Pipelines, (Alaska Gas Pipeline, Denali - The Alaska Gas Pipeline, Mackenzie
Valley Gas Pipeline, Alaska Highway Gas Pipeline, Northern
Gas Pipeline, Arctic Gas, LNG, GTL)
is your public service, objective,
unbiased 1-stop-shop for Arctic
gas pipeline projects and people, informal and rich with new information,
updated 30 times weekly and
best Northern Oil & Gas Industry Links on the
AAGPC, AAGSC, ANGTL, ANNGTC, ANGDA, ANS, APG, APWG, ANGTA, ANGTS, AGPPT,
ANWR, ARC, CARC, CAGPL, CAGSL, FPC, FERC, GTL, IAEE, LNG, NEB, NPA, TAGS, TAPS,
NARUC, IOGCC, CONSUMER ENERGY ALLIANCE, AOGA,AOGCC, RCA and more...
LINKS: FERC Reports
to Congress, 1,
USGS Arctic Gas Estimates;
Enstar Bullet Line: Map and News Links;
Alaska Energy Forum;
Shell Alaska OCS Study;
Mackenzie Gas Project EIS;
Alaska Gas Pipeline Blog
Governor Sarah Palin's AGIA Links;
2007 ACES tax bill links;
Department of Revenue 2007 ACES
2007 ACES tax Presentations;
2007 ACES tax news;
Alaska Gas Pipeline Training and
Gas Pipeline and Economic
Development; Andrew Halcro;
FERC's Natural Gas Website Links
Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act;
History of H.R. 4;
DOE Energy Bill Position, 6-02;
Daschle-Bingaman Energy Bill
(Alaska, Sec. 1236 & tax credit, Sec. 2503 &
H.R. 4 Conferees),
See amendments, "Energy
Policy Act of 2002";
"Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act
of 2001 (Draft)" &
Legislature Joint Committee position;
Governor's 10-Point Plan;
U.S. Senate Energy Committee
Testimony, 10-2-01 -
text version; U.S.
Senate Energy Committee Testimony, 9-14-00;
Report on the Alaska Natural Gas
Transportation Act of 1971, prepared by staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Frank Murkowski's State of the State Speech;
2002 DRAFT Recommendations to 2003
'02 Alaska Legislation;
Alaska Highway Natural Gas
Pipeline Policy Council;
Legislative Gas Pipeline Committee; 9-01 Alaska Models:
HR 4 Story;
Cook Inlet Supply-Demand Report:
Commonwealth North Investigation
State Gas Pipeline Financing Study;
5-02 Alaska Producer Update;
Kenai: "Oil & Gas Industry Issues
and Activities Report, 11-02";
Alaska Oil & Gas Tax Structure;
2-27-02 Royalty Sale Background;
Alaska Gas Pipeline Office
opens, 7-01, and
1-10-03, "Arctic Gas Pipeline
Construction Impacts On Northern Transp."-Transport Canada-PROLOG Canada
Inc.-The Van Horne Institute;Hill
Times Reports, 8-30-02;
9-30-02, Cons. Info. Requirements;
CBC Archives, Berger Commission;
GNWT Economic Impact Study,
GNWT-Purvin & Gertz Study, 5-8-02;
Alberta-Alaska MOU 6-02;
Draft Pan- Northern Protocol for
Oil and Gas Development;
Yukon Government Economic Effects:
Gas Pipeline Cooperation Plan
Mackenzie Valley Environmental
Impact Review Board;
Mackenzie Valley Pipeline MOU
FirstEnergy Analysis: 10-19-01;
Integrated Delta Studies;
National Post on Mackenzie
Nation v. British Columbia;
Indian Claims Commission;
Skeena Cellulose decision --
aboriginal consultations required, 12-02;
Misc. Pipeline Studies '02
Alaska Gas Producers Pipeline Team
APG Newsletter: 5-02,
ArctiGas NEB PIP Filing Background;
NRGPC Newsletter: Fall-02;
4-02 ArctiGas Reduces Field Work;
BP's Natural Gas Page;
YPC Perspective, 7-02
REFERENCE: Alaska Journal of
Commerce; Alaska Inc. Magazine; Anchorage Daily News; Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation; Fairbanks Daily News Miner, Juneau Empire; Northern News Services;
Oil & Gas Reporter; Petroleum News Alaska; Whitehorse Star, etc.
EXTENDED CONFERENCE NEWS:
Support Industry Alliance,
Chamber of Commerce,
Inuvik Petroleum Shows,
International Association of Energy Economists,
Development Council for Alaska,
Ziff Energy Group
LEST WE FORGET!
