We’ve worked hard this year on legislation empowering the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC) to pursue in-state pipeline projects delivering gas to Alaskans. While House Bill 9 passed the House, it did not progress through Senate committees, and Gov. Parnell has included that issue in the special session.
We commend our House colleagues for their vision and leadership in passing House Bill 9, and sincerely expect that, with additional time to consider the legislation and the need for in-state gasline development, the Senate will also demonstrate that foresight. We are eager to discuss this legislation, but the non-starter is doing nothing to get gas to Alaskans.
House Bill 9 is not merely about a one-time, in-state “bullet line” from the North Slope to Fairbanks and Southcentral. House Bill 9 creates a strong, able entity to serve as Alaska’s gas pipeline corporation, responsive to the needs of consumers, utilities, industries and gas producers, now and into the future.
The future is uncertain. Will the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act project by TransCanada and ExxonMobil continue focusing on a Lower 48 line? Will the producing companies and TransCanada align along a new Alaska export project? Would that happen under AGIA, or will a partnership require a new framework that AGDC can provide?
Some things are more certain.
Fairbanks residents continue grappling with heating bills as high as mortgages, and businesses struggle to find economic opportunity. Southcentral Alaskans enter each winter under warnings of imminent rolling brown-outs. Mines and other industrial opportunities struggle to pencil out projects employing Alaskans, and are thwarted by the lack of an affordable, secure power supply.
Enough is enough.
We structured House Bill 9 to support a state corporation prepared to act swiftly no matter what the future holds, with one key mission: pursue pipeline opportunities that get gas to Alaskans in Fairbanks and Southcentral at the lowest possible costs, and then to expand pipelines into other communities.
The Legislature this year approved tax credits for oil and gas exploration. With House Bill 9, AGDC would be able to connect successful developments with markets. If the Kotzebue Basin holds gas, AGDC could evaluate a pipeline to Kotzebue. If Donlin Creek mine builds a pipeline from Southcentral, AGDC could consider a pipeline from the mine to Bethel. With the strong industrial interests in Alaska and the entrepreneurial spirit of Alaskans, the possibilities are endless — if AGDC is standing ready to make it happen.
In 2010, the Legislature approved House Bill 369 almost unanimously, creating a team under the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation to consolidate the myriad of gasline concepts the state has supported through the years – not one of which delivered on an actual gasline. This team was to cull from those concepts the most promising aspects, and propose a new project delivering gas to Alaskans this decade.
House Bill 9 builds on that work. The core direction to AGDC is to advance a 500 million cubic foot bullet line through an open season. That line is as large as a state-supported effort can be without violating the AGIA contract between the state and TransCanada.
House Bill 9 also provides AGDC the authority to participate in a bigger project, should TransCanada and the three producers come together on an export line. Governor Parnell has called on them to conclude discussions with AGDC by fall 2012. If House Bill 9 passes, AGDC will be empowered to demand a seat at the table, not simply hand over assets like a state right-of-way lease or a federal environmental study. We see the potential for AGDC to assume a state equity position in a larger pipe, with a controlling interest.
Little of this is possible without a strong, independent Alaska gasline corporation ready to act, empowered to stand on the same playing field with some of the world’s most sophisticated corporations. House Bill 9 accomplishes this.
We pledge to continue working to bring Alaska gas to Alaskans, allowing communities to thrive; businesses to grow; and new industrial opportunities to develop. We ask Alaskans to stand with us and encourage their elected officials to open doors to a brighter future by supporting the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation and passing House Bill 9.
• Rep. Mike Chenault, the Speaker of the House, represents District 34 in the State House, which includes Nikiski and the rural portions of the Kenai Peninsula. Rep. Mike Hawker represents District 32, which includes parts of Eagle River, South Anchorage, Whittier, and communities along the Turnagain Arm.
The following legislators signed on to this opinion-editorial in support of House Bill 9: Reps. Mia Costello, Anna Fairclough, Bob Herron, Craig Johnson, Kyle Johansen, Wes Keller, Bob Lynn, Charisse Millett, Cathy Muñoz, Mark Neuman, Kurt Olson, Lance Pruitt, Dan Saddler, Steve Thompson, Peggy Wilson, and Tammie Wilson; and, Sens. Cathy Giessel, Linda Menard, and Lesil McGuire.
Comments (14)
Add commentThanks Mike & Mike
But I think I'll trust the Senate to honestly evaluate this plan.
You two have proven yourselves too compromised by big money to earn my trust. Pimping Parnell's oil tax giveaway is exhibit one.
Cost Is The Only Issue
Many agree that an instate gasline is necessary, but at what cost? Heck, it could cost $10 billion with cost overruns. For some reason Chenault & Hawker avoid the entire issue of the construction cost to Alaska in their gasline pitch.
It's like Revenue's Butcher saying he doesn't know how a huge tax reduction on oil would work, but giving back $1.7 billion a year in decreased taxes was probably the "sweet spot" the oil companies would appreciate. Sounds like a lot of "blah-blah-blah" about other people's money.
Waiting for more information
In the article there is no mention of the cost of construction for such a "bullet"line, There is insufficient information about the AGDC authority and what control the State / Legislature would have over the proposed corporation. Finally there is no mention of recent report that there appears to be a large amount of natural gas in the Cook Inlet area and that a line from there to Fairbanks and the railbelt may be more economic and feasible.
