Effects of Trans-Alaska Pipeline on the Lives of the Alaskan Natives - Essay Example

How the Trans Alaska Pipeline Affected the Lives of the Alaskan Natives The Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS), usually called the Alyeska Pipeline in Alaska or the Alaska Pipeline elsewhere, is a major U.S. oil pipeline connecting oil fields such as the Prudhoe Bay, which was discovered in 1968 to a seaport where the oil can be shipped to the Lower 48 states for refining (Trans Alaska Pipeline). President Richard Nixon signed the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act into law on November 16, 1973, which authorized the construction of the pipeline. Although the pipeline is actually about 799 miles long, it is usually referred to as 800 miles long. The single 48-inch (1.22 m) diameter pipeline was built between March 27, 1975 and May 31, 1977 at a cost of around US$8 billion. Five different contractors employing 21,000 people at the peak of work constructed the pipe in six sections; 31 were killed in accidents during construction (Trans Alaska Pipeline). The construction of the pipeline took 39 months to build and cost about $8 billion. The pipeline is over 800 miles long and stretches from Prudhoe Bay to Valdez. The pipeline passes hundreds of rivers, streams, and three mountain ranges. Almost half of the pipeline is buried below the ground. In areas, such as Thompson Pass, the pipe had to be welded at angles of 60 degrees. Thirty-one workers died during the construction of the pipeline. It was originally predicted by engineers that a worker per mile of the pipeline, or over 800 workers, would die during the course of the project (qtd. from Cowans). The obstacles faced and overcome in building the trans-Alaska pipeline are simply astounding. The harsh temperatures, rough terrain, lack of Arctic pipeline building knowledge at this time and the environmental concerns of a pipeline had to all be considered in making this project a success. In 1994, the American Society of Civil Engineers named the Alaska pipeline one of the "Seven Wonders of the United States". Their list includes the Panama Canal, Golden Gate Bridge, Hoover Dam, the Kennedy Space Center, the Interstate Highway System, and the World Trade Center (qtd. from Cowans). Along the pipeline, there are eleven pump stations, each with four pumps. Diesel or natural gas generators power each electric pump. Twelve pump stations were planned but Pump Station 11 was never built, though the southward numbering system for the pump stations retains a place for this nonexistent station. Usually only around seven stations are active at one time, and plans to replace the existing pumps with newer high-efficiency pumps may reduce the number of active stations even further (qtd. from Trans Alaska Pipeline). In areas where thaw-sensitive permafrost exists but the line must be buried, such as highway crossings or avalanche-prone areas, the pipe is encased in an insulated, refrigerated ditch. Nearby refrigeration, plants pump cold brine through 6-inch (15 cm) pipes, which absorb heat and keep the soil cooled. Other areas of burial are either conventional covered ditches or unrefrigerated but insulated ditches, depending on the sensitivity of the surrounding soil (qtd. from Trans Alaska Pipeline). The pipeline was completed on June 20, 1977 and the first oil was pumped into the pipeline. On July 8, 1977, a huge explosion destroyed Pump Station Eight. The explosion killed one worker and injured five more. Human error was attributed to the cause of the explosion. On July 19, 1977, a loader damaged a valve just south of Prudhoe Bay. Approximately 2,000 barrels of oil spilled onto the ground before the leak was stopped and repaired. On the next day, the first attempt of sabotage occurred. A section of insulation from the pipeline was torn off and supporting pipe brackets were torn from the line just north of Fairbanks. The pipeline itself was not injured and the oil continued to flow south towards Valdez. Several people were later arrested and convicted for malicious destruction of property (qtd. from Cowans). How the Trans Alaska Pipeline and the Aleyska Consortium A consortium of oil companies planning to produce the oil determined that a pipeline offered the best means to transport crude oil from the North Slope to a navigable port in southern Alaska where it could be shipped by tanker to refineries in the continental United States (About us). The oil companies with exploitation rights grouped together as the Alyeska consortium to create a company to design, build, and then operate the pipeline (Trans Alaska Pipeline). The Alyeska Pipeline Service Company, named after the Aleut word Alyeska