2008年4月21日（月）　15：00〜16：30

2008年度　第1回サロン講演会 −アラスカ天然ガスパイプライン建設計画−

【会場】電力中央研究所　大手町　第一会議室
【講師】福田　正己　氏（アラスカ大学　国際北極圏研究センター）

【概要】 1975年−７７年に建設されたアラスカ縦断原油パイプライン「アリエスカ パイプライン」(Alyeska)に併行して天然ガスパイプラインを敷設する計画が具体化しつつある。 全米の原油供給の２０％を賄うアリエスカパイプラインではプルドベイ油田での生産量減少から、天然ガスへの転換が計画されている。 しかし、現存の原油パイプラインを天然ガスパイプラインへ転用することは出来ない。 原油は+60℃に加熱され永久凍土地域では融解を防止するために地上敷設されている。計画されている天然ガスは冷却されるために地下埋設が原則となる。 そこで新規に長大な天然ガスパイプライン建設が必要となっている。昨今の原油高騰でアラスカ州政府に入る原油通過税の税収が莫大となり、 その余剰金で外部企業と共同出資で天然ガスパイプラインを建設しようという計画であり、州政府主導でパイプライン設計募集が2008年1月初めに締め切られた。 中国政府出資会社など5社が応募したが、そこからカナダのTransCanadaが設計要件を満たすことになった。 油田の権利を有するオイルメジャーはこの設計基準に達することが出来なかった。そのためオイルメジャーからは不満の声が上がっており、 やり手の女性知事サラーポリンとのせめぎ合いが続いている。含み投資額10兆円とも呼ばれる史上最長4000kmのガスパイプライン建設計画は波乱含みで検討が始まった。 日本ではほとんど報道されていない、こうしたアラスカでのエネルギー事情について報告する。

Alyeska(Russian) = Great white land to the east 　Alaska の語源

December 22, 2006　 Houston Business Journal

El Paso sells ANR pipeline, other assets for $3.39B

El Paso Corp. has sold the ANR Pipeline Co., its Michigan storage assets and its 50 percent interest in Great Lakes Gas Transmission to TransCanada Corp. and TC Pipelines LP. The deal, announced Friday, is worth $4.136 billion, including the assumption of $744 million in debt.

After El Paso utilizes tax loss carryovers, the company anticipates taking in $3.3 billion. El Paso also expects to have approximately $1 billion of tax loss carryovers remaining after the close of the sale, which is expected in the first quarter of 2007.

"The sale of ANR Pipeline, our Michigan storage assets and our interest in Great Lakes is a transformational event for El Paso," said Doug Foshee, president and chief executive officer of Houston-based El Paso. "Coupled with the restructuring efforts over the last three years, this transaction immediately elevates our credit statistics to a level that is at or very near an investment grade level, one of our primary long-term objectives."

TransCanada's purchase of the ANR pipeline gives it control of one of the largest interstate natural gas pipelines in the United States. TC Pipelines, which is managed by TransCanada, will hold a 46.45 percent stake, while TransCanada will assume a 3.55 percent stake.

January 4, 2008　State of Alaska

AGIA Completeness Review Finalized
TransCanada Meets Statutory Requirements

Governor Sarah Palin today announced that the State of Alaska has finished its completeness review of the five AGIA applications. The application from TransCanada Alaska Company, LLC/Foothills Pipelines, Ltd. (“TransCanada”) satisfied all of the mandatory requirements set out in AGIA. Thus, TransCanada’s application will move to the next phase, the evaluation phase, of the AGIA process.

AGIA requires that, before an application can be evaluated, it must first undergo a “completeness review” by the commissioners of Natural Resources and Revenue to determine whether it complies with the requirements of AGIA. Then, the commissioners must evaluate the application to determine whether it will sufficiently maximize the benefits to Alaskans and merit issuance of the exclusive AGIA license. The commissioners are now soliciting public comment to help them evaluate the TransCanada application and make that determination.

