to determine the most cost eecti9e &a# to r!n the pipeline( &e
m!st in9esti"ate the eicac# o r!nnin" the pipeline thro!"h the mo!ntain
and then thro!"h the pri9ate "ro!nd. ,hese are the last t&o lo"ical scenarios to tr#.
<sin" the amo!nts pro9ided ; &as able to determine an e=!ation that &o!ld
relect the associated costs o dierent 9ariations o drillin" thro!"h the mo!ntain and
la#in" pipeline across the pri9ate "ro!nd. ,he e=!ation in9ol9es indin" the optimal
len"th o distance a. ,his is so that &e can minimize the distance &e ha9e to co9er total
&hile indin" the shortest distance &e ha9e to co9er on the more e*pensi9e pri9ate
"ro!nd.
* + ,he cost to r!n pipeline across $%M land
* + -.00(000
# + ,he cost to r!n pipeline across Pri9ate land
# + -6.0(00
-2(000(000 4 one5time cost or mo!ntain drillin"
-320(000 4 impact st!d#
-060(000 4 0 month dela# cost
Private Ground
5 miles
BLM
Ground
15 miles
40 miles - BLM Ground
BLM Ground
Well
a 3. 5 a
15 miles
2a:2 / 1.:2)
a + point at &hich pipeline chan"es direction to head to&ards reiner# o9er
pri9ate "ro!nd
c + >* 23. 5 a) / # 2a:2 / 1.:2) / 2(600(000?
&hen 0 @ a @ 3.
(because we already found these values. Also, when a = 0 the
pipeline will not cross private ground and when a = 35 the
pipeline will not go through the mountain.)
c + >.00(000 23. 4 a) / 6.0(000 2a:2 / 1.:2) / 2(600(000?
Ao& that &e ha9e o!r e=!ation( &e &ill taBe the deri9ati9e o the e=!ation to ind
the critical 9al!es. $# indin" the critical 9al!es &e &ill be able to determine the local
minim!m( &hich &ill pro9ide !s &ith the cost optimization.
c + .00(000 2051) / 6.0(000 >1C2 2a:2 / 1.:2) :51C2 2a / 0? / 0
c + 5.00(000 / 6.0(000a C 2a:2 / 1.:2)
Critical 9al!es are &hen c + 0
0 + 5.00(000 / 6.0(000a C 2a:2 / 1.:2)
.00(000 + 6.0(000a C 2a:2 / 1.:2)
.00(000 2a:2 / 1.:2) + 6.0(000 a
2a:2 / 1.:2) + 6.0(000a C .00(000
2a:2 / 1.:2) + 1.7a
>2a:2 / 1.:2)? : 2 + 21.7a) : 2
a:2 /1.:2 + 2.6Da:2
1.:2 + 2.6Da:2 4 a:2
1.:2 + a:2 22.6D 4 1)
1.:2 + a:2 21.6D)
1.:2 C 1.6D + a:2
21.:2 C 1.6D) + a
a 10.D1
Ao& that &e ha9e disco9ered o!r optimal distance to t!rn the direction o the
pipeline( &e can inall# calc!late the estimated cost or drillin" thro!"h the mo!ntain to
this point and then chan"in" directions to&ards the reiner#. We &ill complete this b#
pl!""in" in o!r res!lt into the ori"inal e=!ation.
c + >.00(000 23. 4 a) / 6.0(000 2a:2 / 1.:2) / 2(600(000?
c + >.00(000 23. 4 10.D1) / 6.0(000 210.D1:2 / 1.:2) / 2(600(000?
c + -30(110(7D..31
Ao& that &e ha9e the amo!nt o o!r critical 9al!e( &e need to appl# the E*treme
9al!e theorem in order to determine &hether this is a ma* or min. $eca!se o!r e=!ation
is dierentiable and on a closed inter9al &e Bno& that o!r e*treme 9al!e theorem &ill
&orB.
c 210.D1) + 30(110(7D..31
c 21) + 32(.76(301.D2
c 230) + 30(667(.37.10
J!d"in" b# these 9al!es &e can tell that 10.D1 is o!r optimal placement o the t!rn
in the pipeline( i &e &ere to "o thro!"h the mo!ntain part o the &a# and then across the
pri9ate land the rest o the &a#. ,he "raph belo& represents this inormation.
Cost in
dollars
Miles
Einall#( the last lo"ical scenario to tr# is to r!n the pipeline o9er pri9ate land and
then $%M land or the inal stretch to the reiner#.
* + ,he cost to r!n pipeline across $%M land
* + -.00(000
# + ,he cost to r!n pipeline across Pri9ate land
# + -6.0(000
a + point at &hich pipeline chan"es direction to head to&ards reiner# o9er
pri9ate "ro!nd
C+ .00(000 23.5a) / 6.0(00 2Fa:2/1.:2)
CG+ .00(000 251/0) / 6.0(000 21C2 H 1CFa:2/1.:2 H 2a / 0)
0 + .00(000 251) /6.0(000 2aCFa:2/1.:2)
.00(000 + 6.0(000aCFa:2/1.:2
Fa:2/1.:2 + 6.0(000aC .00(000
2Fa:2/1.:2) + 21.7a):2
A:2 / 1.:2 + 2.6D a:2
A + F1.:2C1.6D
A+ 10.D
C210.D) + -27(610(7D7(0D
Private Ground
5 miles
BLM
Ground
15 miles
40 miles - BLM Ground
BLM Ground
Well
a 3. 5 a
15 miles
2a:2 / 1.:2)
;n concl!sion( &hen &e looB at the potential costs or each scenario( it is eas# to
see that the most cost eecti9e scenario to ollo& is to "o across pri9ate land and then
thro!"h $%M "ro!nd. ,here are other actors that( altho!"h &e did not actor into this
problem( are 9er# important in determinin" the best ro!te or the pipeline.
