Dakota Access faces unclear path to completion

  • Market: Crude oil, Oil products
  • 06/12/16

The developers of the Dakota Access crude pipeline are entering uncharted legal territory and the potential for long delays after President Barack Obama's administration recent decision to block completion of the 470,000 b/d project.

The US Army Corps of Engineers blocked the project on 4 December by denying it the easement it needs to install pipeline under Lake Oahe, a dammed portion of the Missouri river in North Dakota. The agency now plans to conduct an exhaustive review called an environmental impact statement before deciding whether to grant the easement.

Energy Transfer Partners and Sunoco Logistics Partners are developing the $3.8bn project, which would transport crude from the Bakken formation into Illinois. The companies last month told a judge that the corps' delay in issuing the easement have cost them $450mn. Further delays could threaten the project's survival, they said, because it has contracts with nine shippers to bring the pipeline into service by 1 January.

But the corps' latest actions have thrown up obstacles that – barring some intervention by Congress - could take time to resolve and have created new opportunities for litigation from pipeline opponents, legal experts say, even with a new administration in the White House that supports the project. President-elect Donald Trump wants the 1,172-mile (1,886km) pipeline to be constructed, his transition team says.

The more exhaustive environmental review, if completed, would need to include a consideration of alternative pipeline routes such as an earlier proposed route near Bismarck, North Dakota. The new review also would have to discuss the treaty rights of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, which opposes the pipeline, and the risks an oil spill could cause to the tribe's water and fishing rights.

Completing that environmental review is likely to take six months to a year because of the amount of time it would take to develop, put out for comment and finalize, consultancy group ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said. That review would not preclude the potential for approving the existing easement.

The Trump administration could halt preparation of the new environmental review relatively quickly, by reaching a finding that an earlier corps' review of the pipeline was already sufficient. But there are potential pitfalls to this approach because environmentalists and the Standing Rock Sioux tribe could bring lawsuits to challenge that decision.

"It is going to be a minefield. They are going to have to walk pretty carefully, because they would have to justify a decision to reverse action," environmental group the Natural Resources Defense Council land and wildlife director Sharon Buccino said.

Another option for the Trump administration would be to quickly complete the more exhaustive environmental review of the project before issuing an easement, which pipeline opponents could also challenge in court. Buccino said there could be political costs if the new administration tries to rush through approval of the project, which has prompted large protests.

Dakota Access' developers, aware of the delays associated with the new environmental review, yesterday asked a federal court to find that the corps months ago already authorized the pipeline and that construction under Lake Oahe can proceed.

The corps has acknowledged it authorized the water crossing on 25 July under a century-old law called the Rivers and Harbors Act, but it says the project still needs another easement issued under the Mineral Leasing Act. Dakota Access argues the notion it still needs a separate approval from the corps is a "fiction" used to justify a "raw political calculation" to block the pipeline.

Congress could try to pass legislation that would deem the easement approved, which might insulate the pipeline from further legal challenges. Lawmakers tried that approach with the 830,000 b/d Keystone XL crude pipeline project, but they ultimately were unable to force Obama to approve the project.

Even if the developers of Dakota Access secure the required regulatory approvals, crews still will need 90-120 days to drill under Lake Oahe and install pipeline and then bring the pipeline into service. That timeline assumes legal attempts to halt the project are unsuccessful and that protesters do not impede construction.