Northern Gas Pipelines: The Canadian Opinion Page
Readers know that Northern Gas Pipelines is supportive of all of the people and governments working so hard on all projects. We have treated all with respect and, we hope, equality. Sometimes we editorialize both here and in other publications--not advocating our own special interests but rather advising on public policy. Here we will insert opinion pieces
we select randomly to represent various views, and from readers. We retain editorial rights, discourage uncivilized language and honor good thinking and honest motives. Beyond that, we leave you as judge. The author's 2002 opinion pieces are here. To have your opinion archived here, email us. -dh
9-24-02: "I haven't had the opportunity to pass on my sympathies to you and your fellow Alaskans regarding the tragedy of Sept 11. Like all strong nations I'm sure that you will be able to overcome this horror and emerge stronger than you were before. History can show you this. Thank you for continuing to send me your columns. I am really enjoying the fact that I can watch first hand the Alaska and Yukon relationship grow and flourish. It is a model many other Canadian/American jurisdictions can learn from. Take care."
Scott Kent, Minister of Economic Development, Yukon
Editorial Comment: "Out of the loop"
6-26-02: The Inuvik Native Band has once again
voiced their opposition over the one-third ownership of a proposed Mackenzie
It comes as little surprise. The band has been
steadily courted by the ArcticGas people who offers 100 per cent ownership,
while the Mackenzie Valley Group just blew into town last week.
Chief Firth and his people are feeling
last in line again, and well they should.
Nellie Cournoyea, chair of the APG, has an
office two blocks away from the Gwich'in band and has yet to take the time to
walk over for a visit.
Despite numerous requests from the band, neither
Nellie, Wilf Blonde or anyone from the producer's group have made any
attempt to meet with the Inuvik Native Band to explain their project.
The Inuvialuit and Gwich'in have lived together
here since time immemorial and it seems inconceivable to outsiders looking in
that the two groups could not get together on an issue so important to them
As with many of the signatories to the original
memorandum of understanding, the Inuvik band has been kept out of the loop on a
project that will likely secure a legacy for their people. They react
Perhaps this week's petroleum show will inspire
someone to extend an olive branch to the other and show the world that 25 years
after Berger, the original people here are ready to do business with the
world and with each other.
Trust the Market (and Canada), By Michael
Kergin (Photo) 05/15/2002
The Wall Street
Journal Page A18-Few Americans realize that Canada is the largest energy
supplier to the U.S., providing about 15% of all U.S. Natural Gas consumption,
and more crude and refined oil products than Saudi Arabia. In fact, we provide
9%...(Full text here.
editorials on the same subject.)
Yukon and N.W.T. are always wrongly portrayed as competitors
Not true, says Pat Duncan who supports both Alaska Highway Pipeline Project and Mackenzie Delta development
by Yukon Premier Pat Duncan
Reprinted from the Hill Times, 2-05-02
Despite recent volatility and softening prices, market conditions have renewed interest in exploring, developing, and commercializing the immense natural gas resources of northern Canada and Alaska. Although it's difficult to predict how the September terrorist attacks in the United States or recent economic uncertainty may affect natural gas markets, most analysts agree that North American demand for natural gas will continue to grow.
Northern Canada and Alaska host vast reserves of natural gas. Proven reserves on the North Slope of Alaska total 35 TCF and possible reserves total 195 TCF, in the Mackenzie Delta proven reserves total nine TCF and possible reserves total 64TCF, and in Yukon, where two gas wells rank among Canada's top producers, potential reserves exceed 13 TCF. These resources present immense opportunities for the North, for consumers, and for Canada.
The opportunity to commercialize these resources has come to focus on three pipeline proposals. They include the Alaska Highway Pipeline Project (AHPP), a stand-alone Mackenzie Valley project, and a northern or offshore route that would combine gas from Alaska and the Mackenzie Delta in a sub-sea pipeline trenched across the floor of the Beaufort Sea.
Yukon maintains that in the long run the market will support two northern pipelines, one from Alaska, and another smaller project originating in the Mackenzie Delta, and firmly rejects the proposal for a northern or offshore route. Similar proposals were previously rejected by the National Energy Board and are likely to be rejected again. A northern route is politically and environmentally unacceptable, pushes the limits of technology, and invites acrimonious legal proceedings that would delay or foreclose the opportunity to develop northern gas. It will never enjoy the public, political, or investor support needed for success. As The Toronto Star observed last summer, an "over the top" pipeline probably means no pipeline at all.
Fortunately the momentum for northern pipeline development favours development of both the Alaska Highway and Mackenzie Valley pipeline projects. In November, Foothills Pipelines Ltd. reconstituted the Alaska Highway sponsor group which brings together almost every major pipeline company and energy distributor in North America, and just recently Mackenzie Delta producers and the Aboriginal Pipeline Group in the Northwest Territories announced their intention to progress a stand-alone Mackenzie Delta development to the project definition phase. This work is intended to result in an application for certificates to construct the project, a privilege already earned by Foothills Pipelines Ltd. for the Alaska Highway Pipeline Project in 1978.