;n m# opinion( drillin" thro!"h the mo!ntain is not the most cost eecti9e
sol!tion. Altho!"h it is the second least e*pensi9e initiall#( there is a potential spiBe in
cost o9er time. ; the impact st!d# determines that o9er time the pipeline &ill ca!se
en9ironmental iss!es( then &e ha9e &asted o!r months o o!r time as &ell as the cost o
the impact st!d#. Additionall#( i the impact st!d# comes bacB &ith positi9e res!lts and
&e are able to drill( the amo!nt o time spent &aitin" on the impact st!d# has dela#ed o!r
prod!ction si"niicantl#. ,ime spent &aitin" on the impact st!d# not onl# costs !s mone#
in dela#s( b!t it pre9ents !s rom "ainin" re9en!e o9er that 0 month period. E!rthermore(
in m# opinion( it is also to remember the ethics o r!nnin" pipeline thro!"h the mo!ntain
and alterin" the ecolo"#.
,he least e*pensi9e cost scenarios &o!ld be to r!n pipeline across the Pri9ate
land and then East to&ards the reiner#. Altho!"h this is a airl# lo& cost( and the
materials !sed are minimized si"niicantl#( there are potential conse=!ences to&ards
r!nnin" the pipeline across Pri9ate land. ; there are spills in the !t!re or an# major
maintenance iss!es( there co!ld be 9ario!s additional costs incl!din" reparation costs to
the pri9ate land o&ner.
'!nnin" the pipeline directl# across the pri9ate land is too e*pensi9e and has
potential conse=!ences as mentioned pre9io!sl#. '!nnin" the pipeline thro!"h the
mo!ntain and c!ttin" across the pri9ate land is also too e*pensi9e. E!rthermore( it &o!ld
potentiall# ha9e ne"ati9e conse=!ences as mentioned pre9io!sl#.
;n m# opinion( ; belie9e the best path to r!n the pipeline is aro!nd the pri9ate
land( a9oidin" the mo!ntain alto"ether. ,his is the second to least e*pensi9e scenario and
the most ethicall# so!nd. ,here are also 9er# little conse=!ences to r!nnin" pipeline this
&a#. Altho!"h it taBes the most materials to accomplish this pipeline and !t!re
maintenance iss!es ma# be more costl# than other paths( r!nnin" the pipeline strictl#
o9er $%M land red!ces the risB o ne"ati9e eects on the en9ironment as &ell as
pre9entin" the destr!ction o pri9atel# o&ned land. ;n the e9ent o a spill( &e &ill be
spillin" on o!r land and &ill not ace an# reparation costs to third parties. A9oidin" the
mo!ntain and pri9atel# o&ned land &ill also red!ce the liBelihood o potential le"al
action inlicted !pon !s.
'election
; ha9e thoro!"hl# enjo#ed m# time in Calc!l!s. ; ha9e al&a#s had an immense
respect and appreciation or Mathematics. ; ha9e e9en considered p!rs!in" a de"ree in
Mathematics. ; ha9e learned thro!"ho!t this semester ho& !se!l Calc!l!s can be not
onl# in the &orB place( b!t in e9er#da# tasBs.
; m# odometer and !el "a!"e stop &orBin"( ; can easil# calc!late the distance
;Im tra9elin" based on m# 9elocit#. ,hat &a# ; &ill be able to tell &hen ; need to "et "as.
; ; decide to do some remodelin" on m# home and ; am "i9en dierent cost
scenarios ; can determine the optimal &a# to proceed in order to red!ce cost. ,here are
so man# real &orld scenarios that &o!ld re=!ire this &ealth o Bno&led"e ;I9e obtained.
E!rthermore( the career ;Im p!rs!in" !ses a lot o calc!l!s( mostl# optimizations.
;n the Architect!re ield there are a lot o dierent scenarios in &hich ; &o!ld need to call
!pon m# Bno&led"e o calc!l!s to ind the most eicient &a# to do thin"s. )ometimes ;
ma# be b!ildin" in an area that has a partic!larl# to!"h soil or topo"raph#. ; &ill need to
!nderstand optimizations so that ; can desi"n accordin"l#.
; see a lot o Calc!l!s in the &orld aro!nd me. ; &as 9er# intimidated at irst to
be"in this class( b!t as &e mo9ed alon" thro!"h the co!rse( ; became m!ch more
comortable. E9er#thin" is based 9er# m!ch on lo"ic( and there &erenIt reall# an#
concepts that &ere impossible or me to comprehend. WhatIs more is ; act!all# enjo#ed
Calc!l!s and &ant to p!rs!e it more.