Another Fracking Strawman, Up In Smoke

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, telling Reuters on Monday that state regulation of hydraulic fracturing isn’t enough:

"There are some who are saying that it's not something we ought to do, it should be left up to the states. That's not good enough for me because states are at very different level, some have zero, some have decent rules."

Bold, to be sure. So we wonder about the “some who are saying” in Salazar’s comment. Who’s he talking about? Perhaps EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, who said this in an interview last fall:

"The vast majority of oil and gas production is regulated at the state level. There are issues of whether or not the federal government can add to protection and also peace of mind for citizens by looking at large issues like air pollution impacts, which can be regional. ... So it's not to say that there isn't a federal role, but you can't start to talk about a federal role without acknowledging the very strong state role. We have no data right now that lead us to believe one way or the other that there needs to be specific federal regulation of the fracking process."

Worth repeating: The chief of the federal agency charged with protecting the environment says they’ve got nothing indicating that there needs to be “specific federal regulation of the fracking process.” More Jackson, a few days later on MSNBC:

“States are stepping up and doing a good job. I always say it doesn't have to be EPA that regulates the 10,000 wells that might go in."

Now, about the last part of Salazar’s comment, that some states have “zero” hydraulic fracturing regulation. We’ve checked around, and it looks like the secretary succumbed to a bit of Washington hyperbole there. A 2009 report by the Groundwater Protection Council, funded by the Energy Department for its National Energy Technology Laboratory, didn’t detect any oil and natural gas-producing states with ZERO rules.

Meanwhile, state officials sure sound deserving of Jackson’s confidence.

Oklahoma Corporation Commission Chairman Dana Murphy, before Congress last fall:

"My fundamental point would be to encourage that the states are the appropriate bodies to regulate the oil and gas drilling industry. Protection of water and the environment and the beneficial development of the nation's resources of oil and gas are not mutually exclusive goals. Oklahoma is proof of that."

And Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Michael Krancer:

“Simply put, because of our long history of oil and gas development and comprehensive regulatory structure, Pennsylvania does not need federal intervention to ensure an appropriate balance between resource development and environmental protection is struck.”

And Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper:

“I was personally involved with 50 or 60 (fracked) wells. There have been tens and thousands of wells in Colorado … and we can’t find anywhere in Colorado a single example of the process of fracking that has polluted groundwater. … There is a lot of anxiety out there certainly with hydraulic fracturing. But often times that anxiety is not directly connected to facts.”

If Secretary Salazar is dissatisfied with state-centered regulation of fracking – which is closest to and most responsive to individual industry operations – he should check with Administrator Jackson. And also with officials in the states, who clearly take the responsibility to oversee fracking within their borders seriously.

View the original article here

Philadelphia Story: Energy From Shale and Jobs

Energy produced from shale deposits by hydraulic fracturing continues to create jobs far from the drill site.  The latest example: Improved economics have allowed for a deal to keep a Philadelphia refinery open, which means 850 workers will keep their jobs – and the facility’s new majority partner says hundreds more could be added if plans to expand production come to pass. Philly.com had the story last week.

Those refinery employees – and the local/regional economy that is supported by the installation, as many as 10,000 indirect jobs by one estimate – can thank the Carlyle Group, and they can also thank the Marcellus Shale. Philly.com:

"Carlyle officials say they are 'reimagining' the business to exploit new, cheaper domestic sources of crude oil to replace expensive imported petroleum, a major reason the refinery was uncompetitive. …  Carlyle, which will have a majority interest in the venture and operate the refinery, also plans to increase dramatically the use of low-priced natural gas from Pennsylvania's booming Marcellus Shale region to reduce refining costs and emissions. 'We believe the changing nature of the energy paradigm in the U.S., coupled with a redefined operating model, can truly benefit this refinery,' Carlyle managing director Rodney S. Cohen said."

The Philadelphia story illustrates what some have been talking about when they laud the game-changing nature of energy from shale. It’s creating jobs (and saving them), reducing costs to manufacturers and helping them create jobs, reinvigorating the chemicals industry and more. It’s abundant and affordable energy that’s also helping out consumers.

We’ve seen the shale energy stimulus rippling through states like North Dakota, Texas and Pennsylvania. Ohio is gearing up for its own economic wave from shale. As for the Philadelphia refinery, studies, analyses and projections about shale energy are to become reality – real jobs, held by real people, saved.

Because of energy from shale.

