Natural gas bullet line a critical need in Fairbanks, borough mayor says
Published Sunday, October 19, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!FAIRBANKS — Fairbanks’ need for a cleaner, less expensive energy source has reached a critical level, Fairbanks North Star Borough Mayor Jim Whitaker said.
Natural gas, abundant in the state’s far north, seems the most promising solution. That gas, Whitaker said, is crucial to maintaining economic stability, securing the future of Eielson Air Force Base, and reining in energy prices.
But it’s time to stop waiting for someone else to build a gas pipeline and time that Alaskans start looking after their own interests.
“We, more than any other community in the United States of America, are affected by the cost of energy,” Whitaker said. “Our winters are longer, colder and darker, and our fuel is more expensive. Put all those together, and nobody has as much at stake in this than we as a community.”
The natural gas market has changed significantly since the state granted a license to TransCanada to build a line under the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act. Lower 48 markets aren’t so hungry for new energy, thanks to new gas fields coming into play and increased supplies keeping a lid on prices. Whitaker lacks confidence that the large-diameter line from Alaska’s North Slope to Alberta and American markets will, in fact, be built.
But in the meantime, Alaska’s in-state needs are growing, and liquefied natural gas is selling for top-dollar prices in Asian markets, offering a financial base for the construction of an in-state bullet line.
“What better way to invest in ourselves than to provide ourselves with some reasonably priced, secure, stable source of energy, in much the way the Lower 48 is doing,” Whitaker said. “We’ve got a real public policy decision to make. Are we going to hope that somebody does that — someday, maybe — or are we going to do it?”
Exports coupled with in-state use could offer economies of scale that make construction of a bullet line feasible.
“It’s clear that regardless of whether or not a large-diameter line is built through Canada, we still have the imperative to meet our own needs,” Whitaker said. “We are going to insist that a solution not be imposed upon us, but rather, that we seriously consider what is in our best interest.”
Jim Dodson, president of Fairbanks Economic Development Corp., agreed the situation is at a critical juncture.
Without a reasonable, secure energy source, the outlook could be dire, he warned. New businesses probably won’t eye Fairbanks as a location, discretionary dollars could vanish from consumers’ pockets and businesses could cut jobs to keep the bills paid.
“In 10 to 15 years, I think we’re going to see Alaska, not only Interior Alaska but also rural Alaska, change significantly in ways we didn’t anticipate and that I really don’t think we want,” Dodson said. “It’s going to impact Anchorage, also. They are the economic hub, they are the supply hub and they are the transportation hub of Alaska. As economic activity slows down in Interior and rural Alaska, economic activity will slow down there also.”
The two are hoping that a new task force being launched this week by FEDC’s think tank, the Interior Issues Council, will help line out the quickest, best way to get gas to Fairbanks.
The process will require a close look at the links between four key issues and an evaluation of how to solve those problems economically, with full consideration of market forces, Whitaker said.
Those issues are air quality, economics, energy and stability, Whitaker said. Air quality and energy are already problems, and without solutions, the area’s economy and stability could be hurt. Air quality, in particular, could shut down any future large projects requiring an Environmental Impact Study — including housing F-35 fighters at Eielson Air Force Base or increases in the number of soldiers at Fort Wainwright.
The F-35s are critical to secure Eielson’s future. A closure of Eielson would cut 12 percent from the area’s economy overnight, Whitaker said.
If air quality problems and high energy costs are not solved, the Interior could seriously suffer.
“We could destabilize; we could have growth-inhibiting results,” Whitaker said. “But, we also recognize that there are solutions.”
Market realities point to natural gas, he said. The particulars of various projects, as well as advantages and potential problems, will be discussed at the task force meetings.
Whitaker and Dodson hope people educate themselves about the various proposals, bring new ideas to the table, then make themselves heard. Community support could pressure the state and federal governments to allocate financial and natural resources to a solution.
“I want Fairbanks to start weighing in on state issues,” Dodson said. “If we sit back on this in-state gas line and wait until somebody else does something, it may work for us and it may not.”
