Posted on 08/08/2006 10:53:56 AM PDT by thackney
The U.S. government and oil giant BP Plc. have discussed scenarios where half of Alaska's huge Prudhoe Bay field could continue to pump oil for hungry U.S. refiners, U.S. Energy Secretary Sam Bodman said on Tuesday.
The news, which Bodman delivered to reporters after speaking with BP America Chief Executive Bob Malone, could sooth worries that a shut-down of the 400,000 barrel per day Alaska field will exacerbate shortages in Nigeria, Iraq and elsewhere.
BP on Sunday began shutting down the field after discovering a corroded pipeline and said it could be weeks or months before production resumed.
Initially BP said it would shut down the entire field, which pumps about 8 percent of U.S. domestic supplies. But Bodman said BP is now mulling a "parallel plan" that would allow it to fix the pipeline on the eastern half of the Prudhoe Bay field while leaving the western half on-line.
"A complete shutdown of the Prudhoe Bay system may not be necessary," Bodman said.
"With respect to the Western areas (of Prudhoe Bay) ... (BP is) looking at a parallel program that would enable the repairs to take place ... but that it would be done in a fashion that would allow them to maintain production," Bodman said.
BP was not available to comment on Bodman's remarks. BP has declined to say how long it will take to fix the pipeline but government estimates put Prudhoe Bay field back in service by January 2007.
In the meantime, Bodman pointed to healthy U.S. crude oil and refined product stocks, and said tankers could be diverted from countries like Saudi Arabia, Ecuador, Colombia and Mexico to the U.S. West Coast to fill any shortfalls.
"There appears to be an adequate supply," Bodman said.
Bodman on Monday said he was ready to approve loans from the U.S. emergency crude oil stockpile, but apparently has found no takers among U.S. refiners.
If necessary, Bodman said crude oil from the U.S. emergency stockpile on the Gulf Coast could be released to supply area refiners, and that imports bound for the Gulf Coast could be diverted to the West Coast.
That would avoid rerouting tankers from the Gulf Coast to the West Coast, which would involve a time-consuming journey through the Panama Canal, he said.
Thanks for the update. BTTT
Thanks for these maps, thackney. My son, Freeper intenseracer, works on the slope for Schlumberger, and talks about all these locations all the time, so here's a ping for him and a pat on the back for you! Your knowledge and interest in these topics is greatly appreciated by his family. :o)
Thought you'd be interested as well, RightWhale. :)
If BP had spent less money on those crappy, whiney, New Age, left wing "Beyond Petroleum" commercials and more on maintaining their own equipment, this would not have happened.
Amazing that they didn't think about this before their announcement yesterday. Gee, I wonder if BP is trying to increase the price of crude even more than it is. Noooooo... of course not.
Just idle interest, thanks. My pipeline days are over unless they decide to run the Natural Gas Pipeline through my yard. :)
If BP stops their own production they would have nothing to sell. Not even Belial would go that far just to spite himself.
The new double hulled super tankers would not fit through the Panama Canal.
You are right. They would have to use smaller tankers requiring more trips.
LOL
The price immediately went up at my filling station. I doubt it will fall any with this news.
Bulk gasoline went up two cents. Any retail outlet increase over that was due to something else.
Had you heard about this? I don't know if it is going forward or the schedule.
Panama Canal set for major overhaul
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4876322.stm
The state body which runs it, the Panama Canal Authority (ACP), has now decided that it is about time the waterway had a major refit.
Its plans to widen the canal are due to be presented to the government imminently.
The International Monetary Fund estimates the cost of the project could be $4.5bn, while the Inter American Development Bank says it could be as high as $7.5bn.
Two new 3-chamber locks are to be built at the Pacific and Atlantic ends of the canal, creating a third lane of traffic capable of handling large container ships and tankers that have previously been too wide .
Wonder how much of the other pipeline is aging this rapidly?
Some of the most annoying leftist-pandering rubbish on TV.
Most of the small tankers have been put out of commission due to double tanker rule. Perfectly good tankers were turned into scrap.
I think that I did hear about the planned changes to the canal, but it will take a long time to complete, a lot longer than it should take to fix that pipeline.
I think that CONOCO has some type of vessel, specially designed for lightering, which could transfer oil across the canal, but what an expense. Of course the public won't mind paying for the extra transport cost.
You are not the only one wondering. Since the March Spill, many of these pipelines have been going through detailed inspections using smart pigs. That is how this line was discovered to have such extensive damage.
Is crude oil highly corrosive? Or, are we getting some kind of electrolysis going on from the movement of fluid through the pipe?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.