View the original article here

Another Study ‘Showing’ No Contamination from Fracking

Where to begin in a review of Pro Publica’s article on new research into the migration of subterranean brine to shallow water above? The inflammatory, overreaching headline? The leap from Duke University’s study to conclusions suggesting to the public that hydraulic fracturing is polluting drinking water?

Let’s start there. On that point the article is self-rebutting. See the fourth paragraph:

"No drilling chemicals were detected in the (shallow) water, and there was no correlation between where the natural brine was detected and where drilling takes place."

Then, near the end of the article:

"Nevertheless, (Robert) Jackson, one of the study's authors, said he still considers it unlikely that frack fluids and injected man-made waste are migrating into drinking water supplies. If that were happening, those contaminants would be more likely to appear in his groundwater samples, he said. His group is continuing its research into how the natural brine might have travelled, and how long it took to rise to the surface. 'There is a real time uncertainty,' he said. 'We don't know if this happens over a couple of years, or over millennia.'"

As for the study itself, Jackson and his team say they found that naturally occurring brine migrates upward to shallower depths. They say the risk of the migration could be greater in areas that have undergone hydraulic fracturing. Yet, there’s this from the study’s introductory summary:

“The occurrences of saline water do not correlate with the location of shale-gas wells and are consistent with reported data before rapid shale-gas development in the region …”

Energy In Depth has solid analysis on the study, here. Highlights:

The study fails (as Jackson notes above) to establish whether the migration occurs over 10 years or 10 million years. Without that, it’s impossible to determine whether the phenomenon is cause for concern.If brine is traveling up from thousands of feet below the surface, why haven’t the pathways Duke’s researchers identify allowed natural gas in the Marcellus region to leak out and disappear over time?There’s no discussion of whether the Marcellus Shale – which is largely a dry region with “virtually no free water,” according to Penn State’s Terry Engelder – even contains enough brinewater to leak.

Engelder, a Marcellus expert who was asked by the researchers to review their work, notes a number of questions the study leaves unanswered, reducing its usefulness. He writes:

"My review is predicated on the objective of your paper which is stated as a search for '...specific areas of shale-gas development in northeastern Pennsylvania that are at increased risk for contamination of shallow drinking water resources with deeper formation brines...' (the last sentence of your abstract). The term, risk, suggests that your paper veers from a conventional geology paper and enters into the realm of science-based advocacy or if you like, science policy."

Engelder is on target there. Unfortunately, the academics, wittingly or unwittingly, produced a study that is easily morphed into a siren call by opponents of natural gas production. Pro Publica’s article is Exhibit A. Exhibit B is a Bloomberg News story under this headline: “Pennsylvania Fracking Can Put Water at Risk, Study Finds” – despite the fact the study found no evidence of such a risk.

Words like “can,” “may” and “might” camouflage the point that the study didn’t find a correlation between the location of shale-gas wells and occurrences of saline water. To suggest otherwise in a news article is disingenuous and counterproductive in the national discussion of energy from shale.

As Engelder notes, the study is a platform from which advocates can mislead. On this story, The Associated Press got it right, focusing its report on what the study showed: “Gas drilling in northeastern Pennsylvania did not contaminate nearby drinking water wells with salty water, which is a byproduct of the drilling.”

View the original article here

The Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Lease Sale We Need

Tomorrow’s scheduled Central Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas lease sale in New Orleans will be the first in that area since March 2010. Setting aside for a moment the two-year gap in exploration and development caused by two years without new sales, tomorrow’s auction is important to America’s economic and energy security.

Unfortunately, the two-year gap is real and has real impact. Because it takes seven to 10 years for an offshore lease to start producing oil or natural gas, there’s a gap in the development timeline. It’s like a vintner who skips two years growing grapes; at some point in the wine-producing process there’ll be a lean vintage year. Here’s a chart that shows the stages and time requirements of offshore development:

A couple of other points about tomorrow’s lease sale, underscored by API’s Upstream and Industry Operations Director Erik Milito during a conference call with reporters: While it’s good the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is holding the sale – which will generate significant industry interest – the areas in the Gulf being offered aren’t new, emphasizing the administration’s restricted approach to developing America’s energy resources. Milito:

“Every lease sale is important, but more important for our energy future than any individual sale is our nation’s broader energy policy framework. That, unfortunately, has been inadequate. The administration’s proposed five-year offshore leasing plan for 2012 through 2017 … would limit offshore development to where it historically has always been – parts of the Gulf of Mexico and offshore Alaska. It would restrict opportunities when it should be expanding them. It would not help prepare us well for our energy future.”

