Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Alaska State Taking Over Gas Pipeline Project

Wonder how feasible it would be to use the gas to generate electricity up there, and build a transmission line south, instead of a pipeline?

Jeff

A smaller gasline to Fairbanks should have been built 40 years ago. The interior would all benefit from cheaper gas generated electricity and the intertie to Anchorage could have been loaded.

It's not just a matter of building a pipeline and shipping the gas. As Art mentioned, the gas has be conditioned to make it a useable product and that takes an expensive plant. I was tangentially involved in some high level discussions about the plant and for the full size line they were talking about a $10 billion plant.

The problem we have with such a large state and such a small population is economy of scale. You cut the throughput of the line to 1/10th or 1/100th and cost doesn't drop at anywhere near the same rate.

In talking to the gas field guys around here, states like Michigan are sitting on cleaner gas that's not even being drawn off. It would be difficult for Alaska's gas to compete.

ARCO spent a ton of money years ago on a study that came to that exact conclusion ... Burn it there and transport it as electrons.