meaning mainland, was established in 1970 and charged with designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining the Trans Alaska Pipeline System, commonly called TAPS. In addition, an especially dedicated account funded by oil revenues, the Permanent Fund, has a balance of over $22 billion (About us). The consortium of companies that own TAPS today includes; BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc. 46.93%, ConocoPhillips Transportation Alaska, Inc. 28.29%, ExxonMobil Pipeline Company, 20.34%, Unocal Pipeline Company, 1.36%, Koch Alaska Pipeline Company, L.L.C., 3.08% Headquartered in Anchorage, the company also maintains operations in Fairbanks and Valdez and employs almost 900 people statewide, with 1000 more employed by independent contractors working for the company (About us). Obstacles, Pros and Cons of the Trans Alaska Pipeline System Project Proponents of the Trans Alaska Pipeline argue that the project pitted America's need for energy against its desire to conserve land and wildlife (Lipski). It is the most reliable system needed to transport crude oil from Alaska's North Slope to Lower 48 refineries. Many alternative methods were discussed - ice-breaking tank vessels to traverse the Northwest Passage, giant tanker airplanes, and extending the Alaska Railroad to Prudhoe Bay. Ultimately, the oil companies determined that the most economic transport method was a hot-oil pipeline from the North Slope oil fields to the Port of Valdez, where the oil could be loaded into tank vessels and shipped to the U.S. West Coast (Trans Alaska Pipeline). Additionally, the proponents further argue that the Alaskan pipeline will provide about 17 % of U.S.'s domestic crude oil production and the revenues from the production and transportation of oil will give about 8 % Alaskan government funds. Before the construction of the Alaskan pipeline ever began, several Native villages claimed land that the pipeline and haul road would cross, and filed suit in federal court to stop the construction of the haul road. In addition, three environmental organizations filed a federal suit claiming the pipeline project violated National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) which was passed by Congress in 1969 and the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (MLA) (Clifton and Gallaway).. However, native land claims were mostly settled in December 1971 when the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) was signed. ANCSA created Alaska Native regional corporations and provided almost $1 billion and 44 million acres to Alaska Natives. As part of this legislation, Native land claims along the proposed pipeline right-of-way were resolved, making it possible for the federal and state governments to grant essential licenses and permits (Clifton and Gallaway). Furthermore, in an atmosphere of growing concern over U.S. dependence on foreign oil, then Secretary of the Interior Rogers C.B. Morton declared the trans-Alaska pipeline to be in the national interest. The federal injunction against the pipeline project was lifted. However, in 1973, the appeals court ruled that the proposed right-of-way and special land use permits for the pipeline did not comply with the MLA (Clifton and Gallaway). In places, the proposed right-of-way exceeded the 54-foot width allowed under the MLA. To obtain a wider right-of-way, approval from Congress was required. Extensive debate surrounded the pipeline issue in Congress. However, the Arab oil embargo influenced public opinion in favor of a new domestic source of oil. President Richard Nixon signed the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act on November 16, 1973, after a vote cast by Vice President Spiro Agnew broke a deadlock in the Senate (Clifton and Gallaway). How the Trans Alaska Pipeline system affected the environment Environmentalists remained concerned about potential risks associated with the pipeline (Clifton and Gallaway). Engineers originally wanted to bury the pipeline along most of its route however, the project's startup coincided with passage of national legislation requiring an environmental impact report for such construction. Contending that the pipeline report was inadequate, conservation groups sued. Research on the potentially harmful effects of burying in unstable permafrost a pipeline that contained naturally warm crude oil led to a major redesign (Lipski). Half the pipeline ended up being supported above ground on stilts, which included a passive refrigeration system to ensure that the oil's warmth would not melt permafrost and thus cause shifts in the ground that could rupture the pipeline. The project's delay also led to other engineering