If the energy goal is to reduce oil imports, then tomorrow’s sale reflects a short-sighted vision that will struggle to take us there. Good news: It doesn’t have to be that way. America is energy-rich, with the resources, financial wherewithal and technological know-how to substitute domestic production for much of what we get now from foreign suppliers. It simply takes the right plan, the right approach.

With the right access policies – capitalizing on tight oil and shale gas discoveries, our offshore potential and increased supplies from neighbor and ally Canada – we could see 100 percent of our liquid fuel needs met by 2024, a little more than a decade away. Milito:

“We can do it safely. Industry continues to demonstrate a commitment to continuous improvement in operations to make things safer for our personnel, the public and the environment. In the offshore the industry, working closely with government, has enhanced its ability to prevent, contain and respond to a spill.”

Energy development is a long-term process. Limited vision and action sows seeds for the future. Milito:

“The proposed Department of Interior five-year plan is insufficient, and each year we implement it we will fall further behind what we really should be doing. The administration ought to begin working on a new plan immediately.  … Maintaining the status quo won’t work. Existing wells are continually depleting and need to be replaced with new discoveries. It is also important to open new areas for leasing so that industry can use new exploration technologies that will increase production.”

View the original article here

A Question of Leadership

On energy and jobs, we need leadership. Presidential leadership. We hear about an “all-of-the-above” energy strategy, but we are not seeing those words followed by substantive actions to expand and strengthen U.S. domestic production. At the same time we need leadership to capitalize on the oil and natural gas industry’s demonstrated ability to create jobs, millions of them – and billions in revenue to the government. We’re sitting on a lottery ticket, and we need to make sure we don’t squander this opportunity for our country.

During a conference call with reporters on API’s new “American Energy Works” campaign, President and CEO Jack Gerard challenged the administration to back its words with policies that help increase domestic oil and natural gas exploration and development.

Gerard said the United States is on the verge of a “new energy paradigm” in which North American energy resources are developed – in the process creating jobs and making the U.S. energy self-sufficient, perhaps within a dozen years. Again, it comes down to leadership. Gerard:

“It’s a game-changing opportunity we’ve never seen in our lifetimes. … The president says he’s for all of the above, but when you look beneath the surface the president’s policies, practices and regulations have actually discouraged production of oil and natural gas.”

“American Energy Works” tells the stories of a number of the people in the oil and natural gas industry, which supports 9.2 million jobs. These are the faces and voices of people benefiting from well-paying jobs, more of which could be created with an energy approach that’s all of the above – and below. Gerard:

“The oil and natural gas industry has been a major job creator at a time when overall U.S. job creation has stagnated. It has created thousands of jobs while other industries have been losing jobs or, at best, holding steady.”

The great news is this industry is ready to do more. With the right leadership and policies, it could create 1.4 million jobs by 2030. It’s an industry that’s investing in America, doubling down on her future. Our companies claimed five of the top 11 spots on the Progressive Policy Institute’s recent list of the top 25 nonfinancial U.S.-based companies, ranked by their 2011 U.S. capital spending. There can be more investment, more jobs, more energy – with the right leadership.

It’s not going to come from those running unrealistic “beyond” campaigns to halt the development of fossil fuels, including oil and natural gas. Gerard:

“They say we can stop using oil right now. If this campaign is beyond anything it’s beyond sense. These groups need to be asked, what is their solution to power America’s economy? … Their campaign would put a halt to the creation of jobs that have been a lifeline to thousands of working Americans. It would hurt people who need work and those looking for new opportunities.”

It might set us back centuries. So, a pair of questions:

Given America’s ample reserves of oil and natural gas, onshore and offshore, will there be leadership to develop our energy wealth or policies that keep that wealth off limits, unavailable?For those who oppose oil and natural gas: What’s your plan? What’s your plan to run an economy that currently gets more than 60 percent of its energy from oil and natural gas and which is projected by government to get nearly 60 percent of its energy from oil and gas over the next couple of decades?    

Gerard:

“Our industry is going to continue investing in America. And it’s going to continue to support common-sense energy policies that encourage development of all of our nation’s energy resources. That’s the only way we’ll be able to meet our future energy needs, supply affordable energy to our economy and, most importantly at this critical time, put people back to work.”