The five companies which had applied under AGIA to develop and build a natural gas pipeline to transport North Slope gas to market were: AEnergia LLC, the Alaska Gasline Port Authority, the Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority, Little Susitna Construction Company, Inc. (“Sinopec ZPEB”); and TransCanada. While TransCanada’s application was deemed complete, the commissioners determined that the other four applications did not meet the requirements of AGIA. Those applications will not be evaluated further.

“We have reached another important milestone in bringing our Alaska’s natural gas to market,” said Governor Palin. “We have long stated that it only takes one good application. We’re thrilled to have a project sponsor willing to build a pipeline on terms that benefit all Alaskans. Today’s result is tremendously satisfying.” Public review and comment will begin on January 5, 2008 and will last 60 days, closing March 6, 2008. The public may review all applications received and provide comments to assist the commissioners in their determination of whether TransCanada’s application proposes a project that will sufficiently maximize the benefits to Alaskans and merits issuance of the exclusive AGIA license. If the commissioners find that the TransCanada application meets that test, they will forward it to the Legislature for approval.

---

March 2, 2007

Governor Palin Unveils the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act

Governor Sarah Palin today unveiled the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA). The Governor’s gasline bill heads first to the Legislature to begin the public review process.

“We must move a gasline forward as expeditiously as possible. We need low tariffs to maximize the returns to Alaskans. We envision an open access line so new fields will be explored and new reserves developed and shipped through the line for decades to come,” said Governor Palin. “I am confident that this vehicle, the AGIA, gets us there and gets us there quickly, but ALWAYS with the best interests of Alaskans in mind.”

The AGIA accomplishes six primary goals:

・Initiates an application process open to any project sponsor
・ Takes all possible steps to promote the construction of a gas pipeline as quickly as possible
・ Ensures the North Slope basin is open to long-term exploration and production
・ Ensures reasonable natural gas tariffs
・ Ensures North Slope natural gas is made directly available to Alaskans
・ Creates natural gas pipeline jobs for Alaskans

“Our plan focuses on what’s best for Alaskans: beginning with an open and transparent process, followed through with absolute “must-haves” for Alaskans and a strong commitment to low tariffs, while maintaining focus on becoming a viable and significant player in the nation’s energy plan,” said Governor Palin.

The bill contains specific mandates from any entity or coalition of entities interested in constructing the gas pipeline, which will protect Alaska’s best interests:
・ Applicants must commit to expanding the pipeline project when justified by enough new gas
・ Applicants must commit to propose and support tariff rates that would produce the lowest reasonable costs to produce the highest price at the wellhead
・Applicants must offer “distance-sensitive rates” to delivery points in Alaska
・Applicants must provide a minimum of five off-take points in Alaska
・Applicants must commit to establishing a local project headquarters, and local hiring offices in Alaska and to hire qualified Alaskans, as allowed by law

In return, Alaska will provide a matching state capital contribution on the cost of obtaining the initial regulatory certificate. The state is willing to contribute up to $500 million during this high-risk phase to induce an applicant or group of applicants that become the state’s AGIA licensee, to move toward FERC or RCA certification.

“It is my intention to use the $300 million that has already been set aside by the Legislature. This predictable amount will induce construction of a gasline on our terms,” said Governor Palin. “I am confident that we will see the state’s half billion dollar commitment returned to us over and over again throughout the years in the form of lower tariffs which will result in high royalties from production. In addition, by committing state dollars to get this project going, we can avoid the loss of billions each year the project slips. Simply moving forward is in everyone’s best interest.”

The bill also sets the “evaluative criteria” which will be used during the selection process. The criteria the state will use to determine the best project include: the proposed project timeline, the proposed method to manage cost overruns, the proposed tariff rates, the ability of the project design to accommodate expansion, the percentage of the state matching fund that will be used, whether the project is feasible, and the applicant's ability to perform.

