- The Washington Times - Wednesday, February 22, 2006


A $25 billion pipeline carrying natural gas from Alaska to the lower 48 states would play an important role in satisfying the nation’s long-term supply needs, but those knowledgeable about the subject say it could not by itself reverse the United States’ rising dependence on imports or cause fuel prices to plunge.

Alaska moved the project to the front burner yesterday when it reached a tentative pact with three oil companies to build a pipeline to transport up to 4.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas a day — an amount equal to 7 percent of present U.S. demand.

Still, the project could be a decade or more away from completion. Even after an anticipated multiyear design phase, some knotty economic and political issues must be hashed out, starting with getting the necessary environmental, right-of-way and construction permits from U.S. and Canadian authorities.

The oil companies — Exxon Mobil Corp., BP PLC and ConocoPhillips — and their contractors also would need to recruit about 4,000 workers to build the pipeline and get steel makers to roll out enough high-strength, 52-inch diameter pipe for the 3,600 mile-long project.

The pipeline’s cost was estimated in 2001 at $20 billion. But BP spokesman Daren Beaudo said yesterday the cost has escalated to between $25 billion and $30 billion because of “the cost of raw materials, particularly steel.”

Until recently, natural-gas prices were too low to justify the massive investment needed to deliver the fuel from Alaska’s North Slope to the lower 48 states. But natural-gas futures jumped to $9 per 1,000 cubic feet last year — more than five times the price in 1995 — and now trade around $7.28 and are not anticipated to fall below $4.50 for the foreseeable future.

Currently, the industry re-injects into the ground the large amount of natural gas that comes to the surface when oil is being pumped from Alaska’s large-but-dwindling oil fields. Analysts said there are about 35 trillion cubic feet of known natural-gas reserves in Alaska, but they expect that figure to increase in the future.

Rising demand and high prices already have spurred plans for a separate natural-gas pipeline that will carry 1.2 billion cubic feet a day within five years from Canada’s Mackenzie Valley. And with consumption burgeoning globally for a fuel used to produce electricity, heat homes and power manufacturing plants, producers and energy companies are racing to raise billions of dollars to build the infrastructure needed to transport liquefied natural gas, or LNG, via ships to the United States and other consuming nations around the world.

The United States, for example, is expected to import 16.4 billion cubic feet a day of LNG by 2010, by which time overall U.S. demand could rise to 68 billion cubic feet a day. Current LNG import capacity is 3.3 billion cubic feet a day.

Assuming the Alaska and Canadian pipelines are built, analysts say the U.S. still will face long-term supply challenges because of dwindling natural-gas production in the lower 48 states and rising demand.

“It is part of the solution; it is not the solution,” said Gavin Law, head of the global LNG practice at consultant Wood Mackenzie in Houston.

After years of negotiations, the Alaska pipeline project cleared an important hurdle Tuesday when Gov. Frank H. Murkowski, a Republican, announced that Alaska had reached an accord with Exxon Mobil, BP and ConocoPhillips on a tax and royalties structure.

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide