Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

BP Plans To Close North Slope Oil Field (Alaska)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 12:30 PM
Original message
BP Plans To Close North Slope Oil Field (Alaska)
BP plans to shut Alaska North Slope oil field
Reuters Planet Ark

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - "BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. said yesterday it may halt production at the easternmost operating oil field on Alaska's North Slope in as little as three weeks.

The state Division of Oil and Gas gave BP permission to shut down the once-promising Badami field, which never met expectations since production began there in 1998, company spokesman Daren Beaudo said.

EDIT

The field is estimated to hold 120 million barrels, but reservoir problems limited daily production to no more than 18,000 barrels, well below the expected rate of 30,000 barrels, and currently it produces 1,300 barrels a day, which Beaudo called 'uneconomic'.

Some environmentalists say Badami's fortunes show that oil prospects on the eastern North Slope - particularly in the Wildlife Refuge - are less than development backers predicted.

EDIT

BP has already sold off other leases at exploration sites, including those within the federal National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska on the western North Slope, and plans to focus on boosting flow from existing fields."

EDIT

http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/21455/story.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SeattleDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. does this mean they'll push HARDER for ANWR drilling?
or does it mean they'll be even more worried that there's not enough economically recoverable oil in Area 1002?

(I know what environmentalists say, but what will industry conclude?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
2. since bp sold off
who in the hell would think it`s economically viable to open more drilling sites? not unless bush gives massive amounts of money to cover any losses. hmmmm- maybe they will....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acerbic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-24-03 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Answer:
who in the hell would think it`s economically viable to open more drilling sites?
Especially those who make their profits from development and services, not actual oil... :think:

http://www.halliburton.com/about/index.jsp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spoonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-25-03 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Without oil Chenyburton would not profit
Unless there is oil there Halliburton would have nothing to gain.
All of the exploration services GSI)were sold of in the 80's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. The sooner they quit producing on the North Slope, the better
When the North Slope/Prudhoe Bay plays out, eventually the Alaska pipeline will fall into disuse and disrepair and become unusable. If the pipeline is unusable, then it is less likely that they will be able to drill in the Wildlife Refuge because the pipeline will not be available.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spoonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-24-03 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
4. ANWR Still attractive
"Some environmentalists say Badami's fortunes show that oil prospects on the eastern North Slope - particularly in the Wildlife Refuge - are less than development backers predicted."

I'm afraid to say it, but they're wrong.
Well over 25 test well were punched in the early 70's all across ANWR, and every one of them had "high yields" The wells are still there, and the oil companies know all about them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Submariner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-25-03 03:44 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. I'm afraid your wrong
KIC-1 is the only test well in ANWR.

KIC-1, the test well is called. It was drilled into the coastal plain southeast of Kaktovik. 260, Brower's hometown and the easternmost native village on Alaska's North Slope. The for-profit Kaktovik Inupiat owns land within the refuge. Sixteen years ago, they leased it to Chevron and BP for a test bore.

Exploration geologists, aided by labourers such as Brower, augured into the underlying sandstone. On April 24, 1986, according to state court documents, they reached a depth of 15,193 feet at a cost of $ 40 mm. Then they quit. The oil companies capped the well and dismantled the wooden drilling platform.

Eventually the tundra healed.

The companies won't discuss what they found at the bottom of KIC-1. Seawater? Mud? Gas? Oil? Ten years ago, Chevron won a lawsuit upholding KIC-1's confidentiality. It remains a secret.


http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/company/cnn11977.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spoonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-25-03 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Here's Some Facts You May Be Unaware Of
Working on the North Slope for a total of 2.5 years as a Health Safety and Environmental Manager for a seismic exploration company, I was privledged to and aquired a great deal of first hand knowledge on the subject.
While your artcle makes for enjoyable reading, let me enlighten you as to some of it's shortcommings.


A wooden drilling platform? Wooden platforms have not been used since the early 40's. A wooden platform could not support the weight of 15,193 feet of drill string, BHA (bottom hole assembly) and mud - approx 300,000 lbs. Not to mention the multitude of state and federal drilling standards and safety standards violations.