Contact staff writer Rena Delbridge at 459-7518.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
The state can build a bullet line OR build a gas fired generator on the north slope and set up a power line that would connect with the Railbelt Energy Grid. A feasibility study needs to be done that would tell us which of those two possibilities would cost less and produce low cost energy sooner. HVDC power lines can send power down from the north slope with little line loss and less cost than conventional power transmission lines. If a bullet line is built, then we need to make sure we have a take-off point at the Yukon River so that we can get CNG or LNG down the Yukon on barges to deliver gas to the Yukon/Kuskokwim villages and along the Northern and Southern coastal communities, including the Aleutians and Southeast.
HVDC isn't appropriate for lines with multiple take off points. Sounds great on paper, but three-phase AC is the way to go.
I think a pipeline would be a better idea than electrical lines. That is some of the worst territory in the world to have big huge towers, with horrible soil conditions to avalanches and extremely poor accessibility.... and here we are with an already existing right of way for a pipeline...
=====================
http://www.peninsulaclarion.com/stories/...
Heinze also spoke of the potential of creating a petrochemical industry based in Alaska when the two pipelines finally connect. The gas coming off the slope has a much higher ethane content than the gas from the inlet. Ethane can be converted into an inert pellet, forming the basis for plastics. ANGDA is co-sponsoring a conference in Anchorage with world leaders in the petrochemical industry next April to look further into the industry's potential in the state.
"All of a sudden we're going to have this huge supply of ethane available," Heinze said, "Believe it or not, Alaska could go from not even being on the map to number one."
=====================
The estimated installed cost of the Big Steel Whopper is $4000-$5000 per running foot just for the pipe (and rapidly growing due to the wrecked economy).
HOW QUICKLY CAN PLASTIC GASLINES BE MOVING GAS TOWARD FAIRBANKS??
...BEFORE THE END OF 2009 (quicker if you have frostbite)
There have been HDPE/PEX plastic 300psi 24" water mains that have been installed for as cheap as $50 per running foot in the lower48.
(big ranchers who have a friend who has an extrusion machine)
Plastic Gasline comes in many different styles, but the simplest style is almost identical to plastic waterline polypipe.
The cost of the poly-pellet to make the gasline is @ $2.50/lb.
[until Alaskans can get our own ethane online to be processed into polyethylene-pellet]
If Alaskans invested in owning their own pipe extrusion machines the cost of plastic-gasline (and everything else you can make, ie: poly-kayaks] will be surprisingly inexpensive.
How Can I Help ??
1. I can consult and manage a little bit.
2. I can quickly arrange for plastic-gasline extrusion machines to be airfreighted to FBX and ANC.
WHAT'S THE QUICKEST WAY TO PASS GOBS OF GAS ??
(the quickest way is to buy yourself a bobtail LPG-propane truck and drive it to Prudhoe)
[the next quickest is to buy a bargain LPG-tankership>> http://www.shiplink.info/contents1.asp?r... ]
.....The quickest pipe-trick is to dump into the snow a temporary 4" or 8" extension from the 1100psi fuelgasline at Galbraith over the hump to Chandalar Shelf. This little project will pay for itself in a few months time if it's used to ship some big batches of LPG-propane over the hump. It can also be used to ship 250psi CNG to run a small powerplant in the Upper Koyukuk. The temporary above-ground gasline will present very little firehazard in this location (especially during winter). It can be bermed under snow or gravel to keep it out of sight from goofy-jokers with guns. Leaks are readily stopped with plastic-gasline up to 24" using the Pinch-Method. 8" and smaller gasline can easily have radio or fiberoptic activated stomper valves placed in critical areas. Sizes up to 24" can be deployed as fast as 30,000 feet per day, using 1 FastFusion rig and a crew of 5 workers.
[ok, we'll hire 100 super-stuporvisors too, a dozen from every union-hall ]
There are plastic gaslines that are still in service since being installed in the late 1950's. None have shown signs of rust yet.
All Across Alaska,
More gas can be passed faster and much-much less costly using plastic, not steel pipe.. even if you wanna move 4 billion cubic feet per day.