Based, in part, upon public input and the evaluative criteria, the commissioners would express their intent to issue a natural gas pipeline project license and forward the notice of intent to the Legislature. The Legislature would have 30 days to disapprove the commissioners' proposed action.

The goal of AGIA is to prepare our licensee to begin fieldwork by the summer of 2008.

May 11, 2007, Juneau, Alaska
Governor Sarah Palin today applauds the passage of the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA) and the incredible teamwork on behalf of the State of Alaska to create the best possible piece of legislation that will benefit Alaskans.

更新日：2007/7/17　jogmec

アラスカガスパイプライン・マッケンジーガスパイプライン
〜コスト増加により前途多難な見込み

１． アラスカ州議会は、アラスカガスパイプライン建設支援を目的としたAlaska Gasline Inducement Act(AGIA)を可決した。AGIAは、パイプライン建設に必要な連邦エネルギー規制委員会（FERC）への申請に関わる補助金（上限5億ドル）や生産税の10年据置措置などを実施する項目を盛り込んでいる。
２． アラスカガスパイプライン及びマッケンジーガスパイプラインは、北米での天然ガス供給に相当程度影響を及ぼすことが考えられ、特に北米の西海岸の天然ガス市場及び今後オイルサンド生産のため需要が増加すると考えられるカナダの天然ガス市場に影響を及ぼしうることが考えられる。
３． しかしながら、アメリカのノーススロープの主要生産者であるBP、ExxonMobil、ConocoPhillipsは、現行のAGIAの元で本プロジェクトは経済性がないとして、州政府にパイプライン建設の提案書を提出しない意向を表明している。また、パイプライン企業も主要生産者の参加なしには、パイプライン計画を推進することは困難であるとしており、現行のAGIAではパイプライン建設は実現に向けて動き出さない可能性がある。マッケンジーガスパイプラインの主要推進者であるExxonMobilは、コストが大幅に増加している現状では、両パイプラインは経済性がなく、本計画を留保する旨発言しており、建設が遅れる可能性がある。
４． アラスカ州にとっては、今後石油生産の減退が予測されていることから、パイプライン計画を実施したいところであり、主要生産者も主要供給源のPrudhoe Bayの商業化が今後課題になってくることやノーススロープ地域の埋蔵量も相当程度あることから、税制面等について両者で議論がなされ、折り合いがつけばプロジェクトが推進される可能性もあるが、少なくとも短期的にはそのような動きは期待できない。
５． マッケンジーガスパイプラインについては、カナダ政府からの財政的支援が期待できないこととコスト環境も少なくとも短期的には好転が期待できないことから、こちらも建設が遅延する可能性が高い。

アラスカ州議会は、本年5月21日にアラスカガスパイプライン法案（Alaska Gasline Inducement Act(AGIA)）を可決した。アラスカガスパイプラインについては、前マカウスキー知事時代に本パイプラインの主要供給ガス田となるPrudhoe Bayの生産者であるBP、ExxonMobil、ConocoPhillipsとアラスカ州政府との間で、本パイプライン推進について合意が行われたがその合意内容が、アラスカ州議会で否定されたため、アラスカ州政府は、新たな法案を策定し、同パイプライン計画を進めようとしている。AGIAであるが、パイプライン建設のためにパイプライン事業推進者はFERC(Federal Energy Regulatory Commision)への申請を行うことが必要となるが、その際に生じる費用について上限5億ドルまで補助金を給付することのみならず、本パイプライン向けの天然ガスについて生産税を10年間に亘り免除するという内容になっている。しかしながら、補助金を受けた業者は、生産者と調整ができなかった場合でもFERCなど関係当局にパイプライン建設の申請を出すことを義務づけられている。
また、同時にカナダのMackenzie Deltaのガス田を供給源としたMackenzie Gas Pipelineについても、最近報道がなされている。本稿では、これらのパイプライン計画についての最近の動向、そしてそのインプリケーションについて考えてみたい。
１． アラスカガスパイプライン・マッケンジーガスパイプラインの概要
アラスカガスパイプライン及びマッケンジーガスパイプラインは、過去30年間様々な計画が出てきたが、実現することはなかった。しかしながら、この4〜5年でプロジェクト推進への動きが出てきている。アラスカガスパイプラインについては、前述の通り、前マカウスキ政権時代に主要生産者と州政府の間で同ガスパイプラインプロジェクトへの財政支援措置についての合意がなされたが、この合意を州議会は否認し、この合意は白紙に戻っている。そこで、パイリン新知事が新たに法案を設立し、このプロジェクトを推進しようとしている。アラスカガスパイプラインのコストであるが、2001年には約120億ドルといわれていたのが、現在では250億ドルになっている（300億ドル要するという噂もある。）。
マッケンジーガスパイプラインについては、アラスカガスパイプラインに先行してプロジェクトが進められてきている。同プロジェクトの主要推進者である、Imperial Oilは、同プロジェクトのコスト試算をカナダ国家エネルギー委員会に提出した。その結果、主要供給ガス田の開発費も含めたコストは倍増し、162億カナダドル（154億米ドル相当）となることが明らかになった。

（表１）アラスカパイプライン・マッケンジーガスパイプライン概要

２． 両パイプラインが北米天然ガス市場にもたらすインパクト
さて、両パイプラインであるが、北米の天然ガス市場にどのような影響をもたらすのであろうか？まず、米国の天然ガス供給に占めるアラスカからの供給の割合であるが、アメリカエネルギー情報局は図１のような見通しをしている。

図１の通り在来型の天然ガス生産が長期的に減少していくのに対し、その下落分を非在来型、LNG、そしてアラスカからのガス供給でこの減少分を補填していくことが予測されている。アラスカからの供給については、パイプライン稼働開始が想定されている2018年以降、供給が増加していき2030年には米国全体の供給量の10％程度を占めると予測されており、長期的には相当程度のインパクトをもたらすことが見込まれている。
日本を含めたアジア太平洋地域との関係で言えば、北米の西海岸におけるLNG受入基地建設に影響を与えうる可能性がある。カリフォルニア州政府は、BHP BillitonのCabrillo LNG洋上受入基地の申請を却下した。カリフォルニア州政府は、長期的にはLNGを輸入することは否定していないものの、今後も同州におけるLNG受入基地の建設は少なくとも短期的には困難な様子である。カリフォルニア州は、現在ロッキー山脈で生産される天然ガスを消費しているが、Kinder Morgan社が現在米国の北東市場をターゲットとしてRockies Express Pipelineを推進している。北東市場の天然ガス価格は他地域と比較して高いことから、このパイプラインが稼働した場合、ロッキー山脈で建設されるガスが北東地域に供給される可能性がある。カリフォルニアのガスの供給源となるのは、ロッキー山脈以外では、LNGもしくは、アラスカパイプラインもしくはマッケンジーガスパイプラインで供給される極地のガスということになる。裏を返して言えば、両パイプラインの動向が、今後北米西海岸でのLNG受入基地建設の方向を定める一つの要因になりえることが考えられる。
カナダの今後の天然ガス需要であるが、オイルサンド投資の積極化、また将来生産増加が見込まれており、オイルサンド生産のための天然ガス需要が増加していくことが見込まれている。カナダ石油生産者協会(CAPP)によれば、2005年のオイルサンド生産量は日量１百万バレルであるが、これが2015年には日量3.5百万バレル、2020年には4.0百万バレルに増加すると予測している。カナダエネルギー国家委員会(NEB)によれば、オイルサンドの天然ガス需要は、2015年には日量21億立方フィートに上るとしている。一方で、カナダの在来型の天然ガス生産は今後減退が見込まれていることから、カナダのガス供給のポイントとなるのが、コールベッドメタンなどの非在来型の天然ガス生産、LNG輸入、そしてノーススロープ及びマッケンジーデルタからのガス供給となる。

