Alberta Considers Tar Sands Pipeline to the Arctic’s Tuktoyaktuk

With Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Pipeline project still in the assessment phase and the Keystone XL pipeline proposal awaiting approval from down south, the government of Alberta is considering the possibility of sending its tar sands bitumen north via a pipeline through the Northwest Territories.

With a view to exporting the estimated $30 billion worth of oil left in the ground every year due to the transportation bottleneck, Alberta has hired Calgary consulting firm Canatec Associates International to determine the feasibility of transporting tar sands crude to the Arctic before sending it on tankers to Asian and European markets. The province has already invested $50,000 in the process.

This northern pipeline would move oil through the Mackenzie River Valley to Tuktoyaktuk, a town off the coast of the Northwest Territories.

A pipeline north through the Arctic Sea could prove more dangerous than any of the pipeline projects currently proposed to travel across Canada or down to the American Gulf coast. Shallow waters off the Alaskan coast would pose significant challenges, requiring either dredging of the waters or extending the pipeline offshore so tankers could load up.

With no deepwater port in the Arctic and little in the way of spill response infrastructure, an accident would be even more devastating to the fragile northern ecosystem.

The history of industrial disasters in the region—most infamous among them the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill—paints a clear picture of what’s at stake.

Royal Dutch Shell demonstrated earlier this year the risks associated with drilling in the Arctic when its Kulluk rig, working out in the Beaufort Sea, came loose from its escort tugboat on route to Seattle and ran aground on Sitkalidak Island in the Gulf of Alaska. The company also suffered embarrassment when a routine spill response test failed after an underwater spill containment dome was inexplicably 'crushed like a beer can' during the exercise.  

The US Environmental Protection Agency also deemed that both the Kulluk and a second drill ship, the Noble Discoverer, were in violation of air pollutant permits during the 2012 summer drilling season. Both vessels allowed the release of excess nitrogen oxides into the air.

After conducting an emergency review of Shell’s operations, the US Interior Department demanded the company demonstrate to both government and an independent third party that repairs had been made and adequate safety measures were in place. A spokesperson for Shell indicated the company would work to renegotiate the terms of its permits rather than work to meet the standards the EPA has set for it.

The Interior Department also placed blame on government agencies such as the Coast Guard for failing to anticipate problems, an assessment that has left some to question Canada's preparedness as the Alberta government looks northward.

At the moment, no rigorous spill-response legislation is in place to protect the Arctic waters. However, in February, Greenpeace obtained a leaked copy of the Arctic Council’s long-awaited spill response plan, set to be adopted at the Arctic nations meeting this month.

Ben Ayliffe, head of the Arctic Oil campaign for Greenpeace International, says the document requires so little of the countries who share the Arctic waters—Denmark, Greenland, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, the United States and Canada—as to be all but meaningless in terms of policy.

“No oil company has ever proven it can clean up an oil spill in ice. The agreement offers nothing whatsoever in terms of identifying how a company would stop and clean up a Deepwater Horizon-style disaster,” Ayliffe said in a press release. The document also failed to address how oil companies would be liable for damages should an oil spill occur. According to Ayliffe "serious questions" remain concerning how much input oil companies had in drafting the agreement.

The oil industry, long criticized for its disproportionate contribution to climate change, is now ironically reaping the benefits of new arctic drilling and oil transport opportunities emerging in the wake of unprecedented ice melt. With global temperatures steadily rising, routes in the far north that were once frozen year-round will soon be open during peak season.

A study by climate scientists at UCLA titled “New Trans-Arctic shipping routes navigable by mid-century” suggests rapid sea ice melt is causing major changes to Arctic geography. The two scientists combined multiple climate projection models and climate change scenarios and compared them to shipping routes.

The results predict new routes through the Northwest Passage, the Northern Sea Route and straight across the North Pole will be available between 2040 and 2049.