What's Anadarko gonna use for their Foothills gas-gathering network from all of the small pools? Steel? pffft!
The HDPE system architecture will provide a more sustainable diversified economy from Kaktovik, to Kotzebue, to Kodiak, to Ketchikan.
Go to Ester Dome or Halbgerber lookout and see where the air pollution is being generated. Converting the areas power plants to natural gas will put the EPA on hold for a long time. Autos are no longer the big culprits. First the plants then home heating, converting to gas would be a big boon for Fairbanks.
Using plastic gaslines you won't have to wait 10^+ years to get gas in Fairbanks.
It will start as a trickle in 2009, then it will be a 4bcf torrent in 2013.
This can be done by totally ignoring Juneau.
The best thing Juneau does is "jealousy" (with a few exceptions,maybe),
if real action starts happening Juneau will be chasing after it.
"We must follow them because we are their leaders!!!"
With a cross-linked multi-pipe gasline network moving gas from N-slope to Fairbanks there will never be a 100% interruption in gas flow.
If gas is moving southward across the BrooksRange thru every little pass, Carter Pass to Arctic Village, or down the Noatak to Kotzebue, the whole state will flourish.
Plastic-gaslines can be made to totally disappear into the wilderness without the need for access roads to be built.
Anchorage and Juneau will get gas much quicker using plastic-gaslines too. Cook Inlet underground storage can be refilled by 2015.
Building 2-dozen 24" hdpe-gaslines will still be cheaper than building one big steel whopper.
300psi HDPE softpipe can be made up to 63" diameter.
All this can be done without any long term bank financing.
Or we can buy Abramovich's 26-foot tunneling machine and bore a huge gas tunnel to Cook Inlet for cheaper than $40billion.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...
Whitaker and Dotson, now theres a pair , together they might be able to tie their own shoes. I will sure sleep better knowing I am going to be taken care of by these "EXPERTS". Is this really the best we can do?
For those who have short memories, go back and look at the new papers before the pipeline was build, all about CHEAP fuel, it will all sound very much like this talk.. Wake up there will not be any CHEAP fuel from now on,, we are drug addicts and have proven we will pay what ever it takes to feed our "habits".
I shut my Natural Gas furnace off (only use as a backup to coal) and installed a wood/coal boiler. I now burn coal due to the high cost of NG, and I don't see it coming down in price anytime soon. I want to see the NG line built now, not later. Even if we started now it would be at least five years before gas was coming into Fairbanks, other than by truck. Very expensive way to transport. Once again all I see is peoples lips moving, but no action. I'm starting to think the population of the borough do not care what is being proposed, they are against it, unless it puts money in there pocket for a new snow machine, or truck. No wonder the rest of the state looks at the FNSB as a bunch of negative thinkers. Let's just let the state pay for everything. I believe you call that socialism! I need more coffee!!!
Do you really think the Anchorage controlled legislature is going to turn over billions for Fairbanks advantage. I guess Whitaker isn't going to get help from Obama. Must be his three minute speech didn't work. I for one hope this town's population decreased by two, Whitaker and Dobson. They both have done nothing but collected big paychecks, insured their tax funded retirement and left the community in worse shape than it was before them. Watch who the "experts' are and how much they get paid. Another scheme for the good old boys club.
There will be a meeting at the Westmark for all interested this Wednesday at 8 am. It will be chaired by Mayor Whitaker and UAF Chancellor Brian Rogers.
The subject will be an In-State Bullet Line.
Enstar took five legislators down the Haul Road. We flew to Deadhorse and drove down over a 2 day period, overnighting in Coldfoot.
They have since issued an invitation to their Enstar boardroom on 10/24 and 10/31 to all legislators from across the state to discuss their proposal for an in-state bullet line.
At this time they are asking for nothing from the state of Alaska.
They are capable of self-funding their project at a cost of $3.3 to 4.0 billion. When full, this pipeline would generate a tariff of $2.50 (approx) to Enstar per m/cf.
