• Overcast, light rain
  • 54°
    Overcast, light rain
  • Comment

My Turn: The next chapter of Alaska's energy legacy

Posted: July 3, 2014 - 11:07pm

National politicians could learn a lesson or two from lawmakers here in Alaska. While the United States Congress is mired in inaction, the State of Alaska has taken important steps to secure what could be North America’s largest energy production and infrastructure project.

Legislation signed into law last month by Gov. Sean Parnell represents a crucial step toward designing and building the Alaska liquefied natural gas project. The project would include an 800-mile state-of-the-art pipeline connecting a gas treatment plant on the North Slope to a liquefaction plant in Nikiski. The pipeline and liquefaction plant would deliver gas to Alaskans which would then be liquefied and shipped to market, meeting huge demand abroad.

Estimated to cost at least $45 billion, the Alaska LNG project’s size and scope would surpass another storied North American pipeline project, the Trans-Alaskan Pipeline System, ushering in a new era of energy investment in the state. Ultimately, state officials believe the state could earn $2 to $3 billion annually from natural gas sales as a result of the deal, which is significant — even critical — as Alaska relies on oil and gas money for nearly 90 percent of its revenue.

Now that the state has enacted the legislation, it will join along with its private-sector partners to quickly sign off on front-end engineering and design work plans. Known as pre-FEED, that’s a process that will entail many boots on the ground — immediate jobs, in other words — and is estimated to cost at least $400 million and take between 18 and 24 months to complete. The job potential cannot be overstated, especially given the oil and gas industry’s leading role as the largest private employer in the state. According to a recent study by the McDowell Group on behalf of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, for every one job created by an industry company, some 20 more are created throughout the Alaska economy.

While the state has had starts and stops before, the massive supply of gas on the North Slope of Alaska and growing demand for LNG around the world make this new endeavor truly different. The advent of LNG, the ability to liquefy gas so that it is compressed to a tiny fraction of its normal volume, has made the economics of moving gas long distances possible.

Previously debated Alaskan pipelines had a fixed start — the North Slope — and usually a fixed end — most recently, Canada or the continental United States. Now, that fixed end is a growing worldwide market of demand for LNG via special tankers.

And yet, all this hard-fought progress could very well be undone by an Alaskan ballot initiative on the August primary ballot. That initiative, Ballot Measure 1, has the potential, as Dan Fauske of the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation warned, to put the project “on the back burner,” perhaps indefinitely.

At issue is oil tax reform, SB21, passed in 2013. Designed to address the volatility inherent in the previous tax structure, Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share (ACES), SB21 creates stability, allowing companies to make the investments necessary to undertake a massive project of this size. ACES set a variable tax rate tied to the price of oil; SB21 enacts a higher, flat tax rate less reliant on the price of oil. Under ACES, tax payments varied each month, which inhibited a company’s ability to make investment decisions on projects — including large megaprojects. But now that reform could be subject repeal if Ballot Measure 1 passes on Aug. 19.

Alaskans have long dreamt of a pipeline to move North Slope gas to market. It has been a 40-year aspiration, thwarted multiple times by exorbitant development costs and a dearth of gas buyers. Recent and rising demand for LNG in Asia and around the world has together created the market to render that dream a reality. But first, Alaska will face a very important decision this summer.

• Jack Rafuse is a former White House energy advisor and lontime energy executive, including a longtime member of the Unolocal management staff duing the days of TAPS construction.

  • Comment

Comments (1) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Jan Willson
Jan Willson 07/04/14 - 08:32 am
Jack Rafuse takes the

Jack Rafuse takes the position that people concerned about fracking are extremists.

Jack Rafuse: Don’t Let Extremists Undermine Fracking Boom

December 13, 2013
"When it comes to fracking, opposition activists don’t want facts to get in the way of their story. But it’s important to recognize that fracking gives all Americans a source of clean, inexpensive fuel, creates jobs and fuels economic growth. Let’s not let disinformation rule the day" Jack Rafuse

Apparently, clean water is not important to Jack.

Art Petersen
Art Petersen 07/06/14 - 08:06 am
These people

against Ballot Measure 1 will say anything and everything to scare Alaskans into voting against their own interests. This doomsayer claims that LNG from Alaska will be not just big but a hugely profitable enterprise. But it won't be if Ballot Measure 1 passes. ... This is more of the same old same old, and Alaskans shouldn't buy it. ALL of the expenditures for infrastructure are deducted from Alaska's oil royalty. The money for infrastructure is already there. The oil industry is not cash poor. It is the most profitable industry on earth. And all the infrastructure investment is recouped. ... The industry's pure profit already reaches the stars. The extra money that's been given as a so-called incentive is not needed for development. Alaska needs this money for its schools, transportation, public safety, and communities. SB21's permanent 20% less income from Alaska's oil is too much. Exchanging a lopsided ACES for a lopsided SB21 is no solution. That's why Ballot Measure 1 needs to pass, so ACES can be adjusted equitably.

Back to Top


  • Switchboard: 907-586-3740
  • Circulation and Delivery: 907-586-3740
  • Newsroom Fax: 907-586-9097
  • Business Fax: 907-586-9097
  • Accounts Receivable: 907-523-2230
  • View the Staff Directory
  • or Send feedback