Sharelinkedin-sharetwitter-sharefacebook-shareemail-share

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News
28/03/24

Crane barge arriving at Baltimore bridge tonight

Crane barge arriving at Baltimore bridge tonight

Houston, 28 March (Argus) — The first major piece of equipment capable of beginning to clear the blocked Port of Baltimore, Maryland, is expected to arrive onsite tonight. The Chesapeake 1000 crane barge, capable of lifting 1,000 short tons with its a 231ft-long boom, is expected to arrive at the site of the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge near Baltimore at 11pm ET on 28 March, the US Coast Guard (USCG) told Argus . Both the crane and the tug pulling it, Atlantic Enterprise , are owned by Donjon Marine. It is currently the only crane on route to the collapsed bridge, the USCG said. There is no official timetable for the reopening of the port after the Interstate 695 highway bridge over the Patapsco River was hit in the early hours of 26 March by a container ship and collapsed, with the debris and ship blocking the waterway. The operator of the ship, Maersk, has contracted with marine salvage company Resolve Marine to refloat the vessel and remove it from the area, according to the USCG. It is not clear who has contracted for the Chesapeake 1000. Despite the inbound crane, it could take weeks or even months to clear debris and reopen the waterway under the collapsed bridge according to a engineering professor at the nearby Johns Hopkins University. By Nathan Risser Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Read more
News

'Weeks, months' to reopen Baltimore waterway: professor


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

'Weeks, months' to reopen Baltimore waterway: professor

Houston, 28 March (Argus) — It could take weeks or even months to clear debris and reopen the waterway under the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, Maryland, according to a engineering professor at the nearby Johns Hopkins University. As of Wednesday, there was no official timetable for the reopening of the Port of Baltimore after a major highway bridge over the Patapsco River was hit in the early hours of 26 March by a container ship and collapsed, with the debris and ship blocking the waterway. "I'd be shocked if it's weeks, but I don't think it'll take even a year" to clear the waterway, structural engineer and Johns Hopkins professor Benjamin Schafer said Wednesday. He expects the rebuild of the bridge to take significantly longer. "I've lived through quite a few civil infrastructure projects and they're rarely less than 10 years. So I think that's what we're looking at," Schafer said. He noted that it took five years to build the original Francis Scott Key Bridge and seven years to repair the Sunshine Skyway Bridge in Tampa Bay, Florida, after a similar collapse in 1980. Still, "this is definitely not a national supply chain crisis," John Hopkins operations management professor Tinglong Dai said Wednesday. "The effect will be mostly local, mostly minimal and mostly temporary." The bridge collapse and port closure is also unlikely to trigger a global supply chain crisis, he said. The Port of Baltimore is an important but "niche" port specializing in automobile imports and exports, Dai added. "The supply chain has evolved...I have already seen a lot of rerouting happening." Automakers started adjusting their supply routes away from the top port for US vehicle imports the day of the collapse, including General Motors, Ford and Mercedes-Benz. Baltimore is also a major port for coal exports, which may start to shift to terminals to the south in Hampton Roads, Virginia. Freight rates for ships that carry coal could see increases in global markets Other commodities like asphalt and caustic soda that move through the port will see challenges, while organic agriculture imports may see less problems due to seasonal flows. By Nathan Risser Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Baltimore probe includes potential contaminated fuel


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

Baltimore probe includes potential contaminated fuel

New York, 28 March (Argus) — Federal authorities are examining whether the containership that crashed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, Maryland, was burning contaminated marine fuel at the time of the incident. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said it will collect a sample of the fuel on board the 116,851-dwt container vessel Dali as part of its investigation into why the ship lost power and hit the bridge support early on 26 March, taking down the span. "That sample will be taken, and we will analyze the quality, any sort of contaminants, we will look at viscosity," NTSB chair Jennifer Homendy said this week. "That will be part of our investigation." Shipboard power is generally generated by turbines connected to the same engines driving propulsion. There are a number of issues related to fuel that could have led to a loss of power on the ship, according to Wajdi Abdmessih, chief executive at Seahawk Services, a marine fuel testing company based in New Jersey. The fuel on the ship could have been contaminated, as was the case last year when contaminated very low-sulphur fuel oil was found on a number of ships fueld through a Houston, Texas, bunkering operation, or it could have been a compatibility issue with the vessel's engine, where the fuel was not optimized for the equipment. "If the vessel switches between different types of fuels, compatibility and stability issues could occur, which may cause a problem with the engine," Abdmessih said. "Unstable fuel could cause increased sludging and high sediment, which could clog the filter and cause fuel starvation and engine downturns." Singapore-based Synergy Marine Group, which manages Dali , said it is taking part of this investigation but declined to comment possible causes of the accident, including possible fuel contamination. The pilots on board the vessel lost control because of a loss of propulsion, according to the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA), which is assisting in the investigation because Dali was sailing under the Singapore flag. An issue with the ship's propulsion and auxiliary machinery was discovered during its June 2023 inspection in San Antonio, Chile , according to Equasis, a vessel information database. The problem involved the vessel's gauges and thermometers, according to the data. Its most recent inspection was in September 2023, but there are no indications of issues from the inspection. The vessel's next inspection was due in June 2024, the MPA said. By Luis Gronda Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Stalling climate finance an energy security risk : WRI


