Effects of geomagnetic storms on cathodic protection systems in gas pipelines: A case study of disturbances in Argentina (2013-2018)

Patricia A Larocca; María A Arecco; Patricia A Larocca; María A Arecco

doi:10.3934/geosci.2025033

AIMS Geosciences

2025, Volume 11, Issue 3: 790-805. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2025033

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Effects of geomagnetic storms on cathodic protection systems in gas pipelines: A case study of disturbances in Argentina (2013-2018)

Patricia A Larocca ,
María A Arecco ^,

Universidad de Buenos Aires, Facultad de Ingeniería, Instituto de Geodesia y Geofísica Aplicadas, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina

Received: 01 May 2025 Revised: 30 June 2025 Accepted: 14 August 2025 Published: 12 September 2025

Gas pipelines are susceptible to telluric currents induced by temporal variations in the geomagnetic field (GMF), which are primarily driven by solar activity. These variations can generate electric fields at the Earth's surface, causing current flow through conductive infrastructure such as pipelines. In this study, we investigated the influence of GMF fluctuations on cathodic protection systems in gas pipelines, focusing on two major lines in Argentina: The NEUBA II (mid-latitude) and San Martín Fueguino (high-latitude) pipelines. Between 2013 and 2018, anomalies in Pipe-to-Soil Potential measurements were recorded at 38 monitoring points along these pipelines. We analyzed the relationship between PSP disturbances and geomagnetic and solar indices, including the Dst, Kp indices, Sunspot Number, and the F10.7 cm solar radio flux. In addition to global indices, we introduced the second vertical derivative (SVD) of the GMF as a method to detect rapid, localized magnetic field variations, even during geomagnetically quiet periods. Our findings revealed that such subtle GMF changes can produce Out-of-Range Protection Records, compromising cathodic protection systems, and potentially accelerating corrosion processes. We present an investigation into geomagnetic impacts on pipeline cathodic protection systems, with an application of SVD analysis. This research underscores the importance of integrating advanced geomagnetic monitoring tools into pipeline risk assessment and protection strategies. By correlating space weather parameters with ground-level effects, it provides a framework to better understand and mitigate geomagnetically induced currents, enhancing infrastructure resilience in both mid- and high-latitude regions. Our SVD results of the geomagnetic field are presented as a sensitive local indicator of disturbances affecting pipeline protection, especially under conditions where global geomagnetic indices suggest a quiet space weather.
- geomagnetic field,
- geomagnetic indices,
- solar indices,
- second vertical derivative,
- gas pipeline,
- pipeline soil potential,
- Argentina
Citation: Patricia A Larocca, María A Arecco. Effects of geomagnetic storms on cathodic protection systems in gas pipelines: A case study of disturbances in Argentina (2013-2018)[J]. AIMS Geosciences, 2025, 11(3): 790-805. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2025033

Related Papers:

Abstract

Gas pipelines are susceptible to telluric currents induced by temporal variations in the geomagnetic field (GMF), which are primarily driven by solar activity. These variations can generate electric fields at the Earth's surface, causing current flow through conductive infrastructure such as pipelines. In this study, we investigated the influence of GMF fluctuations on cathodic protection systems in gas pipelines, focusing on two major lines in Argentina: The NEUBA II (mid-latitude) and San Martín Fueguino (high-latitude) pipelines. Between 2013 and 2018, anomalies in Pipe-to-Soil Potential measurements were recorded at 38 monitoring points along these pipelines. We analyzed the relationship between PSP disturbances and geomagnetic and solar indices, including the Dst, Kp indices, Sunspot Number, and the F10.7 cm solar radio flux. In addition to global indices, we introduced the second vertical derivative (SVD) of the GMF as a method to detect rapid, localized magnetic field variations, even during geomagnetically quiet periods. Our findings revealed that such subtle GMF changes can produce Out-of-Range Protection Records, compromising cathodic protection systems, and potentially accelerating corrosion processes. We present an investigation into geomagnetic impacts on pipeline cathodic protection systems, with an application of SVD analysis. This research underscores the importance of integrating advanced geomagnetic monitoring tools into pipeline risk assessment and protection strategies. By correlating space weather parameters with ground-level effects, it provides a framework to better understand and mitigate geomagnetically induced currents, enhancing infrastructure resilience in both mid- and high-latitude regions. Our SVD results of the geomagnetic field are presented as a sensitive local indicator of disturbances affecting pipeline protection, especially under conditions where global geomagnetic indices suggest a quiet space weather.

