To: DavesM who wrote (675882 ) 3/19/2005 1:43:30 PM From: DuckTapeSunroof Respond to of 769670 Excellent research, DavesM... thanks! Re: "The pipeline that was authorized last year was not an oil pipeline, but for natural gas. This means that ANWR oil will go thru the Trans Alaskan Oil pipeline...." Thanks for the memory jog. But, as I remember it, the right-of-way that Canada offered to us for free was for an oil pipeline (presumably the same right-of-way could have been used for a natural gas line, or perhaps that was already included in the thinking).... My memory seems to be telling me that --- after Canada's offer was rejected yet again in favor of a trans-Alaska route yet again --- that an extension to link to the original North Slope pipeline is needed (& that the Alaskan pipeline is currently operating well below capacity): USGS estimates developers would need a $410 million (2004 dollars), 85- mile pipeline from the western area of ANWR to reach the trans-Alaska oil pipeline ... www.tax.state.ak.us/sourcesbook/2004/Fall2004/oped.pdf The proposed Alaska Highway gasline (is in opposition to the proposed MacKinsie Delta line... both would be many years in the building. "In 1973...Congress adopted the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act (TAPS), Pub. L. No. 93-153, authorizing construction of a pipeline to move the oil from state lands on the North Slope to an accessible port at Valdez, Alaska. The legislation also established export restrictions on all domestically produced crude oil carried over any federal right-of-way by adding a new section 28(u) to the Mineral Leasing Act. As amended, the Mineral Leasing Act permitted exports of domestically produced crude oil , including Alaska North Slope (ANS) crude oil, if the President determined the exports would be in the national interest, would not diminish the total quality or quantity of petroleum available to the United States, and would be done in accordance with the licensing provisions of the Export Administration Act of 1969." "In 1979, following the second major oil shock, Congress effectively banned ANS exports by adopting section 7(d) of the Export Administration Act of 1979. Section 7(d) for the first time established specific export restrictions on ANS crude oil independent of the original TAPS provision" Interesting to know what the applicable restrictions are *exactly* now.... Here are some useful links I've found: The Trans-Alaska Pipeline that delivers oil from Prudhoe Bay to the Pacific Northwest is flowing at half its capacity. At its peak, Prudhoe Bay produced 2 million barrels of oil per day. Today it produces only 800,000 barrels of oil. Combined with the rest of the North Slope oil, 1 million barrels of oil flow down the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System. A certain number of barrels of oil per day have to flow though the pipeline to keep it operational. If it runs dry, the laws under which it was constructed mandate that it be torn down and the area be returned to its natural state. Oil companies — namely big Alaskan players including BP, Phillips Alaska and ExxonMobil — stand to lose money if that happens. They are looking for ways to keep the line up and running. geotimes.org Analysis of Oil and Gas Production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Synergies with the Alaska Gas Pipeline:eia.doe.gov 1973: Vice President Agnew breaks tie vote in Senate allowing 800-mile Trans-Alaska Pipeline to be constructed. Senate also exempts pipeline construction from NEPA.oneearthadventures.com Maps to pipeline routes:northernpipelineprojects.com a $20 billion plan to build a pipeline that ships Alaska natural gas to the Lower 48.msnbc.msn.com North Slope issuesehp.niehs.nih.gov arcticgaspipeline.com pipe-line.com inforain.org aapg.org