Fairbanksans would pay for the negotiated cost of gas, either from Anandarko from Gubik or Conoco from Prudhoe + the Enstar tariff + the local distribution tariff to FNG (Fairbanks Natural Gas). The cost of natural gas on Friday was around $6.75 + $2.50 to Enstar + $2.00 to FNG = $11 to $12 per m/cf.
Fairbanks is presently paying $22.91 per m/cf to FNG. That is the equivalent of $3.75 per gallon of heating oil.
A natural gas pipeline price would fix our heating costs at around $2.00 per gallon of heating oil equivalent for many years to come. It would allow Fairbanks to plan for a long-term, stable future.
Enstar would allow for Fairbanks to gasify as a community over a 5 year period. GVEA would see its electricity price decline by 30% if we began burning gas instead of diesel to push the turbines.
Changing the feedstock at Flint Hills from crude oil to natural gas would lower the cost of production of gasoline.
Natural gas would lower the cost of operating Ft Wainwright and Eielson and assure us of a long relationship with the military.
State and borough funds would be set up to offer low interest conversion loans to get gas lines to many neighborhoods that consider themselves too far away to benefit from natural gas.
When mature, the Fairbanks market will be almost as large as the Anchorage market because of what is called "degree days."
An in-state bullet line faces many challenges, including supply and adequate demand--so that the tariff is not unreasonable for the initial users, but we must transition from a diesel economy to a natural gas economy. It is essential to the growth and security of Fairbanks. This isn't a scheme for the "good ol' boys", this is a survival strategy for our community.
We need to be together on this issue. This isn't about a giant line to Valdez with a huge LNG effort; this is a 20" line from the North Slope thru Fairbanks to the Cook Inlet, requiring Fairbanks, replacement gas for Anchorage (the depleted Cook Inlet field), the re-start of Agrium fertilizer plant in Kenai and a modest expansion of the export license for Conoco to Japan.
We need an alignment of interests.
Distant Thunder, Are you going to be present at this meeting Jay's talking about? I have always thought you're ideas were intresting!
Jay, Did you read any of Distant Thunder's messages from the past 6 months concerning plastic pipe, ethane, and a quicker timeframe for applicaition? What are your thoughts on the matter?? Can we expedite these projects without the involvement of Juneau/Anchorage politics? Can we HONESTLY believe that we will receive "cheap" gas after say 10 years of operation? OR are we going to be held hostage by private gas distributors in the same manner we are currently being held hostage by our local gas stations?
http://aprn.org/2008/09/08/could-a-plast...
Well, if I keep hammering away at this rusty old nut pretty soon it's gonna crack.
http://s281.photobucket.com/albums/kk209...
gotta try to grab more time to improve the slideshow..
it's had over 100 page views in the past 24hrs...
hmmm,some people have a plastic pipe fetish?
I'm open to suggestions for how to improve that silly little slideshow...
something simple that a crippled old quasimodo cyclops can do?
This is the sweetest music to my ears. All this should have happened years ago but now is just fine. The sooner the better. A system of temporary smaller plastic line can be used and reused other places when steel prices stabilize and steel becomes available at the right price. Or not - plastic may well be the way to go. The decision to do it and the bringing in all the players and then work it all out. There should be a lot of players. Native Corporations, Enstar, all the utilities, the Permanent Funds, city governments all over the state, the military, just to name a few. All of us Alaskans who want to invest should have a means to do so as well. This is the most important thing this state can do for itself and now is the time.
Just do it.
Hi Zeb..
I'm old and retireded living outside near Seattle.
[well, some days I feel that way]
I doubt I'll make the meeting at the Westmark unless you send a posse to come and get me.
Actually it's a coin toss as to where I'll be traveling next.
The best direction for me to travel next might be Asia where most of the plastic-pipe extrusion machines are being made nowdays.
The internet can keep us all hooked up worldwide via conference calls with SKYPE.
I already have an office/factory in China where the extrusion machines can be tested for quality control and containerized to be shipped airfreight to Alaska.
The only mode of gas-transport that steel-pipe is still useful for is moving methane in dense-liquid phase at high pressure.