View the original article here

Energy Quest and ‘Britain’s Atlantis’

A couple of fascinating reports detail discoveries at the bottom of the North Sea that some scientists say indicate the existence of “Doggerland,” an area that connected modern-day Great Britain to continental Europe until about 7,000 years ago.

CBS News reports that fossilized evidence of mammoths and other large game, harpoons, flint tools and suspected burial mounds mark settlements of hunters and gatherers who lived on dry land all around the British Isles – in areas connecting England to France and the Low Countries, as well as the area between Scotland and Denmark. London’s Daily Mail calls it “Britain’s Atlantis.”

Interesting stuff, you say, but what the heck does it have to do with energy?

It turns out divers with oil companies that are operating in the North Sea found remains of the submerged world, the Daily Mail reports, and scientists have used industry geophysical modeling data to help piece together what the area looked like when it was dry ground. Research team leader Richard Bates, a geophysicist at the University of St. Andrews:

“Through a lot of new data from oil and gas companies, we’re able to give form to the landscape - and make sense of the mammoths found out there, and the reindeer. We’re able to understand the types of people who were there.”

There’s much work to be done, Bates says: 

"We haven't found an 'x marks the spot' or 'Joe created this', but we have found many artifacts and submerged features that are very difficult to explain by natural causes, such as mounds surrounded by ditches and fossilized tree stumps on the seafloor. There is actually very little evidence left because much of it has eroded underwater; it's like trying to find just part of a needle within a haystack. What we have found, though, is a remarkable amount of evidence, and we are now able to pinpoint the best places to find preserved signs of life."

We’ll let you know if they turn up any signs of pre-historic oil and natural gas exploration.

View the original article here

Cooking With Gas–And Loathing It?

The intersection of a recent anti-natural gas fundraiser at the trendy Brooklyn Winery – featuring fabulous culinary delights prepared by a group of talented chefs – and the natural gas that made the evening possible was, well, simply mouth-watering.

New York Daily News columnist Bill Hammond writes that the “Taste of the Marcellus” event last week was hosted by a group called Chefs for the Marcellus, to showcase the kinds of foods they say could be jeopardized if New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo OKs hydraulic fracturing in that state’s portion of the Marcellus Shale. Hammond:

"Guests were treated to eggplant-stuffed okra, smoked lamb belly with fermented tofu and whipped ricotta jewel on toast — along with wines from the Finger Lakes and beers from Cooperstown’s Ommegang brewery. The only thing more delicious than the menu was the irony, because many if not most of those dishes were cooked over the bright blue flame of natural gas. That’s right, the Chefs for the Marcellus saw nothing wrong with using the very same fuel they portray as a dire threat to the upstate countryside."

He writes that even stuff that wasn’t simmered or seared over a gas flame was chilled in refrigerators running on electricity, much of which no doubt was generated at natural gas-fired power plants. Same thing for the restaurant AC that kept the guests comfortable. Every cubic foot of gas used, he notes, came from a hole in the ground – a quarter of it (based on national averages) from the same hydraulic fracturing process the group opposes.

Then there’s this quote Hammond got from Chefs for the Marcellus organizer Hilary Baum – as tantalizing as the sungold tomato gazpacho with smoked trout that was part of the featured fare:

“We all cook with gas. We all use gas. But we have to be looking at developing alternative energy sources and not be so stuck on fossil fuels.”

To ice the cake, Hammond quotes the Manhattan Institute’s Robert Bryce:

“It’s easy to demonize the oil and gas industry. But getting along without the fuels they provide takes us back to the Stone Age.”

Amen. Pass the trout.

View the original article here

Bakken Shale: Supplying Energy, Supporting Communities

Check out a couple of new videos from North Dakota in which Hess employees and others talk about how energy development in the Bakken Shale formation is changing lives and growing the state’s economy.

Part 1:

Part 2:

The narrative isn’t complicated. As Hess’ Steven Fretland notes in the first video, the Bakken is believed to hold between 8 billion and 40 billion barrels of oil reserves. Companies developing the energy resources need workers, and workers need places to live and services to support their lives. Fretland, who was raised in North Dakota, says Bakken energy is reversing historic trends:

“Younger kids, after they left, you know, you hated to see them go but then they come back and they decide … it’s where they’re going to have their home and raise a family and hopefully retire with the industry.”

In the second video, Hess’ Steve McNally says hydraulic fracturing that has revolutionized energy development is responsible for North Dakota’s jobs boom:

“The impact on the North Dakota area and the U.S. in the short term is numerous jobs. There’s a tremendous amount of employment opportunities here. For anyone who wants to work, you can get a job.”

