Alaska House reaffirms gas line vote
Originally published Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at 1:57 p.m.
Updated Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 2:41 p.m.
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!JUNEAU — The Alaska House of Representatives reaffirmed its support for TransCanada’s gas line plan Wednesday, but failed to approve a measure allowing the Canadian company to start work immediately upon final approval.
The bill before lawmakers authorizes Gov. Sarah Palin’s administration to enter a formal agreement with TransCanada to pursue the project.
House members turned down the bill’s immediate effective date clause, which requires a two-thirds vote rather than a simple majority, delaying the bill’s effective date until 90 days after enactment, the default effective date.
The failed vote surprised many.
The effective date passed when lawmakers first voted on the bill Tuesday, but two lawmakers — House Speaker John Harris, R-Valdez, and Rep. Richard Foster, D-Nome — switched their votes on Wednesday. Harris said he simply made a mistake on Tuesday.
The failed vote also left lawmakers, administration officials and TransCanada representatives trying to figure out the consequences.
“It could have a huge impact,” said Rep. John Coghill, a Republican from North Pole and supporter of the bill.
The delayed effective date could potentially give TransCanada a way out of the deal if it wanted one, he said. The company stipulated in its application under the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act that its offer was only valid for a certain period of time.
Majority Leader Ralph Samuels, R-Anchorage, who voted against the license and the effective date, said he didn’t know what impact the no vote would have and didn’t know if other lawmakers were aware of the impacts, either.
“I don’t know, I’m going to talk to some lawyers now,” he said after the vote.
Harris, who also voted no on both, said he didn’t think it would have “any consequences” and simply voted no for the same reasons he opposed the bill.
The bill has yet to pass the Senate, where the effective date could be added back in.
Revenue Commissioner Pat Galvin said if the bill ultimately passes without an immediate effective date, TransCanada’s project would likely be delayed by at least 90 days, stalling summer field work and pushing back the dates for project milestones.
Galvin said it was unlikely TransCanada would back out of the deal even if it could, and he added that the important vote was the vote in favor of the license.
“We got it passed,” he said.
House members also voted 39-0 in support of a letter of intent urging Palin’s administration to continue work on an “all-Alaska” gas line project within the bounds of AGIA and TransCanada’s project, which involves a 1,715-mile pipeline into Canada.
Lawmakers rushed to complete a draft of the letter that would express their intent without interfering with the AGIA license.
The final version of the letter notes the impact of high energy prices in Alaska and states, “... it is the intent of the legislature that an award of an exclusive license to TransCanada not interfere with the rapid delivery of North Slope gas to Alaskan markets.”
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Yay!
Two down, Two to go. Now if only the House will pass it and the Feds will ok it, we are good to go ^_^
I think you mean the Senate, the House has approved it and moved it on to the Senate. Passing it does not mean a pipeline will ever be built, we have a way to go before that happens. Next step will be an open season if the Senate passes it, that could be years off.
After all the headlines die down and the confetti stops flying, folks will get to understand what the AP reporter means when he says: "The license doesn't guarantee pipeline construction."
$500 million Alaska dollars with no guarantee of pipeline construction.
Pretty soon we will see the list of "must haves" from Trans Canada before their board of directors athorizes a pipeline. I'd have liked something more than a promise to "embark on a . . . process" for all that money.
It looks like 16 members of the house thought so too.
Its a better way to promote one than losing billions on tax concessions to Big Oil... anyways dont mean to start a debate, I am just glad to see progress made... even if we still have a long ways to go.
and I did mean Senate, my bad!
My god man, was that marlo miller ? He should appologize to guttenberg.
The Neurosis of being Needlessly Complex...
An important reason why this process is so slow is the idea for a mega-steel-pipeline was first dreamed of in the late 19thCentury..
then it was first sketched after WW1 in the early 1920's..
then it was first blueprinted in WW2..
then they began talking about gaslines during the KoreanWar..
TAPS was built at the end of the VietNam War as a way to keep the post-war industrial pace going, and it was a rehabilitation program for wacky veterans..
This gasline has been sold and re-sold time and again as a megaproject..
Everybody is chanting "Mega-trillions!!" For the much dreamed archetypal North American Backbone Project.