Ethane can be shipped across the state in simple HDPE/PEX plastic-pipe during the cold part of winter. It can be shipped in all temperatures in RTP-pipe like Soluforce.
http://www.soluforce.net/
...or it can be shipped in slightly modified LPG-tankerships.
http://www.shiplink.info/contents1.asp?r...
There's many different plastic-gasline manufacturers in the lower48 who will jump at the chance to dominate this market, all I have to do is pick up the phone...
but I've been holding out hoping that Real Alaskans will step up to the plate and take a swing at this, otherwise this industry will have it's profit-center out yonder like every other big-player in Alaska-Biz.
.........flash/rumble
Maybe Whitaker's buddy Obama will build it. Oh no, he wouldn't do that it would require drilling some wells.
sosorry has the right idea and must be reading my mind..
this is an all inclusive decentralized robust energy infrastructure architecture.
Plastic-gasline and Fiberoptic go together like pie-&-icecream.
Gas & Broadband everywhere.
Gasline Safety Management is backboned through fiberoptic-SCADA, plus fiberoptic makes it possible to operate digital-control sales anywhere along the gasline network where there's a T-tap.
T-taps are easy to install, and will provide ATM-broadband LPG Card-Gas service anywhere there is demand for a point of sale.
Jay, I would like you to answer zeb's questions. I think a lot of us, through these last several months of discussing this, want to know.
I don't think that we should dismiss a very large gas-fired generator on the north slope. The technology to do this is being worked on to lover line loss and build a transmission line far less expensive than current transmission lines in use today. See the following:
From Earle Ausman, Engineer:
We certainly agree with your comments that Rural Alaska has a transportation problem which causes energy to be very expensive. We are currently developing the technology and systems to provide a much lower cost system of intertieing energy resources and rural communities together using a special single wire Direct Current system. We have been funded by the Denali Commission for Phase I of this project and since receiving good reports from our key inverter technology supplier, we can now request Phase II funding. This Phase consists of building equipment and the special transmission system and testing to verify designs. Phase III of the project will be a 25 mile interconnection between Mt. Village and St. Marys.
It may be of interest to you that a HVDC powerline from the North Slope to Fairbanks and beyond can transport the electricity made from natural gas at a lower price than a gas pipeline. As a result, the bullet pipeline will not be required if its major purpose is to provide gas to generate electricity. Suppose the main gas line is delayed or not built at all and the base value of the Prudhoe gas is set by its being stranded. A generation plant built on the North Slope will have the following advantages. A gas conditioning plant to remove the CO2 from the gas is not needed as gas with CO2 can be used directly in a gas turbine plant.
Turbines are more efficient and can generate more electricity because of the lower ambient temperature of the Slope. Exhaust CO2 gas can be sequestered back into the field and used to extract more oil.
There will be no carbon tax on this plant. The DC power line can have branches into the central Alaska's river systems and connect to regional lower voltage single wire DC grids such as we are developing. It is potentially feasible for electricity to be so inexpensive as to be used for heat in buildings, and perhaps to provide fuel for vehicles and boats as hydrogen.
Distributed generation sources are more robust than a single source. It is easy to envision many rural resources and systems feeding into a large Alaskan grid. The current requirements point toward using gas for the long term the use of renewables distributed over a grid will allow Alaska to emulate Norway that generates 95% of its electricity with hydro.
If I can answer questions please contact me.
Earle Ausman, P.E., President Polarconsult Alaska Inc.
1503 West 33rd Ave., Suite 310, Anchorage, Alaska
907-258-2420
I have spent most of the summer in South Dakota and they have already started the natural line months ago.
They will be conecting with the line from Canada.
They seem to be taken charge of there end with no delay.I can not understand why We dont follow.
We need to Start Now!
Gas is a great adjunct to oil, but hydro-electric power from the Sustina dam is better. A plus is the road infrastrcuture and associated commerce along the new road. Screw the gas, build the dam.
Oh, I forgot to add Mayor Whitaker to the **** list when the governor gets back to town. He's with good company, Mayor's Weinstein and Bothelo, of Ketchikan and Juneau respectively. But maybe Mr. Whitaker will get an national appointment too. He'd be my choice of the three for doing something in DC with the incoming administration.
