Page images
PDF
EPUB

To our knowledge, to date Canada has issued only a tentative

set of environmental guidelines for northern construction

and more specifically directed to gas pipelines. Results of governmental investigations have not yet been collected

and simulated into a formal set of environmental and techni

cal stipulations.

Chapter 9 of the 1972 McKenzie Valley feasibility study lists

several areas requiring further study. They indicate that all work has been directed to determine feasibility and appreciate that further research and development work remain to be done.

A partial list of further requirements is:

1.

Terrain classification - Additional field work to veri

fy and establish a satisfactory level of confidence in the

[blocks in formation]

determined largely by literature research.
4. Pipeline design Field work to establish parameters
of design such as soil coefficients of friction, soil

modulus, and creep properties of permafrost.
5. Thermal predictions - Determination of more adequate
soil properties and surface temperatures to increase the
reliability of the mathematical model of heat conduction.
6. Seismicity More complete data on seismic occurren-

ces and location of fault areas.

7.

Construction

Further refinement and investigation

of summer techniques, hydrostatic testing, pipe coatings, logistics, and availability of men, equipment and material.

[blocks in formation]

of pipeline safety from soil settlement, drainage basins, and oil spill contingency plans.

10. Economics

Further in-depth studies and factual

data in the areas of base costs and assumptions, regional and national economic impact, and methods of financing.

ROM OUTSTION RA'SUD S N TON JACKSON
1:47RON 715-CATHIAN/TRANSDU,ISKAN PII'LL SE ALTERNATIVES

1-7.

Assuming right of way width limitation renoved, whai suribor

[blocks in formation]

3.

The litigation between the owner companies and the State of

Alaska should be resolved this year.

There are no restrictions on bringing the crude into the

marine terminals in California and Washington.

5.

The engincering, legal and financial considerations do not

appear to offer any obstacles to completion of the project.

These problems are being worked concurrently with the

resolution of the environmentally inspired delays.

1-B

The delay in completing the Trans-Canadian vs.

the Trans-Alaskan

pipeline could reasonably be expected to range from two to

five years.

This estimate is based on the following factors:

1.

Ounership and operating agreements must be negotiated and

a Canadian corporate entity must be formed to undertake all

the responsibilities associated with financing, designing

and constructing a project of this magnitude.

2.

The Cacciative Claris11e must be resolved and

negotiations wichi tahe years.

The iact that the proper

muchou SR 101 settlement is unclear would add to, rather

[blocks in formation]

will have taken three years to complete its route analysis

and its mile-by-nile design, it is likely that four years

would be required to accomplish the route analysis and

mile-by-mile design, write the revised project description,

prepare and review the environmental impact statement for

thenew route through Alaska to the Canadian border, hold

public hearings, solicit the vicws of the various U.S.

[blocks in formation]

ceivable that a line four times longer and traveling through

twice the length of difficult construction terrain could be

built in the same time, particularly when there is a shortage

of massive equipment to outfit more than a few construction

spreads.

This might add one to two years to the three year

construction time forecast for TAPS.

This time period would

not run concurreasily with the above since all pornits,

native chain settlements, labor agreements and other

issues would have to be identified, understood and

settled before such a massive vndertaking could be

started.

1-C

of the poicntial problem areas raised in Item 1-A, Congress

could have an indirect influence on the early resolution of

the environmental issues if they clearly indicated full

support for TAPS.

2-A

Question:

What is the likelihood that sufficient reserves

will be proved on the North Slope to justify two 2AM B/D pipe

lines?

This is difficult to answer as most exploration has been delayed

until such time as construction of the pipeline has started.

But

substantial new discoveries must be made before a second line

would be feasible.

Question:

What is the likelihood that sufficient reserves

will be proved in the North Slope of Alaska to utilize the

full capacity of the Alyeska Pipeline plus a substantial part

of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline?

The odds for finding additional reserves above the added reserves

required to

koop

the Trans-Alaska Pipeline full must be

considered at this point as highly speculative.

« PreviousContinue »