Unfortunately Yukon and the Northwest Territories are portrayed as competitors vying for a single prize, namely a single northern pipeline project. This is simply wrong. Yukon supports Mackenzie Delta development and wishes that development every success. Yukon believes the first priority of all stakeholders must be to gain a foothold for northern gas in the North American gas market. Northern pipeline projects are threatened more by market volatility and competing sources of supply rather than the order in which these projects might proceed. The fortunes of Alaska, Yukon and Northwest Territories are tied where gas development is concerned, but not because northern gas needs to share a common pipeline. The risk of stranded gas doesn't lay in the question of pipeline routes. Rather it lays in the risk that North American gas consumers will turn their back on the potential for northern gas in favour of other energy alternatives.
Together the Alaska Highway Pipeline and stand-alone Mackenzie Delta projects will contribute just 6-7 BCF/D of natural gas to a growing market that will need 30 BCF/D by 2020. They will also deliver significant economic benefits to all parts of Canada. According to a study prepared by Informetrica Ltd. for the Government of Canada, these two projects would create 281,000 person years of employment (144,000 from the AHPP, 137,000 from Mackenzie). A similar study underway by Informetrica for the Yukon government indicates significant real business investment, GDP growth, and job creation for all regions of Canada arising from an Alaska Highway Pipeline Project.
The Alaska Highway Pipeline Project could lead northern gas development by securing the first critical market share for northern gas. It is a near term prospect that could begin in as little as two or three years. The project is the subject of an existing Canada/U.S. treaty, certificates have already been issued in both countries, a unique regulatory regime is in place, and North Slope gas is plentiful and already being produced. Yukon's own oil and gas basins are also ready for further exploration and development.
Yukon has always maintained that northerners and Canadians are not confronted with a single northern pipeline choice, that two pipelines are both possible and probable, and that the market will support two projects in the long run. No one asked Atlantic Canadians to make a choice between Hibernia, Sable Island, or Terra Nova and northerners shouldn't have to make that choice either.
In a recent report the U.S. National Petroleum Council painted this picture of the growing North American gas market -- by 2015 more than 14 million new customers will be connected to natural gas supply through over 300,000 miles of new transmission pipelines and distribution mains. Many more customers will use electricity that is fueled by natural gas as over 140 gigawatts of new electricity generation capacity -- almost entirely gas burning units -- go into service. These new customers, as well as the existing customer base, are counting on long-term availability of reliable, competitively priced natural gas to meet their energy needs. "Industry, government and other stakeholders must act quickly, cooperatively, and purposefully to meet those expectations," according to the report.
The Alaska Highway and Mackenzie Valley pipeline projects are not competitors. Nor do they compete with other Canadian energy projects. They are but two elements of a continental energy mix that will require an investment of $1.5-trillion in the next two decades. They are complementary projects representing significant investment opportunities for Canada that should be welcomed and supported.
We have a pipeline proposal, now we need some Ottawa action
By 2015 the demand for natural gas in North America is projected to soar to 30-32 trillion cubic feet a year
by N.W.T. Premier Stephen Kakfwi
Reprinted from the Hill Times, 2-05-02
Recent debate over the development of northern Canada's natural gas supply has sparked discussions from as far and wide as the band office in Colville Lake to the Houston headquarters of ExxonMobil -- and has involved our Prime Minister and U.S. President George Bush.
Why? Because, by 2015 the demand for natural gas in North America is projected to soar to 30-32 trillion cubic feet a year. Because, Canadian and American gas reserves in the Arctic constitute a significant proven and secure supply for North American markets. And, because development of N.W.T. natural gas is worth $40-billion to $70-billion to government, industry and business in Canada over the 25-year life of a Mackenzie Valley pipeline.
With each day, there is more conclusive evidence that the momentum has shifted in Canada's favour. It is no longer a matter of if N.W.T. gas will be brought to market by a Mackenzie Valley pipeline -- but when.
In November, 2001, the Team Canada West Trade Mission, including the Prime Minister, western and territorial Premiers, were advised by Dallas-based oil and gas industry executives that development of N.W.T. gas is their preferred option.
In December, 2001, yet another independent study, this time by Ronald Ligney and James Longbottom at the University of Houston, confirmed that the Mackenzie Valley pipeline will be cheaper to build.