DT you are so right on and so is Andora. My apologies if my positions and statements in any way taint your respective messages gentlemen. I think when DT was speaking of Juneau, he meant the political processes that are perceived to occur there - they do at least from January til April starting this year. But I think Anchorage or Southcentral are a better term coined for the political process. Really nothing like that remaining in Juneau outside of legislative session dates.
Juneau has enough problems on its own without being tainted with the political process. And Southeast inclusive of Juneau wants a portion of the state's natural gas.
Love the plastic pipe idea DT, we have a few "energy corridors" we must put into place. We'll gladly have a spur from Southcentral across the Gulf of Alaska to Yakutat, Haines, Hoonah Juneau, Angoon, Kake, Petersburg, Wrangell, Ketchikan and Prince of Wales Island, oh yeah and Sitka too! Or, we can take delivery coming from Fairbanks through Yukon and down to Haines on the old pipeline right-of-way.
What are energy corridors one might ask? Well it has to do with a later act of congress, namely the Energy Policy Act of 2005. www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/publ_109-058.pd... This act permits national interest energy corridors through National Parks if need be! Where is our state on this issue?
Speaking of Energy Corridors, you all remember ANILCA? That Congressional Act was meant to put the kibosh on development of Alaska by precluding corridors. Well guess what? As mentioned above, we have another grab at the brass ring. With our state's abundant gift of energy we should be selecting these corridors now for the present, mid-term and future of our state.
More to come....
Andora..
Can you build a powerplant on the Nslope that is invisible to my infrared goggles?
When flying over the existing industrial footprint on the Nslope the excess heat spilled into the Arctic Basin stands out like a sore thumb when viewed with infrared imaging equipment. You can also definitely see the heat-pollution from space satellites too.
There's over 1000trillion cubic feet of methane-hydrates in the ArcticBasin that is currently in RED-FLAG "avalanche" or "soda-pop" condition. This is a primary cause of the huge 350square-mile 2007 tundra fire between the Nanushuk and Itkillik Rivers. The methane saturated grasses burned like gasoline spilled on a flannel shirt when sparked by lightning.[Hence my tag: DistantThunder]
Despite reports of a cooling shift in southern Alaska, the Nslope thermal baseline is several degrees above average, including 2meter underground temps.
Good Ol' Arnold Brower Sr. bless his boots at 86years young froze in his tracks on his way to his traditional hunting campsite when he broke thru the ice on on a lake that was unseasonably thin 60miles SE of Barrow. This was a trek he had done many times before at this time of year.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa3M4ou3k...
Yes, using Nslope gas to make HVDC and 3phase power is a good idea, but do you think we can compromise and use HDPEpolypipe-compressed-natural-gaslines from Foothills-gas to fuel the powerplants if they're located on the southside of Anaktuvuk Pass and Atigun Pass ??? The polypipe-gasline really isn't all that expensive, much-much cheaper/quicker than steel-pipe.
Resequestering CO2 is a good idea, and polypipe is commonly used for just that purpose.
Moondoggie,
I say dam-it, but it will take years to permit and construct. Do the gas now, but of course build Susitna. Alaska needs multiple energy solutions not just one. Get some immediate solutions going, because Fairbanks and rural Alaska need solutions now not tomorrow...
Territorial>>>>>>
Yup, thanks for speaking on my behalf about my references to Juneau, yes I'm thinking of the Statehouse in Juneau and the de-facto bigwigs in Anchorage when I talk that way.
And thanks for pointing-out the "across the Gulf of Alaska" route for a subsea gasline.
I have no doubt that Gazprom has been looking at my slideshow too.
http://s281.photobucket.com/albums/kk209...
Gazprom built the Bluestream twin-24" gaslines to Turkey from Russia 350miles across the bottom of the BlackSea in 89 days!!!
Both a dryland shoreline route and a subsea route are possible from Valdez-Katalla to Juneau and SEAK.
The subsea route could be done quicker if the fleet of boats were already pre-positioned. Both routes will eventually get built.
