A Least-Cost Path Analysis of Crude Oil Pipeline Routing in Alaskas North Slope: 1002

Area in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

Proposed by Simon Dowling
March 6th, 2015

Project Background

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was created in 1980 as a product of the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act. In section 1002 of this act, Congress deferred a
decision regarding future management of the 1.5-million-acre coastal plain known as the 1002
area due to its potential oil yield. According to a USGS petroleum assessment of the 1002 area
made in 1998, the amount of recoverable oil is roughly about 7.7 billion barrels of an average
between 4.3 and 11.8.
In the case of oil exploration in the 1002 area, a pipeline would need to be constructed to
connect the coastal plain with the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. The development of ANWR oil
resources also could potentially extend the lifespan of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline which is
believed to be uneconomic to operate once oil throughput falls below 200,000 barrels per day. It
is currently anticipated that the daily throughput will approach 500,000 barrels a day in 2015
unless additional sources of oil are developed. GIS analysis will be used to identify an optimal
route for a potential pipeline using a wide array of factors. This project aims to create a potential
pipeline route using the least-cost path analysis tool in ArcMap. It is crucial that pipeline routing
is planned in an environmentally sound manner, offering a relatively low environmental impact
path. The path will be routed based on a suitability index created from multiple variables such as
water bodies, topography, stream crossings, populated areas, and wildlife. These factors are
based on a case study of a proposed optimal pipeline route executed by Peter M. Macharia and
Charles N. Mundia, 2014. Due to the immense length of the Trans Alaskan Pipeline System the
study area is contained within the North Slope borough to avoid processing and analyzing the
entire state of Alaska. After finding suitable areas in the study area, a path will be generated
showing the potential pipeline route in relation to the variables.

This least-cost path analysis will benefit oil companies and Alaskan governments in the
situation that the 1002 area is opened up for oil development. Any company looking for an
analysis that will offer an environmentally sound, cost effective route as a function of distance
could use this project.

Figure 1: Study Area

Data
In order to map out a suitable pipeline route, a cost raster must first be composed using
multiple variables. Certain variables must be considered when directly measuring cost. These
variables include the distance from source to destination, slope, soils, and proximity to populated
areas. In addition to these variables, environmental impacts must be considered. These will be
measured by proximity to native land, wetlands, and number of anadromous stream crossings.
Due to the unique geography of Alaskas North Slope, typical variables for suitable pipeline

routing are disregarded. For example factors such as vegetation and forestry are not considered
as the tree line is absent past the Arctic Circle.
Data availability for Alaskas North Slope has proven to be relatively limited as it is such
a remote region. In order to obtain the data required for the project I had to access various online
national data sets (USGS, WSS) and state data sets (Alaska DNR). All of the data was clipped to
a polygon shapefile of the North Slope.

Project Approach
The first step to answering the geospatial question at hand is to load the data into ArcMap
and project it in an appropriate projected coordinate system such as GCS_North_American_1983
Alaska Albers Equal Area Conic. A cost raster will then need to be generated containing all of
the variables. This process involves converting the data to raster and reclassing each data set
using a ranking system. For example, the pipeline route should be routed away from the
populated area for public safety in case of an accident. Also, a potential oil leakage can easily
contaminate water bodies and streams which are essential for the life cycle of anadromous fish.
The pipeline should be routed on surfaces with a relatively low slope. All datasets were
rasterized except for the DEM. Ranking schemes are based on a scale of 1-10 and 1-50, some
ranking criteria is based on existing literature such as slope while other variables are not. For
example, water bodies will either be classified as 1 (water bodies) or 10 (no water bodies). All
datasets that involve a proximity ranking from the pipeline such as distance from populated
areas, native lands, and anadromous steams will be rasterized using Euclidean distance to
complete the cost raster. The pipeline can now be mapped by utilizing the cost distance tool and

the cost path tool in ArcMap. In order to add variation to the model, multiple cost rasters will be
created using different cost values to reclassify the components. This will allow for two options
for the final pipeline route.

Figure 2: A simplified data flow model for the project

Expected Results
After performing the analysis I expect to have routed two options for a potential crude oil
pipeline connecting oil fields in the 1002 area to the Trans Alaskan Pipeline System. An optimal
route can be identified by comparing the results. I expect the route to remain relatively close to
the coastline, connecting to a point close to the source of the Trans Alaskan Pipeline System in
Prudhoe Bay. This is expected due to the mountain range of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
just south of the 1002 area.

The two routes will be displayed on a map showing the Trans Alaskan Pipeline System
and the 1002 area. I will also add a table showing a sensitivity index comparing the two routes
and how they differ as a result of the different values attached to them. I plan on creating a poster
to present the analysis containing the data flow model, value tables, and the final map.

Conclusion

Due to the large reserves of crude oil located in a section of the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge referred to as the 1002 area, U.S politicians have been vouching for oil exploration in
order to lower the global oil price and become independent from imports. In the unlikely
situation that the 1002 area is opened up for oil exploration, there will be a need for an optimal
oil pipeline that will balance cost, environmental, and social factors. This project will utilize
Geospatial Information System to develop a model incorporating topography, soil types, water
bodies, and other factors to successfully identify an optimal route. It is essential that crude oil
pipelines are routed in an environmentally sound manner, offering a relatively low
environmental impact path as well as cost efficient.

References

United States Geological Survey. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, 1002 Area, Petroleum
Assessment 1998, Including Economic Analysis.USGS Fact Sheet FS-028-01, Apr. 2001.

U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC Analysis of Crude Oil Production in the

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Energy Information Administration Office of Integrated
Analysis and Forecasting 20585 May 2008

M. Macharia, P., & N. Mundia, C. (n.d.). GIS Analysis and Spatial Modelling for Optimal
Oil Pipeline Route Location. A Case Study of Proposed Isiolo Nakuru Pipeline Route.