Tonight Is Another Big Night, For Those Who Care About Alaska’s Economic Future!
|
The Government Gas Pipeline Commentary by Dave Harbour Late yesterday, we followed the Senate Finance We have always supported the concept of this project as an insurance policy for Interior and South Central Alaska electric power and space heating consumers. This is because Cook Inlet gas supplies are dangerously low, a fact exacerbated by a regulatory decision six years ago (i.e. which has likely cost ratepayers over $.5 billion in unnecessary natural gas expense since then.) Enstar, the local gas distributor, has worked hard to safeguard its customers from gas shortages. It has aggressively pursued more gas supply contracts, built a gas storage facility and investigated new gas supplies–from Prudhoe Bay to potential gas imports. Still, during a cold winter the actual deliverability of supply could push available supplies beyond the breaking point. Every year, the threat of a gas shortage grows. The AGDC project involves a 737 mile pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to Southcentral Alaska, after winding its way by Fairbanks. The lion’s share of its right of way work is done and its engineering work is moving steadily toward a potential ‘open season’ wherein those interested in the gas can bid on pipeline capacity to move purchased gas. While a government owned pipeline concept is controversial, running out of natural gas is unacceptable. If sufficient new gas reserves are proven to exist in Southcental Alaska, the AGDC project could be terminated. But if there is no AGDC insurance policy and more gas is not found, the old cliché about, "freezing in the During the hearing yesterday, several witnesses distinguished themselves. The HB 4 sponsors are House Speaker Mike Chenault (NGP Photo, above) and Representative Mike Hawker (NGP Photo with Rena Delbridge). Hawker thanked Senators for their complete hearing of the issues while Chenault described the compelling need for the project to safeguard citizens. Hawker’s staff executive, Rena Delbridge, artfully briefed the committee on all current issues related to the bill before them. Frank Richards, representing AGDC, offered highly credible, technical briefings and responses to questions. As our readers know, we have followed Arctic gas pipeline issues for many decades. We have seen many projects come and go. We briefly worked with AGDC and continue to believe that the project is closer to becoming reality than any of its cousins for several reasons:
This is not a case of a heavy handed government saying, "We are going to create a gas pipeline bureaucracy come heck or high water". Rather, this is a case of government exercising its proper role of protecting citizens. Our hat is off to the dedicated public officials who have developed the vision, protected and remained focused on the mission and worked so hard to so successfully overcome political technical and financial obstacles. At this writing, HB 4 hasn’t received final approval. We expect it will. When it is the law of the land, the citizens will have been well served. |
|
To NGP Readers: Here are Consumer Energy Alliance’s earlier comments on the EIS, for your reference. CEA’s general concern is that the proposed mitigation measures will limit OCS exploration activity without any significant benefits for the local marine mammals. NMFS should focus on cooperative mitigation measures with companies – such as Shell’s efforts to suspend operations in the Beaufort during whaling season – as opposed to broadly limiting activity. Note: this is the kind of comment opportunity that badly needs elected officials from throughout Alaska submitting comments for the record. Otherwise, the record will not be balanced nor will it reflect the opinion of Alaska’s elected leaders. -dh |
Click for more information here. -dh
dark", comes to mind.
Leave A Comment