Oil and gas exploration in the arctic began in earnest in 1944 in the Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4 (now National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, NPR-A), which lies in northwestern Alaska, under a program conducted by the Navy.
There was a hiatus in exploration from 1953 until 1974, when the Navy resumed exploration. The program was subsequently transferred to the Department of the Interior in 1977, and by 1980, 24 additional wells had been drilled in NPR-A. The first NPR-A lease sale was held in 1982, but to date there have been no significant discoveries.
Exploration offshore in the Beaufort Sea began in the mid-1970s on state leases in shallow water. In 1978, the Endicott field was discovered near the Sagavanirktok River Delta and construction of production facilities began in 1985. The field, with estimated recoverable reserves of 500 million barrels, began production in October 1987, nine years after its discovery.
The pace of exploration in federal OCS waters accelerated following the Joint State-Federal Lease Sale in 1979. Subsequently, there have been four additional federal sales in the Beaufort Sea-Sale 71 in 1982, Sale 87 in 1984, Sale 97 in 1988 and Sale 124 in 1991. Drilling activity following these sales has resulted in three announced discoveries, one of which is located approximately 12 miles offshore ANWR. A state lease sale within the 3-mile limit along the seaward boundary of ANWR in Camden Bay was held in 1987, and a second offshore state sale stretching from Camden Bay to the Canadian border occurred in 1988. The state has scheduled another lease sale for 1999 that will include all of the acreage within state waters that lie offshore ANWR, stretching from the Canning River to Canada.

http://www.arcticgaspipeline.com/North%20Slope%20O&G.htm

Although my initial time estimate was slightly off, (Notice the gap between 1974 and 1977) several onshore test wells were drilled within the borders of what is now called ANWR. Many more were drilled just offshore ANWR.
I have personally seen the abandoned rigs from the air during fly-overs looking for migratory herd direction.
Why the info is not publicized, I don’t know.

Remember this as well; the area in question was not protected from exploration until 1980.

In 1980, Congress enacted the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA, P. L. 96-487, 94 Stat. 2371), which included several sections about ANWR. The Arctic Range was renamed the Arctic National Wildlife.

Section 1003 of ANILCA prohibited oil and gas development in the entire Refuge, or "leasing or other development leading to production of oil and gas from the range" unless authorized by an Act of Congress.

Many of us have jumped on the bandwagon of “environmental protection of ANWR” with little or no knowledge of the facts.
I happen to be very proud of the fact that I was involved in helping making the north slope the cleanest oil field in the world. I do consider myself an environmental activist, but I am also a firm believer that industry and nature can cohabitate the same areas.
Industry just has to be willing/forced to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Submariner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-25-03 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. I'm familiar with the overflights of ANWR
Edited on Fri Jul-25-03 05:53 PM by Submariner


Thanks for your information. I should have been more specific, but I didn’t realize you worked on the North Slope.

I was not including offshore or NPR-A exploratory wells in my view of where the ANWR exploratory well is located. What I had in mind are the calving grounds and the upland herd grazing/resting areas. I don’t doubt your assessment of how many of those other wells there are outside of the critical and sensitive habitat areas.

I was the project manager of an oil company field program assessing the impacts of drillsite runoff to tundra ponds, so I’m familiar with ANWR and the slope oilfields. Beautiful country isn’t it?

With the drastic changes going on in the Alaska climate, the scientific community will be rewriting the books on the changes in migration, feeding, calving, spawning, and other changes in habitat utilization patterns for years to come. With the freeze line moving north, and perma-frosted muskeg thawing earlier, now is not the time to develop the ANWR coastal plain with haul roads and pipeline corridors with so much at stake for the ecological community. Caribou are just one component as you’re familiar with.

For instance, the proposed Colville River Bridge will be crossing Dolly Varden habitat, but the quandary now is trying to identify that habitat because the water temp changes following an earlier ice-out is changing the movement pattern of the fishes. I may be surveying the site and writing the EIS, so these changes make for exciting times for the befuddled Alaskan biologists.

Anyway Spoonman, in my initial thoughts, I was only thinking of that KIC-1 well within the ANWR that everyone looks to yield 3 to 16 billion barrels of crude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spoonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-26-03 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Native Pollution
Did you witness as I did the natives reckless disregard for the environment?
I could not tell you how many time I saw them dumping spilled gas and oil out of their boats into the Coleville river, dumping the used oil from there vehicles directly on the ground?
I spent 9.5 hours one night south west of Alpine looking for a hydraulic fluid leak that was about 1 foot in diameter.
The following spring I see these natives doing #### like that.
Man I was pissed!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Submariner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-26-03 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. I saw that out at Lake Iliamna
some young natives were draining their car oil pan onto the ground out by the town landfill where the rain would carry it towards the lake. When I came back a few hours later, they were gone, but there was a dead bald eagle nearby that was apparently recently shot. I could not prove they did it, and there are no police out there anyway.

Either they’re not listening to their Elders, or the Elders are sending out the wrong message to them about respecting the land.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC