Front Page News

Northern Gas Pipelines, (Alaska Gas Pipeline, Denali - The Alaska Gas Pipeline, Mackenzie Valley Gas Pipeline, Alaska Highway Gas Pipeline, Northern Route 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 Internet.  Find 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...

2009 LINKS: FERC Reports to Congress, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7....; USGS Arctic Gas Estimates; MMS hearings: RDC, Our NGP, AJOC, DH, ADN, KTUU; Enstar Bullet Line: Map and News Links; ANGDA; Alaska Energy Forum; Prosperity Alaska

2008 LINKS: Shell Alaska OCS Study; Mackenzie Gas Project EIS; Join the Alaska Gas Pipeline Blog Discussion; Governor Sarah Palin's AGIA Links; 2007 ACES tax bill links; Department of Revenue 2007 ACES tax documents;  2007 ACES tax Presentations; 2007 ACES tax news; Alaska Gas Pipeline Training and Jobs; Gas Pipeline and Economic Development; Andrew Halcro; Bjørn Lomborg; FERC's Natural Gas Website Links

WASHINGTON: 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), Tax Credit; See amendments, "Energy Policy Act of 2002";  "Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act of 2001 (Draft)" & Background Paper, 8-9-01;Alaska Legislature Joint Committee position; Governor's position; Governor's 10-Point Plan; Anadarko Analysis; 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 Commission, 1-18-01

ALASKA: 1-23-03, Governor Frank Murkowski's State of the State Speech; 2002 DRAFT Recommendations to 2003 Legislature; '02 Alaska Legislation; Alaska Highway Natural Gas Pipeline Policy Council; Joint Legislative Gas Pipeline Committee; 9-01 Alaska Models: Canadian Routes, LNG, GTL; HR 4 Story; Cook Inlet Supply-Demand Report: AEDC; Commonwealth North Investigation & Our Article; Report: Backbone; Legislature Contacts; 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 closes, 5-02; Betty Galbraith's 1997-1998 Chronology Our copy.

CANADA: 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, 5-13-02; 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: 4-02 & PPT; Gas Pipeline Cooperation Plan Draft & Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board Mackenzie Valley Pipeline MOU Draft, 6-01; FirstEnergy Analysis: 10-19-01; Integrated Delta Studies; National Post on Mackenzie Pipeline, 1-02;Northern Pipeline Act;  Haida Nation v. British Columbia; Indian Claims Commission; Skeena Cellulose decision -- aboriginal consultations required, 12-02; Misc. Pipeline Studies '02

COMPANIES: Alaska Gas Producers Pipeline Team Newsletter, 7-27-01; APG Newsletter: 5-02, 7-02 & 9-02; ArctiGas NEB PIP Filing Background; NRGPC Newsletter: Fall-02;  4-02 ArctiGas Reduces Field Work; BP's Natural Gas Page; Enbridge Perspective; Foothills Perspective; Williams Perspective; YPC Perspective, 7-02

 MEDIA 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: Alaska Support Industry Alliance, Anchorage Chamber of Commerce Canadian Institute, Insight Information, Inuvik Petroleum Shows, International Association of Energy Economists, Resource Development Council for Alaska, Ziff Energy Group











Northern Gas Pipelines: ARC &  APG 

(This and the "Delta-Only" sites are under construction: sponsors & readers are invited to submit further, supplementary information. {You may request copies of news items relating to the Aboriginal Pipeline Group and Western Arctic Energy Corporation})

Last updated: 12-28-01(under construction) 


Forward.  This is a reference page providing general information on the gas pipeline routing being advocated by Arctic Resources Company (ARC) and studied as an alternative by the Alaska Gas Producers Pipeline Team.  It also references the Aboriginal Pipeline Group (APG), attracting headlines in Mid-2001 (See archives) for negotiating with four Canadian producers a reported 1/3 interest in a Mackenzie Valley-only Pipeline to access about 6 TCF of stranded Mackenzie Delta gas reserves.  The "Delta-only" site, button on the left, is scheduled for completion mid-summer, '02) Another group (Western Arctic Energy Corporation) led by Sahtu region interests supports a routing which includes Alaska gas, due to economies of scale, and seeks 100% Aboriginal ownership to possibly be shared with Gwich'in, Deh Cho and Inuvialuit landowners, but open to producer involvement as well.  While headlines in early 2001 were captured by ARC, APG, and Western Arctic, the long-time Mackenzie Delta producers have worked diligently to commercialize their gas reserves and will ultimately control much of the decision process.  A corporate transmission and service company dominating pipeline operations in the Canadian Northwest is Enbridge (Map above Enbridge's; full resolution copy available here).  Enbridge's work and vision for many years has carefully anticipated both the producing potential of the area and the North American demand for gas.  It is "...the only pipeline company with regulatory, design, construction and operating experience..." in the Canadian North, is a service provider and likely to be involved in any of the projects.  See some of their presentations here

Approximately 1,200 miles long, the ARC routing would move from Prudhoe Bay off the coast of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, buried for 326 miles in a 15 foot trench, then tracing a general  Mackenzie River route, linking with other pipelines 874 miles to the south....(more)

Independent Site.  This is an independent, information site.  It is not indorsed by Arctic Resource Company, the Aboriginal Pipeline Group, Enbridge, Western Arctic Energy Corporation nor Canadian producers.  Neither is it indorsed by the Alaska Gas Producers Pipeline Team, led jointly by BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc., Phillips Alaska Petroleum Company, and ExxonMobil Production Company, nor by other companies.  However, the author has attempted to gather factual, useful information and anticipates making weekly changes with suggestions invited from all sources, including the above named parties, that will ultimately provide historians with an authoritative record.

Introduction.   ARC's position is perhaps best represented by the plan transmitted to Governor Tony Knowles in the following letter:   ...(more)

Competition.  The Southern Route's proponent is Foothills Pipe Lines Ltd. and that project depends on roughly the same gas volumes as ARC does, though optimistic geologists are certain that several times the current 35TCF of reserves will likely be discovered.  However, the Foothills proposal deserves mention here because.....(more) 

Producer Challenges.  Whether American and Canadian  producers end up favoring....(more) 

Politics.  The state of Alaska, Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories have adopted political positions on ....(more)

ARC History and References.  The ARC project....(more)

Next sections:  ........Under Construction....Add reference pages: Maps, References, 'My Story' of participants.  (Readers are encouraged to send additions, corrections and supporting documents, PowerPoint presentations, etc. which responsibly communicate the background and progress of these and the other projects.  5/1-dh).

Sample News Items Relating to ARC; most are included in archives: 

2001 Reports

Dr. Bruce Hall, MBA

Managing Director 

March 26, 2002 

Dear Sir / Madam, 

ArctiGas Resources Corp would like to inform all the participants in the regulatory approval process for the proposed Inuvialuit and Gwich’in Pipeline Construction Evaluation sites on Harrison Island and near Campbell Creek that due to unforeseen circumstances ArctiGas will not be proceeding with this field work this winter. 

The recent amendments approved by the United States Senate to the pending Energy Bill (S517) mandates the Alaskan Highway Pipeline option as the only way to transport the North Slope, Alaska reserves to the lower 48 states through Canada.   

This Highway option is in direct conflict with the proposed “Over-the-Top” (OTT) project (the Northern Gas Pipeline Project – NGPP) being advanced by ArctiGas Resources Corp for almost three years.  ArctiGas still believes this pipeline option to be the shortest, cheapest and most environmentally acceptable pipeline project to accommodate the transportation of Alaskan and NWT natural gas reserves to Canada and the lower 48 states. 

ArctiGas Resources and its parent company Arctic Resources Corp have been working hard to lobby both the US and Canadian federal governments to prevent the mandating of any northern pipeline option in either the United States or Canada.  Although meeting with some success, ArctiGas finds the immediate political situation too uncertain at this time to allow it to proceed with the major capital expenditures required for these Pipeline Construction Evaluation Programs. 

ArctiGas would like to express its sincere thanks for the extensive cooperation, efforts and guidance received from all the regulatory bodies in Yellowknife, Hay River and Inuvik.  ArctiGas looks forward to planning this evaluation work for next winter. 

Yours Sincerely

 Cc -     Inuvialuit Land Administration

Inuvialuit Land Administration Commission

Environmental Impact Screening Committee for the Inuvialuit Settlement Region

Environmental Impact Review Board for the Inuvialuit Settlement Region

Joint Secretariat for the Inuvialuit Settlement Region

Gwich’in Land and Water Board

Gwich’in Tribal Council - Inuvik

Gwich’in Development Corporation - Inuvik

Aurora Research Institute - Inuvik

Department of Transportation – Hay River

Department of Transportation – Inuvik

1-18.  Peninsula Clarion, ANCHORAGE (AP) -- An energy consultant who grew up in Alaska believes the least risky way to tap the North Slope's huge natural gas reserves is to do so in stages, running multiple pipelines across the Canadian Arctic during the next 16 years.  (Please see our report here, complete with study to download.)

1-17: This has been a big week in the lives of Northern Gas Pipelines, with many currently active project advocates raising their voices:

  • See our report on ArctiGas' Calgary press conference, Forrest Hoglund, Chairman.
  • See our report on Tuesday's presentation by Professor Ron Oligney.

2001 Reports

1-17-01.  CBC, CALGARY - Another group is moving forward with plans to get natural gas in the Arctic to markets in the south.

American, Canadian and northern aboriginal entrepreneurs have alerted the National Energy Board that they plan to build a pipeline from Alaska, offshore along the Beaufort Sea, and then down the Mackenzie Valley in the Northwest Territories.

They say it makes economic sense to bring Alaskan and Canadian gas to consumers in a single pipeline.

Forrest Hoglund worked long, hard and unsuccessfully for Exxon to bring Alaskan gas south. That was 25 years ago. Banking on that experience, Hoglund says he's come up with the best formula for everyone.

He says northern aboriginal groups would own the pipeline, and his company Arctigas Resources, would run it. But Hoglund admits not everyone is onboard with the project.

"The major Canadian and Alaskan producers are also not supporting us at this time, but we feel our approach is so attractive, and advantageous, they will eventually join us."

The government of Alaska has been pushing for a longer route through the state and along the Alaska Highway in the Yukon.

Gas producers in Canada are already working on plans for their own pipeline along the Mackenzie Valley.

But the chairman of Arctigas Resources, former federal cabinet minister Harvie Andre, says the Arctigas plan would save everybody money and bring the Alaska government hundreds of millions in extra royalties.

Andre says opposition to the offshore segment of their proposal, shouldn't be a problem.

"What we're talking about is a very benign approach environmentally, because once in place there's nothing above the ocean floor. There's no foreign materials brought in," said Andre.

If Arctigas can get past the environmental concerns, and win the support it still needs from key stakeholders, construction could start by 2007.


Special Report: ARC Press Conference, 1-16-01, Calgary

CALGARY-Calgary, AB - Today, ArctiGas Resources Corporation, on behalf of the Northern Route Gas Pipeline Corporation, filed a Preliminary Information Package (PIP) with the National Energy Board for the Northern Route Gas Pipeline Project.  The company conducted a news conference here today in the Royal Room of the Metropolitan Centre, which Northern Gas Pipelines monitored via teleconference.  The PIP deals with the Canadian section of a pipeline from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska to the Mackenzie Delta and then via the Mackenzie River valley into Alberta, the so called “over-the-top” route.  Speaking at this news conference were Forrest Hoglund (Photo-Houston, 11-01), Chairman of Arctic Resources Corporation, Dr. Harvie Andre, Chairman of ArctiGas, the Canadian affiliate of Arctic Resources and Larry Tourangeau, President of Northern Route Gas Pipeline Corporation.  Other executives of Arctic Resources were present in the company’s Houston office.  Please review the large media information package here.  Project comparison figures are provided on the last page.

Hoglund (Photo, 11-30-01, Houston) affirmed ArctiGas filed the PIP yesterday to move Alaska North Slope gas to U.S. markets, outlining three primary principals: 1.  North America must expeditiously access NWT and Alaskan gas reserves, and 2.  Accessing these vast reserves must be done in a fashion that a. Makes economic sense, at low gas prices,  b.  Makes political sense to both Canada and the U.S. c.  Makes environmental sense, d. Includes Aboriginal groups upfront and in a meaningful way…and 3.  Given the complex issues, low natural gas prices and competing agendas, a new approach is needed to avoid past mistakes.   He said there is the potential to double or triple the 35 Tcf of proven Alaska reserves and 6-9Tcf of Mackenzie reserves, given proper exploration incentives such as his project envisions.  Two routes—a Mackenzie Valley Pipeline and an Alaska Highway Pipeline--cost nearly twice as much as the single project, he said.  Construction would occur in phases, he said, beginning with a 36” line from Inuvik.  Phase II would extend to Prudhoe Bay and successive phases would be timed to market conditions and have an ultimate capacity of 5.2 Bcf/d.  “We are the only company supporting that approach at this time,” he said.  The project will be run by a consortium of stakeholders and organized like a municipal infrastructure project.  The aboriginal groups would own the project and enter into an agreement with ArctiGas to design and build the project.  100% debt financing is possible due to the solid Alaska reserves, supported by throughput agreements and revenue bonds.  Hoglund said the project “…creates an economic consortium approach that can be supported by all stakeholders,”  and counselled that now is the right time, while costs are low and inflationary pressures are low.  “Alaska still prefers the Alaska Highway line,” he said, “but it is basically uneconomic.  Our route maximises the economics for Alaska.”  He said that the major producers do not presently support the project but could be expected to farther into the process.

Andre discussed impact on Canada, calling it the “…most economical project, creating the highest value for Mackenzie Delta reserves.”   By combining reserves from both areas, he said the project produces a savings over two separate projects to Alaska alone of $200-300 million / year in royalty value.  He said that the project provides incentives to exploration companies leading to “…a real boom in exploration”.  He said the project advocates bringing on Canadian gas first, followed very quickly by Prudhoe gas.  Two 36” pipelines, he said, would mean all major North American pipe manufacturers could participate.  The project is environmentally benign, he said.  Andre pointed to other pipelines in Arctic conditions.  He recalled that 25 years ago Justice Thomas Burger said there are no significant environmental problems with a Mackenzie River route.  Building both the Alaska Highway and a separate Mackenzie pipeline at same time is not possible.  He referenced recent presentations by former Alaska Governor Steve Cowper and University of Houston Professor Ron Oligney.  “We believe Alaskans are hearing the message,” he said.  This will also be the backbone for aboriginal development.  It is not altruism that guides us, but good economic and good sense.

Tourangeau said, “We’ve worked very hard on the project.”  He said it is the most economic alternative.  “We have negotiated and signed the program management agreement that will allow the project to go ahead”. He said the project will enable Aboriginal people to become self-sufficient and that one of his responsibilities will be to assist with permits and regulatory approvals.

During the question & answer period, teleconferees were not permitted time for questions but Municipal Energy Resources Corporation president, Bob Murphy (Photo) quickly provided email responses to several questions.  Here are Northern Gas Pipelines’ questions and Murphy’s answers:

·         May I have a copy of the Program Management Agreement?  The media kit has a summary of the PMA.  Let me know if you need more than that.  It's a rather important document because through it we are able to protect the interests of both producers and aboriginals.  (We have located this and all currently public project information here for you to download.)

·         Where will corporate headquarters be and will there be an Alaska office?  Corporate headquarters for the ARC group will, for the foreseeable future be in Houston, with a major office in Calgary, where ArctiGas is based.  We will absolutely have an office in Alaska.… 

·         How do you envision Alaska Native ownership developing for the Alaska section?  There are several approaches that we could follow to create local Alaskan ownership.  For now, however, I think we need to watch how things play out as the facts concerning gas commercialization and related issues are disseminated and analyzed by industry and state and federal leaders.

Other Q&A asked by live participants led to these responses:

Andre, on economic development.  He said the Nova and TransCanada pipelines in Alberta created jobs, but they paled in comparison to the indirect employment created by this project.  This project could help the northern parts of the country to become self-sufficient, he said.

Tourangeau emphasized long term benefits, including the hope that Aboriginal peoples would not incur high risk.

Hoglund on Alaska and Mackenzie positions.  He discussed the State approved legislation prohibiting a northern route but said, “We anticipate Alaska wants to develop its resources and this is the only economic way to do it.”  He said the Mackenzie Delta producer agreement with Aboriginals does not apply to gas from Alaska.  Tourangeau added there is no provision in the Mackenzie producer/aboriginal agreement for a program management agreement. 

Andre said his plan minimized conflict by virtue of the phased approach, asserting the economics of Mackenzie gas movement improves dramatically when combined with Alaska gas. 

Hoglund, on operations.  He said the company has no intent to build a large company and will have quite a number of people and companies contracted to operate the pipeline.  He said he  anticipates the major companies in Alaska and Canada will join his consortium because it is so economic.  “This is such an attractive solution for everyone that everyone will come together on this solution,” he said.  “We bring  best project design, technology, phased approach, structure, financial structure, lowest tariff—an enormous amount of expertise and capability benefiting every Canadian and US consumer and taxpayer.”

8-02-01.   Washington, DC – One of the major, yet politically motivated amendments tagged onto the Saving America’s Future Energy Act passed last night by the House of Representatives will actually reduce natural gas supplies to the lower 48, increase the cost of energy to U.S. consumers and damage one of our most important energy trading partners – Canada.

The amendment, which attempts to legislate a market decision on an Alaskan pipeline route, caught many in the energy sector by surprise.  Forrest Hoglund, President and CEO of Arctic Resources Company (ARC) stated, “The Tauzin Amendment in the current Energy Bill is one of the most blatant political moves against the interests of the America people I have ever seen.  This does not represent responsible energy policy for U.S. citizens.  Instead, it represents old time, parochial, Alaskan-focused politics at the expense of U.S. energy consumers in the lower 48, the economy and Canada, upon which we depend for much of our vital clean-burning energy supplies.”

There are currently two competing pipeline routes to bring northern Alaskan and Canadian natural gas supplies to the lower 48 states.  The Northern Route, supported by ARC and Canadian Aboriginal groups, would cost $6.1 billion and would transport 4 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day to American markets.  The alternative, the ANGST Route, would require two separate pipelines to be built at a cost of $12.5 billion and would scar over 900 miles of Alaskan mountain ranges.  The Tauzin Amendment would prohibit construction and permitting of the only currently economically viable route – the Northern Route – thereby depriving U.S. energy consumers of nearly 1.5 trillion cubic feet of clean, low-cost natural gas annually.

“The pipeline route from the Alaskan North Slope trying to be legislatively selected instead of a private-sector, market-driven decision, will actually require two pipelines to be built; they will be twice as long, cost at least twice as much, and be more harmful to the environment,” said Hoglund.  “But worst of all, they are uneconomic.  History has shown that when politicians try to force uneconomic decisions, those projects are usually never built; in this case, depriving U.S. consumers of major new supplies of clean-burning natural gas.”

“In addition, it will directly conflict with Canadian Government interests, causing unneeded tensions between our two countries.  In fact, Canada could choose to block the ANGTS route in view of such arbitrary and damaging political actions in Washington,” Hoglund added.  “The market, not the Congress, should decide which pipeline will be built.”

About Arctic Resources Company

Arctic Resources Company (ARC) is a special purpose company formed to manage, in a unique way the development of North America’s most important energy project.  ARC believes that North America must expeditiously access Northern Canadian and Alaska natural gas reserves in a fashion that makes environmental, economic and political sense and includes Aboriginal and Alaskan Native groups upfront and in a meaningful way.  ARC believes that the complex issues involved in creation of a pipeline to transport Alaskan and Canadian natural gas to the lower 48 states is a complex issue requiring a new approach to avoid past mistakes. ARC Contact: Jack Jacobson, 202, 661-6187.

5/31. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE  CONTACT:  Larry Tourangeau, DATE: May 26, 2001

NORMAN WELLS, NWT--In response to a recent article that appeared in the Calgary Herald (See May 2001 Archives), the Ernie McDonald Land Corporation stated today that they are unaware of the details of any tentative deal with Canadian energy companies for a Mackenzie Valley pipeline project.  Larry Tourangeau, President of the Ernie McDonald Land Corporation, stated, “We do not understand why the Aboriginal Pipeline Group would agree to a potential 33% ownership when their mandate is to maximize Aboriginal interests.  So why settle for “up to 33%” when we can own a 100% of the Northern Gas Pipeline”. 

Mr. Tourangeau adds that it was his understanding that the aboriginal leaders and landowners in the NWT were to pursue the formation of a consortium that would own 100% of a pipeline.  Mr. Tourangeau notes that the Calgary Herald article indicates that the consortium currently consists solely of four producers.  Aboriginal ownership will be financed based on the shipment of excess gas, if and only if it can be arranged by the APG, above some pre-specified base load number.  Given the small one billion cubic feet per day capacity of the pipeline and the limited number of alternate producers in the area, he questions the ability of the APG to realistically be able to achieve their ownership equity stake of up to 30%. 

“The APG proposal, while it significantly offers a more attractive ownership potential for aboriginals than prior proposals by producers, doesn’t appear to contemplate the possibility that the producers in Alaska may eventually elect to construct the ‘over the top’ route,” (Prudhoe Bay east through the Beaufort Sea onshore in the northern Yukon or Mackenzie Delta and then south through the Mackenzie Valley and on to Edmonton, Alberta and then southeast to Chicago) said Winter Lennie, of the Western Arctic Energy Corporation, who is a strong supporter of 100% Aboriginal ownership of the proposed Northern Gas Pipeline Project that runs from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska through the Mackenzie Valley and south to Edmonton, Alberta.  “It is our opinion that regional Aboriginal corporations such as ours should have the opportunity to be involved in the development and operation of the pipeline project”. According to a report on May 23, 2001, a BP official has hinted that the Alaskan producers might be leaning towards favouring the construction of this route instead of the Alaskan highway route.  In addition, he added, the economics of this route would make far better sense for producers instead of a Mackenzie Valley-only route that, at $3 billion, could be marginally economical for Canadian producers if gas prices were much lower.  The “over the top” route would have substantially better economics. 

A proposal by Arctic Resources Company offers aboriginals in the NWT and northern Alberta a 100% ownership in a pipeline, notes Mr. Tourangeau.  According to his understanding, Arctic Resources Company will not require that the aboriginals or governments finance any portion of their equity stake either initially or over time.  Furthermore, notes Mr. Tourangeau, in Arctic Resources Company the regional Aboriginal for-profit corporations will have the opportunity to be at the same table along with the other stakeholders.  The APG deal is admittedly “highly complex” and the “tweaks” that are described, as being worked on now may still not result in any aboriginal ownership of the consortium that currently consists of only four producers.  “I believe the best proposal should be one that enables the original mandate of maximum (100%) Aboriginal ownership and economic benefit to be achieved,” said Mr. Tourangeau.  Mr. Tourangeau believes that it may be premature to consider rushing to embrace the APG proposal at the Hay River meeting without a further understanding of the Arctic Resources Company proposal.




5/23.  Washington (Platts)--23May200.  "'Producers Like NWT Pipeline Route Over Cross-Alaska Plan.'

With a recommendation months away, a BP official gave strong indications Wednesday that Alaska producers favor a gas pipeline across Canada's Northwest Territories over one across Alaska. Charles Coulson, commercial manager of BP's Alaska Gas Business, said producers studying the options see the so-called "over-the-top" northern route, which would run under the Beaufort Sea and through the Mackenzie Delta to Alberta, "as having several potential advantages" over paralleling the Alaska Highway. Speaking at the OCS Policy Committee of the Minerals Management Service in Washington, Coulson said a northern pipeline would be cheaper, shorter, easier to build and leave a smaller environmental "footprint" than the alternative.

But Coulson was quick to note that the producers have a lot of work left to do before making a recommendation, which he said may not come until early next year. "It's really premature to exclude any options," he said. And Coulson acknowledged there are many hurdles to achieving the Beaufort Sea/Mackenzie Delta project, which include swaying regulators to allow the controversial proposal to lay pipeline under pristine waters. In addition, if the producers ultimately choose the northern route, they would have to get around recent legislation passed by the state of Alaska to block any pipeline construction under the Beaufort Sea.

George Ahmaogak, mayor of Alaska's North Slope Borough and an OCS policy committee member, questioned how producers would deal with the potentially "serious" environmental and ecological impacts of laying pipe under the sea. Coulson assured the mayor that "we are very conscious of the concerns of your communities" on the project's impact on fishing, hunting and other water-related activities and "they are being taken into account." In addition to BP, producers involved in the study include Exxon Mobil, Phillips Petroleum and some smaller firms. The expected time frame on completion of an Alaskan pipeline is 2006 to 2008." -Platts


Natural Gas & Oil Prices

Upcoming Conferences: IOGCC, 5/11 -13;

Newspaper Front Pages--WORLDWIDE

Our view of South Central Alaska's imminent Energy Crisis

 Linking to Us!

Founding Publisher's  2002 Editorials and 2001; magazine & newspaper articles; Seattle Chamber of Commerce Speech, 5-8-02, CBC Interview




Yours is visit # Hit Counter to this website.

Contact the Webmaster

Site planning: September 2000 - Site construction initiated: January 1, 2001 - Site uploaded to Internet: March 31, 2001 - Founding publisher, 09-00/1-03 and 3-08/present


© 2001-2002-2003-2004-2005-2006-2007-2008-2009 Northern Gas Pipelines 

Web pages herein are protected by the Copyright laws of the United States of America and the Internet Copyright Act.

This Website is provided as a public service.