There may be another reason that Nussel and Ganske are confused about this.

There is a tremendous amount of natural gas in the Prudhoe Bay oil field
areas.  There are studies under way for building a natural gas pipeline from
these oil fields.

Among the paths being discussed are to run the pipeline from Prudhoe Bay,
across the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, into Canada, and then turn south
into the United States.

Another path would be to run the pipeline in the Arctic Ocean parallel to the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  There has already been a request for
permits to allow testing the earth's structure under the Arctic Ocean, to
determine if this route would be satisfactory.

There has been interest in following the existing oil pipeline from Prudhoe
Bay to Valdez.

There is an additional route that would start the pipeline from Prudhoe Bay,
along the existing oil pipeline, but turning east somewhere south of
Fairbanks, snaking into Canada, then turning south into the US.

The BIG OIL companies would like to link the US and Canada natural gas fields
on one pipeline.

The last word I had on this was shortly after Ganske appeared on Iowa Press.
At that time, the Sierra Club had not endorsed a route for the natural gas
pipeline.  They wanted to see the Environmental Impact Statement before they
endorsed any route.  However they did not agree with building any natural gas
pipeline through the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge nor one running in the
Arctic Ocean parallel to the Refuge.

I know Ganske is aware of this pipeline discussion.  He referred to it on his
Iowa Press appearance.

Pam Mackey-Taylor