On Jan. 9, 2002, the Mackenzie Delta Producers Group, composed of Imperial Oil Resources, Conoco Canada Ltd., Shell Canada Ltd. and Exxon Mobil Canada and the Mackenzie Valley Aboriginal Pipeline Corporation (MVAPC) announced their intention to begin the regulatory application process.
That same day, regulators and environmental assessment agencies layed out a draft co-operation plan to streamline environmental review and permitting processes to ensure pipeline project applications in the N.W.T. can be processed in a timely, fair and balanced manner.
Later this month, aboriginal equity in a Mackenzie Valley pipeline will be further advanced by the formal incorporation of the Mackenzie Valley Aboriginal Pipeline Corporation (MVAPC) Ltd.
Meanwhile, Petro Canada, Burlington, Devon, Chevron, BP, AEC, Anadarko and Shell are continuing their exploration programs in the Mackenzie Delta and other N.W.T. locations. Signals continue from Alaska indicating that the Alaska Highway route for North Slope natural gas may not be economically viable without tax concessions.
As pipe dreams go, progress for the Canadian option over the past two years has been extraordinary. From the N.W.T. government's perspective, the formula for success has been relatively simple.
In contrast to the Alaska Highway pipeline approach involving tax concessions and prohibitive route legislation, the N.W.T. government has a straightforward plan.
Industry should make its pipeline route determination on the basis of economic feasibility, environmental integrity and the best deal for consumers.
While development of Arctic gas and construction of a Mackenzie Valley pipeline was rejected by N.W.T. aboriginal peoples 25 years ago, conditions have changed significantly.
Aboriginal land rights and self-government settlements mean N.W.T. aboriginal people are exercising more control over resource development, including participating in employment, training, business and ownership opportunities. Their support and active involvement creates a positive investment and development climate in the N.W.T.
The development of N.W.T. natural gas is not only a win for the N.W.T. and N.W.T. aboriginal peoples, it is also a win in the short, medium and long-term for all of Canada.
In the short-term, construction of a Mackenzie Valley pipeline means the purchase of at least: $600-million worth of pipeline materials; $500-million in pipeline construction equipment; and, $1-billion in labour. In the long term, the Mackenzie Valley will become the transportation corridor to move N.W.T., Alaska, Yukon and eventually maybe even High Arctic Nunavut gas as well.
Moreover, Ottawa is already receiving returns from N.W.T. resource development. Royalties from N.W.T. diamond mine production, for example, are already starting to flow to Ottawa. Two more diamond mines and a pipeline will considerably increase this flow of revenues to the federal government.
Twenty-five years ago, many N.W.T. aboriginal people still relied upon hunting, fishing and trapping as a primary means of support. We were without phones, offices, credit cards, driver's licences, and the other tools necessary to be part of Canada's economic and political mainstream.
Twenty-five years ago, many of us stood up to the oil and gas industry and the government of Canada and said there will be no pipeline until it is built to our benefit and on our terms.
Over the past 25 years, we have defined those terms and developed the businesses and skills needed to bring prosperity and further self-reliance to the people of the N.W.T.
The people and leaders of the N.W.T. have come a long way to bring themselves and this project to the point where it is today. They have taken on a huge commitment -- one that will become increasingly difficult to sustain without decisive federal support soon.
Already we are experiencing impacts on our existing infrastructure as a result of resource development. Housing and office space are almost nonexistent in Inuvik and Yellowknife and we cannot hope to keep pace with the much-needed highway infrastructure improvements required by both industry and residents of the N.W.T.
Early in my term I met with the Prime Minister and federal ministers with an interest in, or responsibility for, the Northwest Territories and the development of Arctic gas.
I spoke about the opportunities that lay ahead for the N.W.T., aboriginal peoples, Canadians, our governments and the Canadian economy. I noted then that to fully realize the benefits and manage development impacts of such a project, investment was needed in the N.W.T.'s labour market, business capacity and transportation infrastructure.
They asked for, and the N.W.T. government produced, a plan (Towards a Better Tomorrow: a Non-Renewable Resource Development Strategy for the N.W.T.) outlining a $339-million investment over four years to be shared by Ottawa ($235-million) and the N.W.T. government ($104-million).
Ottawa's response was that it could not participate in the plan because no pipeline project had been approved. In two years, however, the picture has become significantly clearer.
We have a pipeline proposal. We have industry support. We have long-term market demand. We have aboriginal support. We have regulatory reform. What we don't have is any movement from Ottawa. This is more than a good business deal. It is an investment in our country.
It is time for Ottawa to act.
Natural Gas & Oil
IOGCC, 5/11 -13;
Newspaper Front Pages--WORLDWIDE
Our view of South Central Alaska's imminent Energy Crisis
Publisher's 2002 Editorials
magazine & newspaper articles;
Seattle Chamber of Commerce Speech, 5-8-02,