....More Monopoly Architecture, promoted by the same control-freak bureaucrats who want to put an end to Net-Neutrality too.
[you can identify people like this because they drink only bottled water, and litter the countryside with their plastic trash]
Building a gasline is like building a road, it's fun and gives you a sense of accomplishment.
Building the bureaucracy and bank for a fully monetized toll-road network [or gasline network] takes billions of cases of bottled water to lubricate the throats of the control-freaks who beat the drum and chant "monetize the hydrocarbons" decade after decade.
These people won't actually ever hire out of the union-hall to build the project, but they'll sit in an office and attempt to rake in all of the dough that can be extorted out of the process even before the first gas is passed.
In America when you buy a box of crackers 90% of the cost is packaging and marketing, 10% of the cost is the crackers..
same goes for our energy too.
If you want to get some N-Slope gas to the interior the Alaska-Way..
see the slideshow at www.fairbanksgas.com
Being a sucker for a 50years of bull from Juneau while they make all this big talk about how everybody has to wait until the goldplated pipeline to Tierra del Fuego is approved by every office building from Anchorage to Amsterdam really will drive you nuts.
Building a $10million little LPG-gasline will begin delivering our kidnapped resource to where it needs to go.
If I only knew then what I know now...
in 1967 I was taught how to use an old junk car, an arcwelder, torch, a junkyard-weight, a rope, some shackles, and a tripod of logs..
..to drill 300' for water.
On the 3rd well we drilled I hit coalbed methane at just over 200'.
...Gubik-Gas was found at 890' in 1951 with some fairly primitive equipment too.
The fundamental requirements for state and federal pipeline safety aren't too hard to meet for small gaslines, there's small contractors all over America installing 4" distribution lines everyday.
Or, we can all just sit on our frozen butts and wait for the next Megaproject to slide on by...
http://www.schillerinstitute.org/graphic...
............................................
While all this is going on, anyone notice oil is at $123 a barrel, ten straight days of oil falling.
House members also voted 39-0 in support of a letter of intent urging Gov. Sarah Palin's administration to continue work on an "all-Alaska" gas line project within the bounds of the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act.
==============
Well, I suppose when we run up against the 500mmcfd offtake-limit this will open up a new can of worms. Another goofy megaproject energy consumer like The Pebble Project jumps in and grabs 300mmcfd of the limit and the rest of the state will still freeze in the dark.
can we disband the Port Authority now and
QUIT SPENDING MY PROPERTY TAX DOLLARS?
Big Mike, A great idea, but let's demand an audit first and if need be file criminal charges if any money was mis-spent. I think we
should start with the Board of Directors :looking first at the Treasurer No lynch mob or anything, just an audit.
Jump for joy only 16 of 39 still in the dark or (light of big oil, big money). Lets take note alaskans, VECO did not get them all!
Nice touch not giving it an effective date. Harris sure knows who butter's his bread, one would think after the raw deal EXXON gave the people of the sound. He could get his head/hand out of thier *** and support the people of alaska. Hope we as voters take note of the NAY voters when reelections come around.
NOW WE WAIT ON THE SENATE! Let the game begin anew!!
OH! by the way anyone catch the latest Big Oil slick ad on DENALI
(buy/hire/build) with alaskan and alaskans another try for the end around to beat the bid process. Anybody out there accepts this line, I got some arizona ocean front property for sale.
Hey Bob, go cash your welfare check and hush up. Miss ya on the radio though. Keep waiting for ya to check in. WHy do you hate the Port Authority sooo much? It's not .......natural.
Yay! Boo! Without an effective date, how will it play out? The Senate better get it right. I am disappointed that it has taken this long to vote. Lower fuel prices might make it a little cheaper to build if we strike while the iron is hot. I don't know if they are deliberately delaying their decision or if they are just that unsure of themselves, but the legislators and senators need to do some work and get this right.
The "all Alaska line" is a myth and no matter how much money gets spent, we will never end up with an "all" Alaska line. Mitsubishi, Japan, China, Canada, British Petroleum, Denali, all have their eyes on the money, so there is no way the State is going to fend them off and build our own line. Even the less than 500bcf lines are potential foreign targets for investment.