３． アラスカガスパイプライン及びマッケンジーガスパイプラインの動向
さて、アラスカ州政府は、法案を可決させたが、順風満帆とはいかない様子である。アラスカ地域での石油・天然ガスの生産者であるBP、ConocoPhillips、ExxonMobilは、アラスカガスパイプラインに関する提案書を州政府に提出しない方針と伝えられている。ExxonMobilのTillerson会長は、株主総会の終了後、現在のコスト環境では、パイプラインプロジェクトには経済性がなく、コストインフレーションが落ち着くなど経済性に見通しが立つまで、本プロジェクトを延期する方針を示している。これら主要生産者は、税制面において何らかの優遇措置が取られない場合は、本パイプラインを少なくとも短期的には推進する可能性は低いと思われる。
これら主要生産者の参加がない場合、パイプライン企業が提案書を提出することも考えられるが、パイプライン企業の主力企業の1つであるEnbridge社は、アラスカガスパイプラインに関心を示しつつも、主要生産者の参加なしには本プロジェクトは、総費用が200〜300億ドルと非常に大規模であり、リスクも相当高いため、これら3社の関与なしにはパイプライン計画を推進することは困難ではないかと発言した旨報道がなされている。また、現在のパイプラインコストは膨大であることから、メジャーズのような資金力を持った会社の参加なしには、資金調達が困難になる可能性があると思われる。
コスト面のみならず、法制面で主要天然ガス生産者がAGIAについて問題視しているのは、第1にタリフの設定方法があげられる。アラスカ州政府が今回設定しているタリフのフォーミュラであるが、パイプラインの拡張の費用負担を拡張事業参加者のみならず、既存のパイプライン保有者にも負担させることとなっている。つまり、パイプラインの初期建設費用が100ドル、通ガス量が100であったとすると、1単位あたりのタリフは1ドルとなる。そこで、拡張工事があったとし、建設費用が30ドル、増加分の通ガス量が18であったとすると、アラスカ州政府の今回設定したタリフのフォーミュラによれば、（100ドル＋30ドル）/（100+18）＝1.1ドルとなり、本来であれば拡張分の費用は拡張事業に参加した企業が負担すべきであるが、今回の法案は、そうなっていない（本来であれば、既存パイプライン使用者が1ドルを負担し、拡張事業参加者が30ドル/18＝1.67ドルの負担）。第2の問題点は、アラスカ州政府にプロポーザルを提出し、それが承認されると次は、FERCやNEBなどの連邦政府の関連機関への承認作業が行わうこととなるが、この間、パイプライン事業者は、生産者との間で販売活動を実施し、パイプライン事業が経済的に遂行可能と成るような作業を行うが、アラスカ州政府は、この活動に対して補助金を供与するとする一方で、この販売活動がうまくいかなかった場合でも、FERCやNEBへの申請を行うことを義務づけている。FERC等への申請の義務化については、主要生産者のみならず、パイプライン業者も反発をしている。
マッケンジーガスパイプラインについてもExxonMobilは、アラスカパイプライン同様、現在はプロジェクトを推進するようなコスト環境にないことから、パイプライン建設を留保する旨を示している。カナダ政府等からの税制面などでの優遇措置があれば、パイプラインの経済性も向上するかもしれないが、カナダ政府は、Mackenzie Deltaの主要生産者との対話には応じるものの、同パイプラインプロジェクトへの財政的支援は行わない方針であることから、パイプライン建設は遅延する可能性が高い。
それでは、今後のパイプライン建設への動きはどうなるであろうか？まずアラスカパイプラインであるが、現在Prudhoe Bayからの随伴ガスが生産されており、これを再圧入し石油の生産に使用している。しかしながら、同油田からの石油の生産は今後減退が見込まれることと、相当程度の埋蔵量が存在（約9tcf）することや、今後Lower 48での需要があることから、これをそのまま放置しておくことは考えにくい。Tillerson会長も、プロジェクトからの撤退については否定をしている。しかしながら、コスト環境がいつ好転するかは不明である。アラスカ州は、総歳入の中約40％弱を石油収入に頼っており、今後アラスカ地域からの石油生産は減退が予測されていることから、ガスパイプライン建設を推進したい意向は強いものと思われる。また、パイプライン推進者に、新たに税制面などでの優遇措置が行われれば、建設に動き出す可能性があるかもしれないが、州政府は、新法案に基づいた提案書の提出がなされることに自信をもっていることから、提案書の期限である7月までにこのような措置が取られるとは考えにくい。新たな動きがあるとすれば早くとも本年7月以降になるのではないかと思われる。
マッケンジーガスパイプラインについては、コスト環境が好転すればパイプライン建設に動き出す可能性が高いと思われるが、少なくともそのような状況は短期的には見込まれないこと、また、カナダ政府に財政的支援を行わない方向であることから、本パイプラインについても建設が遅延する可能性が高い。
両パイプラインの建設が遅延した場合、または、最悪建設されない場合は、北米での天然ガス価格が上昇する可能性があること、米国においては特にLNGの需要が増加してくることが考えられること、また、これに対応してメキシコ、カナダを含めた北米西海岸でのLNG受入基地の建設（増設も含めて）が考えられる。また、カナダにおいては、コールベッドメタンなど非在来型ガス開発の増加やオイルサンド開発においてコークスを使用するなど天然ガスに代替する資源の活用の推進などが考えられる。