I will await my evaluation when more of this information becomes available. The bipartisan State Senate Finance and Resources committees seem to be examining all the factors before signing on to it.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY
the continual criers mantra to keep the government out of business seems to not apply when the private sector is not willing to front the cost of things like the gas line. Sure there are profits to be made from natural gas production. And one sure way to increase profits is to have the State build the pipeline so the risk of investing in the gas line is not on the private sector.
Does anyone believe the gas producers would not begin on day one complaining about what they'll pay to ship gas through a state owned pipe?
If this is such a great idea then why is the private sector favoring a state funding for the construction and not simply creating a private owned gas line? Remember these are the same private sector people who tell us government should keep out of business all together.
great point islander
You summed it up pretty nicely.
Senate vs House
I trust the Senate. Instead of rubber-stamping bills based on the political party of the person who sponsors it, they actually read the bills, and consider how it might affect Alaskans in the future.
I've been pretty pleased with the bi-partisan, pro-Alaska Senate this session.
For all that signed on to HB 9
Use the Google, man!
http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/NG/W
The state of Alaska already
The state of Alaska already has a well positioned legal entity that can act in our interests. It is part of the benefit of the half a billion we`re paying transcanada. ANGDA is a legal participant WITHIN that Transcanada plan to take our gas to Valdez. As long as AGIA is the law of the land we already have the reason to build a line under ANGDA auspice. That way the 30% discount that ANGDA gets on gas will be passed on to Alaskans using that .500bcf a day that Mr hawker refers to. HB9 is an industry grab for power and control that directly benefits Mr hawker as his wife is a well paid employee of that company. HB9 will end up costing Alaskans billions..like the ELF tax system, like the governor`s HB110 tax give-away (also mightily lobbied for by both these "representatives"). http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/102807/let_20071028011.shtml
Southeast Alaska
Hydro and interties
An addition
From what I have heard and read, just to build a pipeline from the North Slope to Anchorage, will cost somewhere between $7 billion and $10 billion. With my elementary school level math ability, and a calculator, estimating the line would serve 500,000 people, just the cost to build the line would be about $14,000 per person. That doesn't include any "glitches" the cost of the gas, the transportation of the gas.
I think we all, as Alaskans have to think about the entire state and our people but what will the people who get the gas have to pay if the State is going to get any of its money back?
Secondly, it took a constitutional amendment to set up the Permanent Fund so it could operate as a private investment agency. What I see in this bill is a new corporation, but no full explanation of what funds they would get, what control the State would have over it, what would happen if it turns out to be a poor investment.
Finally, looking at the decreasing price of natural gas in the nation and around the world, and the potential for Cook Inlet to provide sufficient natural gas for a long time and even extend its use to the Fairbanks area - is HB 9 the best way to go? ? ? ?
I am not an elected member of the legislature, and never will be, but if I were such a person, I would be very cautious about supporting a proposal and signing a letter, until I had a lot more information about what I wanted to support or not.
We are already "at the table"
We are already "at the table" with this new AGIA/ANGDA "alignment" our Governor keeps telling us is happening. That includes the 30% discount in gas cost that ANGDA "owns" inside the AGIA law, that is if the governor is truthful in his desire to develop under the AGIA umbrella. HB9 guts AGIA as that 30% discount will be lost. AGDC is NOT under the AGIA umbrella, no matter how badly these two legislators and this governor wish it were. ANGDA is LAW, and created by a vote of the people. It was put into the AGIA law BY THE PEOPLE. HB9 is just an attempt to divert Cook Inlet gas from going north where it is needed in the short term because Conoco wants to send it to japan from Nikiski in smaller ships. Any AGDC gasline KILLS AGIA, and usurps that 30% discount back to Conoco in Cook Inlet.. and any line built under HB9 will never provide abundant affordable gas or value-added products to the Alaskan economic picture FOR ALASKANS compared to AGIA and ANGDA. AGIA and ANGDA are the only insurance the people of Alaska have. Hawker and Chenault`s HB9 would give that 30% discount away to some unknown future PRIVATE corporation, setting the pattern for the rest of the other four "take-off" points that are guaranteed to the state within AGIA. SB215 or the "B2F" line, both options going north from Cook Inlet instead of south from the slope with a smaller line are called for now. Under AGIA those "take-off" points were construed as "state" infrastructure. HB9 steals that from the people of Alaska. The voters who created ANGDA and AGIA.
How many of these folks are
How many of these folks are still on this old list of oil industry buddies?...are they recruiting from the new members since the old days? Who`s the chief CBC recruiter now that Bill Allen has immunity for life? Parnell? Chenault?..Hawker? Senate bi-partisan majority and House minority...Please be vigilant. Just who is representing who around here? This Alaskan voter would like to know. http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/102807/let_20071028011.shtml
jmacinak
All you have to do is look at not only the two authors of the letter, but to those who signed on in agreement with them.
No matter what part of the state you are from, look for your local representative and if you like, send that representative your opinion.
Elected representatives are or hopefully will represent the people who elected them. If you, as a voter, do not agree with your elected representative, you need to find a new representative in the next election.
An additional comment to jmacinak
Recently, in watching "Gavel to Gavel" on television, I saw a member of the Legislature stand up and say something to the effect that "I personally do not approve of this bill. I personally would vote against it. However, in talking and hearing from many of my constituents over the weekend, this is what the vast majority of them want. I was not elected to represent myself, nor my political party, but the people who elected me. And so, I will vote in favor of this bill."
To me, as an elected representative, that person is kind of a "hero". He voted not for himself, nor along party lines, but for what the people who elected him wanted.