How many less than 500bcf lines are we limited to supporting? From what I have read on AGIA it is unlimited so if Denali and the Port Authority want State support for two more lines each less than 500bcf/day then the State is not prohibited from assisting. That's a way to expand for growth. It may not be the ideal solution, but if the Cook Inlet provides one supply line and another runs from the North Slope then we should be legal.
Come on now an effective date? How about a you will start date or else you will reimburse the state and its people 500 million dollars plus a very nice interest rate. While this has been a good process to get things and keep things moving we all know that we are going to be left in the cold. Why is it they can give away 500 million of the peoples resources money and even some have the audacity to think they know better how to spend it then us. Oh right we voted them in. Time to vote em out!
Speaking of Veco anybody who accepted Veco or Bill Allen money should be voted out. Check APOC and opensecrets.com find out who is left of the good ole boys. Even though some are now pretending to be on the right side by voting yes and blending in with the crowd.
Like the way Tom Erwin of DNR came on the radio and blasted the Port Authority and corrected the misinformation presented by the Port Authority's treasurer. Erwin said the Port Authority had the worse presentation of any of them. Even said they bent over backwards, but the Port Authority couldn't make the grade. Every authority needs a devil's advocate. Where is SamBam he sure gave out alot of misinformation today.Erwin really came back with the correct information.
Isanova: Billions in concessions to big oil? Where did that come from? And what concessions is Trans Canada asking for besides the $500 million and an exclusive license? TC said they understand that nobody comes to their open season without tax stability and has openly asked the state for just that. So . . . name a couple of verifiable concessions to big oil for us all. Or is it just mindless regurgitation of an urban myth?
I keep hearing all about these billions of dollars in concessions to big oil and still haven't found out what they are.
cdog63: An "effective date" is often part of a bill. It says what date after the bill is passed that it will become effective (law). What failed was the part of the bill that said it would become law as soon as the Governor signed it - an "immediate" effective date. Without that provision, the bill becomes law (is effective) 90 days after the Governor signs it. Without an immediate effective date, the agreement cannot be executed prior to the August 2, 2008 deadline provided for in the Trans Canada proposal. That doesn't mean the deal is dead. It does mean that no TC field work this year. Read it all on the internet on the Alaska Legislature's BASIS site.
Thanks darkhorse I was being snarcastic but appreciate the complete explantion. Wanting more of hammer club etc to make sure they get the job done we are paying them to do. Now do you think T.C. will honestly get the PL built in the next 10 20 years? Time will tell
Before any field work is set to begin, the open season will happen where the producers must commit to filling the line. That is planned as an 18 month process. Then the FERC permitting, then the actual financing, then the construction. This is a long haul project and it was never intended to provide short term energy relief. Unfortunately, the long term goals of AGIA have been scrambled into the short term problems and surplus during the legislative process. It doesn't help when the first and second losers in the proposal process are still crying over spilled milk rather than helping to move forward with the State and Trans Canada.
Denali, AKA BP and Conoco Phillips, is working solely on plans to build the Alaska portion of the TC proposal. In their Operational Overview they make mention of the route through the State to Canada to Chicago. They outline specific field work in Alaska but do not make any mention of field work in Canada. Last time I checked there isn't a big market for trillions of feet of natural gas on the ALCAN Border. It is possible that they will subcontract for TC and exchange "priveledges" for their field work. This could be a nice compromise for Alaska provided Denali and TC continue to work together.
The Port Authority on the other hand, is planning to subcontract to Betchel Corporation out of San Francisco which is currently working on the Keystone project in Canada. The Keystone project is one of three projects which TC is completing before the AGIA project. Keystone happens to be owned by TC and Conoco Phillips. That's a quick loose run down, of some of the outside players in this "big gas line" (say it fast).
So yes, TC is getting flack over the construction delay until 2018, but TC, CP, PA, BP and BC all want AK to build the line on any terms other than our own. Stay with AGIA and keep your eye on all of these associations as they will all be back when we hold TC to the fire.
It would have been better for the state to just randomly pick 5000 Alaskans & give them $100,000.000. At least the money would be given out above the table. It still smells like a lot of money is being passed under the table.
More likely through the line than under the table, but yes a lot of money is being made off both our slow processing of the facts and gathering of more information for the sake of making things complicated and easy to hide money.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.