References

[1]	Boteler D (2013) A new versatile method for modelling geomagnetic induction in pipelines. Geophys J Int 193: 98–109. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggs113 doi: 10.1093/gji/ggs113
[2]	Ingham M, Rodger CJ (2018) Telluric Field Variations as Drivers of Variations in Cathodic Protection Potential on a Natural Gas Pipeline in New Zealand. Space Weather 16: 1396–1409. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018SW001985 doi: 10.1029/2018SW001985
[3]	Hejda P, Bochniek J (2005) Geomagnetically induced pipe to soil voltages in the Czech oil pipelines during October-November 2003. Ann Geophys 23: 3089–3093. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-23-3089-2005 doi: 10.5194/angeo-23-3089-2005
[4]	Trichtchenko L, Boteler DH (2001) Specification of geomagnetically induced electric fields and currents in pipelines. J Geophys Res: Space Phys 106: 21039–21048. https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JA000207 doi: 10.1029/2000JA000207
[5]	Fernberg PA, Samson C, Boteler DH, et al. (2007) Earth conductivity structures and their effects on geomagnetic induction in pipelines. Ann Geophys 25: 207–218. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-25-207-2007 doi: 10.5194/angeo-25-207-2007
[6]	Marshall RA, Waters CL, Sciffer MD (2010) Spectral analysis of pipe-to-soil potentials with variations of the Earth's magnetic field in the Australian region. Space Weather 8. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009SW000553
[7]	Trichtchenko L, Trishchenko AP, Hejda P, et al. (2023) Evaluation of telluric-associated corrosion on buried pipelines. J Atmos Sol-Terr Phys 248: 106082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2023.106082 doi: 10.1016/j.jastp.2023.106082
[8]	Dobrică V, Demetrescu C (2024) The geomagnetic field and the earth's rotation. Connection at sub-centennial and inter-decadal timescales. Rev Roum Géophysique 67: 35–42. https://doi.org/10.59277/rrgeo.2024.67.5
[9]	Dwivedi D, Chandrasekhar NP (2024) Geomagnetic field variations due to solar tides at the Indian Observatories. Earth Planets Space 76: 61. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-024-01996-8 doi: 10.1186/s40623-024-01996-8
[10]	Osella A, Favetto A (2000) Effects of soil resistivity on currents induced on pipelines. J Appl Geophys 44: 303–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-9851(00)00008-2 doi: 10.1016/S0926-9851(00)00008-2
[11]	Borovsky JE, Shprits YY (2017) Is the Dst index sufficient to define all geospace storms? J Geophys Res Space Phys 122: 11543–11547. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JA024679 doi: 10.1002/2017JA024679
[12]	Borovsky JE, Denton MH (2006) The differences between CME-driven storms and CIR-driven storms. J Geophys Res 111: A07S08. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JA011447 doi: 10.1029/2005JA011447
[13]	McPherron RL, Weygand J (2006) The solar wind and geomagnetic activity as a function of time relative to corotating interaction regions. In: Tsurutani B, McPherron R, Lu G, et al. Eds., Recurrent Magnetic Storms, Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union, 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1029/167GM12
[14]	Oghli HM, Akhbari M, Kalaki A, et al. (2020) Design and analysis of the cathodic protection system of oil and gas pipelines, using distributed equivalent circuit model. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 84: 103701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2020.103701 doi: 10.1016/j.jngse.2020.103701
[15]	Yu Z, Hao J, Liu L, et al. (2019) Monitoring Experiment of Electromagnetic Interference Effects Caused by Geomagnetic Storms on Buried Pipelines in China. IEEE Access 7: 14603–14610. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2893963 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2893963