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

Stalling climate finance an energy security risk : WRI

London, 28 March (Argus) — The "best bet" to achieving global energy security is through mitigation funding and multilateral cooperation, according to the World Resources Institute (WRI). WRI highlighted that governments are funding more domestic renewable energy projects but have increased oil and gas production in the name of "energy security" at home in the years following the Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The recent rebrand of energy transition funding to energy security funding has allowed some developed nations to justify domestic oil and gas licences and drag their feet on multilateral financial commitments. This is causing "real worry" among climate-vulnerable developing nations, WRI chief executive Ani Dasgupta said. He said that although the initial "shock" to the world's energy markets after the invasion of Ukraine "quickly went away", it has triggered "real worry among poorer countries that when push comes to shove, it won't be an even game, or have a fair outcome." Developing countries have long complained about the lack of access to climate funding. Richer nations have only recently met the $100bn/yr target in climate finance to developing countries agreed in 2009, while discussions on setting a new climate finance goal for 2025 at Cop 29 in Baku in November could prove difficult. President of the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville) Denis Sassou-Nguesso said last year that the $100bn/yr in climate financing to developing countries promised by rich countries "never reached us", adding that the annual UN Cop climate conferences have become little more than a talking shop. "Just after the invasion of Ukraine, every country started to think about energy security," Dasgupta said. "In theory, good things could have happened, countries could have concluded that their best bet to getting energy security is by going renewable". But it was not the case in key consumer countries or regions, Dasgupta pointed out. China bought the majority of Russian gas following the EU's withdrawal, he said, and has since upped production at coal-fired power stations despite an "extraordinary" acceleration towards renewables set for 2023-28, according to Paris-based energy watchdog IEA . In Europe, the UK and Norway continue to award new oil and gas licences . "In the US, the fossil fuel lobby argues that the best route to energy security is to invest more in fossil fuels". But the best route is to invest in more renewables, he said. "Even if the US produces a large amount of oil and gas, it is still a traded commodity, and so you have to pay a price for it that is set globally." The US special presidential co-ordinator for energy security Amos Hochstein has also suggested in September that a widening climate finance gap could ultimately threaten global security. "We have seen the percentage of dollars spent on the energy transition outside the OECD, in developing and middle income countries actually go down instead of up…" By Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

ACT to partner with LR, Wartsila, and UECC on CNSL


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

ACT to partner with LR, Wartsila, and UECC on CNSL

London, 28 March (Argus) — Dutch supplier ACT Group is collaborating with classification society Lloyd's Register, Finnish engine manufacturer Wartsila, and Norwegian shipping firm United European Car Carriers (UECC) on the development and evaluation of cashew nut shell liquid (CNSL) as a biofuel in marine biodiesel blends. ACT confirmed the launch of a CNSL-based biofuel called "FSI.100", which has gone through extensive engine testing with various blend combinations. The CNSL-based biofuel has now received approval from engine manufactures to be blended as a 30pc component with marine gasoil (MGO) to form a marine biodiesel blend for the purpose of further sea trials. ACT confirmed that the FSI.100 product will benefit from lower acidity, and there is potential for the product to be compatible for blending with fuel oil. CNSL is an advanced biodiesel feedstock, making it a more appealing and price competitive option to buyers compared with other biodiesel feedstocks. The development follows a report by Lloyd's Register fuel oil bunkering analysis and advisory service (FOBAS) that pointed to a correlation between engine fuel pump and injector-related damage in vessels and the presence of "unestablished" CNSL in the utilised marine fuels. By Hussein Al-Khalisy Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more