The point, underscored in this new industry spot, is that fracking has made an old frontier state like North Dakota a new energy frontier. Previously unreachable shale resources are now available in abundance through responsible development. Learn more at Energy From Shale.org.

View the original article here

Graphically Speaking: Fracking and Injection Wells

Last week’s National Research Council report on hydraulic fracturing and earthquakes pretty much ends up where a number of scientists are on the correlation between fracking and quakes: that energy development from shale formations poses a low risk for tremors of significance. The report said more attention should be given to injection wells, which are used for waste disposal by a number of industrial enterprises, not just the oil and natural gas industry. AP science writer Seth Borenstein’s take on the report is here.

API, America’s Natural Gas Alliance and the American Exploration & Production Council have produced a couple of informational tools on hydraulic fracturing and seismic activity and underground injection control (UIC) wells that are especially timely with release of the council’s report. 

Highlights from the fracking document:

Hydraulic fracturing is done with a mixture of more than 99.5 percent water and sand. The other one-half of 1 percent is chemical – including anti-bacterials and lubricants. See the FracFocus.org site for more on fracking fluids.Fracturing that occurs thousands of feet below the surface (and below groundwater aquifers) is carefully mapped with sophisticated equipment to optimize recovery of the oil and/or natural gas and to monitor the well itself. In other words, microseismic activity associated with fracking is thoroughly understood.

One study of several thousand shale fracture treatments across North America showed the largest micro-quake measured about 0.8 or about 2,000 times less energy than a magnitude 3.0 earthquake. The chart below shows that most of the micro-quakes in this study were 10,000 to 1 million times smaller than a 3.0 earthquake, which is roughly equivalent to the passing of a nearby truck:

Highlights from the UIC document:

The U.S. has about 151,000 Class II UIC wells used by the oil and natural gas industry, of which only a handful are being studied for possible links to earthquakes. These wells are a subset of more than 800,000 injection wells nationwide used to dispose of a variety of industrial wastes and for development of various minerals and geothermal energy sources. Here’s a map that shows the state-by-state well distribution:

Injection wells are regulated by EPA under the Safe Drinking Water Act. In many cases EPA has delegated authority for the UIC program to the states, with 39 states having primary authority over 95 percent of all UIC Class II wells.Literature published in the past five years shows that less than 40 incidents of seismic activity felt on the surface were associated with Class II injection wells.

Injection wells pump fluids into deep rock formations (see graphic). It’s unusual, but in some cases a quake can occur when a number of geological and operational factors come together – especially the presence of hard, dense and brittle crystalline “basement rock.”  These quakes are almost always small, below the level that would be felt on the surface.

For more information, check out the Energy From Shale website.

View the original article here

Gulf Lease Sale Emphasizes Need for Expanded Opportunities

Some details from Wednesday’s federal lease sale in the central Gulf of Mexico (news coverage here and here):

Size – The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) sale attracted high bonus bids of $1.7 billion for the area off the coasts of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama – ranging as far as 230 miles into the Gulf. Bids – Fifty-six companies submitted 593 bids on 454 tracts, with the sum of all bids totaling more than $2.6 billion. That’s a big sale, though not the biggest ever. According to BOEM the biggest value lease sale was $3.68 billion in the central Gulf in March 2008. The last sale in the central Gulf in March 2010 totaled $949 million. Record – The highest bid on a single tract was $157.1 million, submitted by Statoil in the Mississippi Canyon, Block 718 – about three times higher than the previous top bid of $52.5 million submitted in 2010.

Now, some perspective.  As API’s Erik Milito said Tuesday, the simple fact that the federal government held a lease sale in the central Gulf is important. It had been more than two years since drilling blocks had been put up for bid. That BOEM opened more than 38 million acres after a two-years-plus hiatus was a positive step.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar heralded the sale as evidence of the administration’s “all-of-the-above” energy strategy:

“When it comes to domestic production, the president has made clear he is committed to expanding oil and natural gas production safely and responsibly, and today's sale is just the latest example of his administration delivering on that commitment. … The Gulf is back. There is great robustness in oil and gas activity currently under way in the Gulf, as well as interest in additional exploration.”

