 Natural Gas or Hot Air? |
Natural Gas or Hot Air? |
May 24, 2008Arcticulates ®Focusing on Alaska's BeautyAuthor: K. FieldsNatural Gas or Hot Air?I am not really sure how true these statements are because of the many different opinions floating around on this subject. We Alaskan’s have been hearing for years and years about the proposed natural gas pipeline, which would start in Alaska’s North Slope all the way to the Canadian province of Alberta (approximately 2000 miles in length). It has been said that getting this natural gas pipe line built in Alaska could be a critical component of the nation’s energy source’s security. I do know that natural gas is cleaner burning then for instance coal. And with higher fuel prices, and a growing appetite for natural gas, the oil companies are beginning to think putting the natural gas pipeline in Alaska is seemingly the right thing to do... It has been proposed that this pipeline would have the capacity to daily move 4 billion cubic feet of natural gas. This is approximately 7 percent of current natural gas use in United States. Concerned analysts are predicting that the natural gas prices will keep rising as the need becomes larger, and that Canada will not be exporting as much because of the increased consumption in their own nation. This could mean United States will end up depending more and more on imports of natural gas in a liquefied form, which is costly, and very vulnerable to the political instability of various other places that would be suppliers. There are many, many issues that will need to be addressed before this natural gas pipeline can be built. There has been much political opposition that has caused delays in moving forward with this, and the rising costs. So approximately 35 trillion feet of gas reserves are either returned to the oil fields, or left alone because there isn’t an export facility to move it out and into the consumer’s market. They will have to secure over 1,000 permits, from Canada and United States, from the federal, local, and state authorities which can take years. Plus, they will have to negotiate with the native tribes on the proposed route, to secure right of way. So now I have heard that there are two of the worlds largest oil companies that are willing to work together to try and get this natural gas pipe line done! Which will cost $30 billion to achieve and they are figuring around 10 years to complete. Recently Alaska’s Governor Sarah Palin has recommended to the state law makers, that they should approve a proposal from TransCanada Corp. Governor Palin said that this is a better plan because "it puts Alaskan’s first", rather then the competing proposal from BP and PLC oil companies. The people in Alaska could benefit from the added jobs that this pipeline would provide. But my question is will the Alaskan's benefit from this natural gas pipeline with...let's say... maybe... lower prices? Or will it be like the oil being transported out of our state, for which we have always payed more for fuel and heating oil then most of the other 49 States with the exception of Hawaii. I am not too worried about how this pipeline installation and upkeep will effect Alaska's natural environment. Mainly because the oil pipeline put in well over 20 years ago, has not caused any major detrimental problems. And Americans have gathered much more information on how to protect the natural environment in the years since the oil pipeline was built. The Alaska lawmakers have 60 days to decide, and they started meeting on June 3. So it is anybodies guess how this will all work out. It does seem like there will be a natural gas pipeline.But the question is when? Later... K Fields See Also:Baby! It's Cold Outside?
|
Return
to:
Recent
Posts! |
Recent Comments From My Readers! Thank-you! |
|---|