Simple-soft HDPE-gasline when submerged to 1500'deep suspended on anchor-cables can carry methane in dense liquid-phase just like a big-expensive steel-gasline does on dry-land. The ambient pressure backing the outside of the poly-gasline compensates for the higher pressures inside the pipe. Just the up-down risers at the ends of the subsea runs need to be made out of the expensive hdpe-clad-steel or RTP-flexline. You can piggyback all of the fiberoptic trunkline you need too.
A twin 63" subsea gasline to Seattle would still be much cheaper to build than a $40bil boondoggle to the tarpits, which is unnecessary because microwaves will do a much better job in the tarpits.
http://www.globalresourcecorp.com/Engine...
here's a handy list of stuff to do with polypipe..
when it get's too beat up to be used for gasline it can be reused for many other purposes, waste-waterpipe, mining-slurry, and it can be cut up into shorts and used to build docks.
http://www.oxfordplasticsinc.com/applica...
it seems to me line these bigwigs collecting paychecks need to start doing what they should have been doing all along; listen to the people. I read from people on here who now how to harness northern natural gas and bring it south. i read abotu folks who harness winds in Delta. Folks who want to harness tidal energy fromt he ocean, and all of this.
The problem is the politicians and elected officials are still trying to figure out how to do just a little at a time, and with as least amount of effort as possible.
I guess I have a hard time taking any pipeline discussion seriously. Why? Because we already have one that runs right through town, and yet does not appear to benefit Fairbanks energy prices in any way whatsoever. Less than ten miles from the pipeline, and our primary city power plant burns coal that has to be shipped in by train. All those millions of gallons of oil just go right on by us, bypassing a local refinery that's less than fifteen miles from town, down to Valdez and straight out of the state. At the same time, we here in Fairbanks are paying some of the nations' very highest prices for Gasoline, Diesel, and Heating Oil.
How, or better yet, why would a natural gas pipeline be different from this?
I do understand that I don't have all the information; I'm not even sure where to look. I also realize that I'm probably oversimplifying things. But - from a layman's point of view - all I see is that it is apparently in the interest of the energy companies at large to maintain the status quo and make money for their shareholders, not to provide more cost-effective alternatives for the average individual or family living here in Fairbanks.
Having said all that, I have to say that the Enstar project, mentioned above by Jay Ramras, does sound attractive...
Hey JP-offroader,
I tend to agree. I don't know if it's just myopic vision or what. They pass a bill on energy, but effected very little energy policy. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to study things to death. The gasline bill is for something years out. In the meantime people are moving out of Fairbanks and the villages. And I am sorry to say to Anchorage legislators and residents - I told you so now you can live the mess you helped create.
In Southeast, we are on the precipice of having an electrical connection to the North American grid. When it happens, well Katie bar the door" I'd rather have a bit of a plan in place that assures that the rewards of any connection accrue mainly to the state and its citizens instead of a dollar export out of state. Like our tourism industry seems to do - mostly.
But ignoring the approaching economic tsunami won't make it go away. Planting our heads in the sand won't prevent outside companies from making claims on Alaska resources. It's already happening on some of our rivers, also in our fjords and straits and mountain lakes. The permits are federal mostly and they are being issued to outsiders.
So where is a state agency to assist Alaskans to stake these energy claims to ensure that the benefits remain in the region! This tendency to do nothing is not a positive for ensuring that Alaskan's benefit! They got part of it right, but still nothing has been done to effect a united energy policy for the state, one which ensures the benefits will remain here mostly.
Anyway my two bits for now.
Yeah Territorial... Alaskans 1st this time... this the big one for everyone who lives year-round in Alaska.
So where is a state agency to assist Alaskans???
AIDEA seems to be the lead agency.
Go ahead, apply for a grant to buy an extrusion machine and see what happens !!!
I'll do my best to come up with the best price for a turn-key operation in the least amount of time, and time is of the essence.
EGAD!... 551 pages??
search for "corridor"...
hmm..
EPA 2005 Energy right-of-way corridors on federal land.
Section 368.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.