Well, it’s probably more accurate to say the Gulf is getting back. Unfortunately, just returning to 2010 levels of activity (rig counts, etc.) concedes that two years of production were negatively affected by the administration’s policies – the 2010 deepwater drilling moratorium and the slow pace of permitting when the ban was lifted. Given that context, sure, industry was enthusiastic about Wednesday’s sale. National Ocean Industries Association President Randall Luthi:

“A sale of this size signals a strong industry commitment to the Gulf of Mexico and to our nation’s energy future and to more domestic jobs.”

More context: The areas opened for bidding this week have been considered before, which is what Milito emphasized on Tuesday. The central Gulf was not a new area for development. So, instead of restricting opportunity to these areas, the government should be expanding it to new ones. As Luthi suggests, industry is willing and able to do more. Just imagine the robustness of the bidding if the lease areas were in the Eastern Gulf or off the Pacific and Atlantic coasts – areas with undiscovered, technically recoverable reserves estimated at 1.40 billion, 10.37 billion and 3.82 billion barrels, respectively (see map).

Milito from Tuesday:

“Exploration is what leads to production. And it is important to understand that it is critical to maintain a robust leasing program to allow companies to explore new prospects and replace the production that is coming from existing wells. Maintaining the status quo won’t work.”

Opening up more U.S. resources for development (onshore as well) is the real path to expanding domestic oil and natural gas production – which is fundamental to a true, all-of-the-above energy approach. It’s critical to an American-made energy strategy that will create jobs, expand the economy and help us be more energy secure in the future.

View the original article here

Make TAPS the Gift That Keeps On Giving

Worth reading is U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s op-ed piece in the Juneau Empire, marking the 35th birthday of the Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline System, or TAPS.

The Alaska Republican knows something about oil. She represents a huge energy state and would likely head the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee if the GOP emerges from this fall’s elections with a majority. She depicts TAPS as more than a conduit for crude from Alaska’s North Slope. It’s an economic pipeline as well – for the state and the rest of the country. Key facts:

TAPS is 800 miles long, running from Prudhoe Bay in the north to Valdez on the Gulf of Alaska.Since oil first started flowing in 1977, the pipeline has delivered more than 16.6 billion barrels.As Murkowski notes, three out of every 10 jobs in Alaska can be traced to TAPS.The pipeline has generated more than $171 billion in revenues to the state treasury. North Slope oil production allowed the state to terminate its income tax in 1980.

Murkowski writes:

“Oil wealth has paid for improving our roads, water and sewer systems, building parks, renewing our cities, and improving life in our most remote villages. The riches that Alaskans have extracted from under the North Slope have also funded our schools, and helped bring our health care system into the 21st century.”

The pipeline’s birthday is an excellent time to think about its future. Murkowski writes that at its zenith, TAPS carried 2 million barrels of oil per day. Now the daily flow is only about a quarter of that. Alaska has slipped behind North Dakota to No. 3 on the list of top oil-producing states (behind Texas). Here’s a chart from Gov. Sean Parnell’s office showing North Slope production decline, which has decreased TAPS’ flow: 

There are risks with reduced pipeline flow. According to the governor’s office, at lower flow levels it takes longer for oil to go through the pipeline, and at lower temperatures ice forms inside that can cause damage. Murkowski:

“Without new oil production, throughput in the pipeline could fall enough to threaten its future viability. Shutting down the pipeline would mean closing up shop on the North Slope. Alaska’s oil — like its massive natural gas reserves today — would be stranded with no way to market, leaving the state scrambling to replace the 85 percent of its annual revenue that today comes from oil.”

There’s a relatively simple solution: Produce more domestic crude oil to send through TAPS. The oil is there – offshore in the Beaufort Sea and the Chukchi Sea (where Shell hopes to sink exploratory wells this summer) and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), which Murkowski writes is the “largest single prospective onshore source for conventional oil in North America.” Some estimate ANWR could produce 1 million barrels of oil per day, which by itself would solve the under-capacity situation with TAPS while significantly boosting our country’s oil output. 

The problem is policy. ANWR continues to be held off limits by Washington, and development of Alaska’s offshore areas has been slow in coming – again, chiefly because the federal government has been slow granting approvals. Murkowski:

“The federally owned lands and waters to the east, west and north of Prudhoe Bay hold tremendous resources, but access has been slowed by an administration more interested in designating new wilderness than shoring up Alaska’s economy.”

We need policies that create sustained and predictable access to oil and natural gas on federal lands – in ANWR and elsewhere (see map below). Access = energy development, which will mean job creation, economic growth and a more secure energy future. And a great birthday present for TAPS.

View the original article here