BP Shutdown of Prudhoe Bay Prompts Energy Policy Criticism

After Alaska Disruption, Governors Criticize National Energy Policy

Some criticized poor federal oversight, others, environmentalists who fight pipeline construction and drilling.

Last night I watched a news report featuring interviews with Lois Epstein from Cook Inlet Keeper and Steve Marshall of BP.

Ms. Epstein pointed out the state's reluctance to regulate pipeline construction and maintenance, due to its heavy dependence on oil revenue, and that in this case, because the BP lines met certain criteria (these have got to be 'internal' lines, carrying crude oil to the trans-Alaska pipeline or something like that) including not being near commercially navigable waters, that created a regulatory gap such that neither state nor federal rules were covering this pipeline adequately.

Of course that doesn't mean BP consciously built bad pipelines because of this gap, or anything like that. It's not in their commercial interest to build stuff designed to carry oil and have them fail to carry oil. But we are talking about lines that were built in the 1970's, and a) things age; and b) understandings of the impact of a pipeline and how best to construct and maintain them is going to advance with time.

The particularly troubling remark Ms. Epstein made is that the cause of corrosion in this case was unknown, which means (these are my words) this is and was an accident waiting to happen. Mr. Marshall suggested microbial corrosion, and noted that this is a highly corrosive environment, which doesn't seem to fit with his earlier description of the "dry crude" this particular pipe was carrying as being "low-risk", (and hence having no need for some of the more strenuous checks available).