refinements to safeguard the environment. Environmentalists hoped to prevent the pipeline from being built at all, and many pipeline opponents still felt they had failed. "But in fact," Stine says, "they pushed substantial design changes and made a project that could have been environmentally disastrous far less so (Lipski)." However, proponents of the project argue that the pipeline will be surveyed many times a day, mostly by air. Due to the placement of the surveillance bases, the pipeline can be surveyed in just two hours, but most surveys take longer to ensure thoroughness. Furthermore, other methods of surveying include regular Pipeline Inspection Gauges, or pigs, sent through the line. Some pigs are used to remove buildup of paraffin on the insides of the pipe; others have complex electronics, which relay radar scans fluid measurements as they travel down the line (Trans Alaska Pipeline). The Trans Alaska pipeline has operated continuously since June 1977 except for some maintenance and troubleshooting disruptions (Alaskan pipeline's environmental impact studied. Furthermore, the Alyeska Pipeline spends over $60 million annually to oil spill prevention and response in Prince William Sound, and has dedicated over 300 personnel to this effort, mostly through its Ship Escort/Response Vessel System (SERVS). Created in July 1989, SERVS is considered one of the best oil spill prevention and response forces in the world. The SERVS mission is three fold: prevention, preparation, and response. Each laden tanker is escorted through Prince William Sound to the Gulf of Alaska by response vessels capable of assisting a distressed tanker. Oil spill response equipment has been pre-stationed throughout the Sound for rapid response (About us). Sad to say, as of 2000, there were 1,543 oil spills in the state, as reported to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Spills amounted to the release of 145,338 gallons of oil. These averages out to almost 30 oil spills every week, or four oil spills a day. In 2001, one oil spill alone amounted to more than all the reported oil spills in 2000. In October 2001, the Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS), the 800-mile system that goes from Prudhoe Bay to the port of Valdez, reported that 285,000 gallons were spilled because of a rifle bullet that pierced the pipeline. Oil sprayed out about 75 feet from the pipeline at about 120 gallons per minute for 36 hours. According to a Jan 10, 2002 report by Lois N. Epstein, a senior engineer at Cook Inlet Keeper, there were 43 reported pipeline oil spills at Cook Inlet in 2001 (through Dec. 5). This is up from 14 reported oil spills in the area in 1996 (Alaskan Native Activist). A major, unforeseen impact of the project resulted from the pipeline's service road. Intended for the pipeline's builders and operators, the road made it easier for people in automobiles to visit the Alaskan countryside, sometimes with unfortunate consequences for the environment. It let more people in, and that impact has been enormous (Lipski). Effects of Trans Alaska pipeline to the Alaskan Natives The congressional passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in 1971 climaxed a century of Native effort to gain title to lands they had long claimed as their own. Passage of the act also spawned the hope and expectations among many that ANCSA would establish for the Natives of Alaska a permanent basis for prosperity through a $962.5 million cash settlement; title to 40 million acres of lands; and establishment of regional and village corporations to distribute and manage the money, lands, and resources (qtd. from changes in the well-being). ANSCA gave Alaska Natives title to 44 million acres and US$962 million to settle aboriginal land claims by creating thirteen for-profit corporations. ANCSA was the largest land claim settlement in U.S. history. Oil companies, due to their interest in the Trans-Alaskan Pipelines System, lobbied hard for the passage of ANCSA, fearing that Native claims along the proposed route might prohibit the granting of a right of way. Even Justice Thomas Berger, in a 1985 report of the Alaska Native Review Commission regarding the Act, said, "The imposition of a settlement of land claims that is based on corporate structures was an inappropriate choice (Alaskan Native Activist)." However, the Alaskan native villages have lost its political and social autonomy. The indigenous peoples who have a direct spiritual, cultural, intimate relationship to the natural world, suffered almost immediately and straightaway from any negative effects of unsustainable development projects such as the Alaskan pipeline. The Alaskan natives are the stakeholders, and