[16]	Moraes JF, Paulino I, Alves LR, et al. (2020) Evaluation of possible corrosion enhancement due to telluric currents: case study of the Bolivia–Brazil pipeline. Ann Geophys 38: 881–888. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-38-881-2020 doi: 10.5194/angeo-38-881-2020
[17]	Larocca PA, Arecco MA, Macrino AC (2021) Anomalous geoelectric potential variations observed along a gas pipeline section in Argentine, possible intensification with variations of the Earth's magnetic field. Earth Sci Res J 25: 363–369. https://doi.org/10.15446/esrj.v25n4.91059 doi: 10.15446/esrj.v25n4.91059
[18]	Larocca P, Arecco MA, Barredo SP (2022) Posible riesgo de corrosión en gasoductos enterrados en suelos resistivos por variaciones del potencial caño-suelo anómalos. En el 11th Congreso de Exploración y desarrollo de hidrocarburos (CONEXPLO22), Realizado del 8 al 11 de noviembre, Mendoza, Argentina. 473–481. Available from: https://www.iapg.org.ar/conexplo/PENDRIVE/pdf/sesiones-generales/geofisica/geofisica25.pdf.
[19]	Pereyra FX, Fratalocchi CN, Tchilinguirian P, et al. (2001) Carta de Línea de Base Ambiental 3763–IV-Coronel Suárez Provincia de Buenos Aires. Servicio Geológico Minero Argentino.
[20]	Pereyra FX (2012) Suelos de la Argentina. Geografía de suelos, factores y procesos formadores. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Editorial SEGEMAR-AACS-GAEA. https://repositorio.segemar.gov.ar/handle/308849217/3619.
[21]	Morari F, Castrignanò A, Pagliarin C (2009) Application of multivariate geostatistics in delineating management zones within a gravelly vineyard using geo-electrical sensors. Comput Electron Agric 68: 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2009.05.003 doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2009.05.003
[22]	Rostoker G, Friedrich E, Dobbs M (1997) Physics of magnetic storms. Magnetic storms 98: 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1029/GM098p0149 doi: 10.1029/GM098p0149
[23]	Loewe CA, Prölss GW (1997) Classification and mean behavior of magnetic storms. J Geophys Res Space Phys 102: 14209–14213. https://doi.org/10.1029/96JA04020 doi: 10.1029/96JA04020
[24]	Matzka J, Stolle C, Yamazaki Y, et al. (2021) The geomagnetic Kp index and derived indices of geomagnetic activity. Space Weather 19. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020SW002641
[25]	Tapping K (2013) The 10.7 cm solar radio flux (F_10.7). Space Weather 11: 394–406. https://doi.org/10.1002/swe.20064
[26]	Blakely R (1996) Potential theory in gravity and magnetic applications. Cambridge University Press, London, 461.
[27]	Cooper GRJ, Cowan DR (2006) Enhancing potential field data using filters based on the local phase. Comput Geosci 32: 1585–1591. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2006.02.016 doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2006.02.016
[28]	Shore RM, Freeman MP, Wild JA, et al. (2017) A high-resolution model of the extemal and induced magnetic field at the Earth's surface in the Northem Hemisphere. J Geophys Res Space Phys 122: 2440–2454. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JA023682 doi: 10.1002/2016JA023682
[29]	Conde D, Castillo FL, Escobar C, et al. (2023) Forecasting geomagnetic storm disturbances and their uncertainties using deep learning. Space Weather 21: e2023SW003474. https://doi.org/10.1029/2023SW003474 doi: 10.1029/2023SW003474
[30]	Opgenoorth HJ, Robinson R, Ngwira CM, et al. (2024) Earth's geomagnetic environment-progress and gaps in understanding, prediction, and impacts. Adv Space Res. In Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2024.05.016
[31]	Soil Survey Staff, Keys to Soil Taxonomy. 11th Edition, USDA-NRCS, Washington DC, 2010. 338. Available from: https://nrcspad.sc.egov.usda.gov/DistributionCenter/product.aspx?ProductID = 837.
[32]	Panigatti JL (2010) Argentina 200 años, 200 suelos. Buenos Aires: Ediciones INTA. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/40540943/ARGENTINA_200_A%C3%91OS_200_SUELOS.

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2025 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)