at the first point of impact, and they need to create a mechanism that would build alliances, empower, educate and unify their people to build solidarity in a positive way to effectively address the profound issues and concerns of Alaska (qtd. from Alaskan Native Activist). Furthermore, during the last 13 years, essential developments have also occurred that have been intended (or have inadvertently tended) to affect the Natives' standard of living. These have included: huge increased state capital spending that resulted in improved housing, educational, and health-care facilities (and associated employment in constructing and operating these facilities), expansion of telephone and television service to rural villages, Improved transportation. Changing technology, i.e., also increased the use of general transportation of outboard motors, snow machines, and three-wheelers. The Trans Alaskan pipeline also created a general expansion of the state's economy, which increased employment opportunities for Alaska Natives, especially in urban areas (qtd. from changes in the well-being). Moreover, the Alaska Native population grew 2.4 percent per year since 1970, a rate twice that of the national population. Alaska's non-Native population, however, increased at an even faster rate, averaging 3 percent per year. This largely resulted from a substantial migration to Alaska brought about by the discovery of oil at Prudhoe Bay and the construction of the trans-Alaska oil pipeline. Because of these population changes, the Alaska Native population constituted about 16 percent of the state's population in 1980, down from 16.7 percent in 1970. Thus, despite a substantial increase in their population, Alaska Natives were a smaller minority group in 1980 than in 1970 (qtd. from Changes in the Well-being). Economic impact of Trans Alaska Pipeline to the Alaskan Natives The decade of the 1970s brought massive changes to the Alaska economy, largely resulting from the discovery of oil at Prudhoe Bay and the construction of the Trans Alaskan pipeline. While the number of jobs in Alaska grew between 1970 and 1980, the employment profile of both Native and non-Native men did not change significantly. On average, almost half of all Native men 16 years or older were outside the wage labor force at any given time. The Native male unemployment rate, as measured in the week prior to completion of an individual's census form, showed a negligible change between 1970 and 1980. The labor force behavior pattern of Native men was much the same in 1980 as it was a decade before. This did not hold true for Native women however (qtd. from Changes in the Well-being). During the last decade, Alaskan native women entered the labor force in increasing numbers, until the proportion of Native women working now approximates that of Native men. The ratio of public to private employment increased among the Alaska Native population during the 1970s, particularly in rural Alaska. By the 1980 census, state and local government employment among rural Alaska Natives accounted for 39 percent of all Native employment, compared with 22 percent a decade earlier (qtd. from Changes in the Well-neing). The proportion of Natives employed by the federal government, however, decreased in rural Alaska and remained essentially constant in urban Alaska. The distribution of public and private employment among non-Natives in Alaska changed only marginally over the last decade. In comparison with Alaska Natives, the proportion of non-Natives finding employment in the public sector has remained low (31 percent of non-Natives v. 52 percent of Natives in 1980) (qtd. from Changes in the Well-being). One of the most striking changes in the status of Alaska Natives after the construction of the Trans Alaska pipeline has been in the quality of housing available, particularly in rural Alaska. Whereas in 1970 one in five rural Native-occupied housing units had been built in the last 10 years, by 1980 the ratio had risen to one in two. The rural housing boom was accompanied by a substantial reduction in the percentage of overcrowded households as well as in the number of Native households lacking plumbing facilities (qtd. from Changes in the Well-being). In part because of the increase in housing stock and in part because of the decrease in family size, the average number of persons per Native household dropped from 5.2 in 1970 to 3.8 in 1980. Unfortunately, however, the proportion of Native women living in households with their own children but no husband increased from 8 percent to 22 percent over the last decade (qtd. from Changes in the well-being). When revenues from the Trans Alaska pipeline reached its peak in the first half of the 1980s, the state government used it in ways that reached throughout the economy-including construction of new public facilities, increased aid to local governments, subsidies for home mortgages and other loans, and annual cash payments to virtually all Alaskans. This spending created the largest economic boom to date in Alaska. It not only boosted direct state and local government employment, but also created thousands of new jobs in private industry (Goldsmith and Hill). Moreover, the per capita incomes rose throughout the state, with virtually every community benefiting. State leaders were determined that this boom would not end like the fur and gold booms, in an economic bust as soon as the resource had disappeared. In 1976, the people of Alaska amended the state's constitution, establishing the Alaska Permanent Fund (History of Alaska). The fund invests a portion of the state's mineral revenue, including revenue from the Trans-Alaskan Pipeline System, "to benefit all generations of Alaskans". Of all mineral lease proceeds, 25% goes into the fund, and income from the fund is divided three ways. It pays annual dividends to all residents who apply and qualify, it adds money to the principal account to hedge against inflation, and it provides funds for state legislature use (History of Alaska). Everyone living in the great State of Alaska receives a check once per year from the state. The money comes from investments and royalties received by the state from oil production and lease sales (Cowans). The fund is the largest pool of money in the United States and a top lender to the government. Since 1993, the fund has produced more money than the Prudhoe Bay oil fields, whose production is diminishing and may dry up early in the 21st century, though the funds should continue to benefit the state. In March 2005, the fund's value was over $30 billion (qtd. from History of Alaska). In February 1977, the Permanent Fund received its first oil revenues of $734,000. In 1980, the share of oil revenues was increased from twenty-five to fifty percent to the Permanent Fund. The first Permanent Fund Dividend check was distributed in 1982. This check was for $1,000. There has been over $11,500 given to every man, woman and child living in Alaska since the Alaska Permanent Fund began passing out these checks. That's a bunch of cabbage for just living in the most beautiful place in North America (qtd. from Cowans). Despite these gains, however, the Alaska Native population remains at a disadvantage in all areas relative to the Alaskan non-Native population and the U.S. population as a whole. While Alaska Natives received significant direct and indirect transfers of goods and services from the federal and state governments, most of their support continues to come from their own wage employment and subsistence activities (qtd. from Changes in the Well-being). The underlying causes of emotional stress that have apparently led to increased alcohol abuse, accidents, and suicides are still not well understood. Some of the stress experienced by Alaska Natives may result from unmet hopes and expectations raised by ANCSA. However, the environment in which Alaska Natives find themselves is changing so rapidly that it is impossible to weigh the importance of the myriad of potential factors that may affect the emotional well-being of the Alaska Native population (qtd. from Changes in the Well-being). . Works Cited "About us." 2005. Alyeska pipeline. 23 Nov. 2005. . "Alaskan Native Activists Take a Firm StandAgainst Oil and Gas, Launching a New Alliance." Drillbits & Tailings v.8, n.2. 28 Feb, 2003. Mindfully.org. 23 Nov. 2005. . "Alaskan pipeline's environmental impact studied." 2004. Argonne National Laboratory. 23 Nov.2005. . "Changes in the Well-being of Alaska Natives Since ANCSA." ALASKA REVIEW OF SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS. Institute of Social and Economic Research. University of Alaska Anchorage. Vol. XXI, No. 3, November 1984 Clifton, L.J. and B.J. Gallaway "History of Trans-Alaska Pipeline." 15 Feb. 2001. Argonne National Laboratory. 23 Nov. 2005.. Cowans, Chris. "History of oil fields in Alaska." 19 Nov. 1997. Chris Cowans. . Goldsmith, Scott and Alexandra Hill. "Alaska's Economy and Population, 1959-2020." Prepared for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. Institute of Social and Economic Research. March 1997. "History of Alaska." Wikipedia. 19 November 2005. Wikimedia. 23 Nov. 2005. . Lipski, Michael. "Researcher drawn to intersection of technology and environment." 1999. Smithsonian Institute. 23 Nov. 2005. . "Trans-Alaska Pipeline System." Wikipedia. 19 Nov. 2005. Wikimedia. 23 Nov. 2005. . Read More