2006/10/30 新日本製鐵

高強度（〜X120）及び複合特性鋼管の量産化体制確立について

新日本製鐵株式会社は、このたび君津製鐵所鋼管工場における高強度ＵＯ鋼管（大径溶接鋼管）の量産化体制確立に向けた投資を決定した。ラインパイプ分野における最先端の高付加価値製品として開発したX120グレード（”X”はAPI 5L〜米国石油協会ラインパイプ規格〜の強度記号）を始めとする高強度複合特性ＵＯ鋼管の量産体制を、競合他社に先駆け世界で初めて2008年3月に確立する。

１．投資決定の背景
世界のエネルギー消費が趨勢的に拡大する中、とりわけ、天然ガスはクリーンエネルギーとして開発が活発化しており、これに伴ってガス輸送用のラインパイプ需要が着実に増加している。
一方で、天然ガスの開発環境は年々遠隔地化、過酷化（寒冷地、深海等）が進行しており、パイプラインに使用されるUO鋼管に対する需要家の要求品位はますます高度化・複合化するとともに、増大する開発コスト低減のため抜本的なサイズダウンニーズ（→高強度鋼管化）が高まっている。
当社はAPI 5L（現在Ｘ70までが主流）の X100、X120グレードを含む高強度複合特性鋼管（低温靭性、高圧潰性、高変形能等）の開発を実施し、既に完了させていたが、今回本格的に量産化するための設備体制を整える。

2008/04/10 日本経済新聞

米コノコのガスパイプライン、英ＢＰも建設参加・アラスカ

　米石油大手、コノコフィリップスが米アラスカで計画中の天然ガスパイプライン建設に英ＢＰが加わることが8日、明らかになった。投資総額は300億ドル（3兆900億円）を超える見通しで、米エクソンモービルなどにも参加を呼びかける。天然ガスは石炭などに比べ環境負荷が小さく、発電用燃料としての需要が急拡大している。

　両社は6億ドルを投じて建設準備を始める。天然ガスは埋蔵量が豊富なアラスカ北部で生産。パイプラインはまずアラスカからカナダ東部に通じる部分を建設し、将来は北米大陸を縦断して消費地の米南部まで延ばす考え。現在の米消費量の6％にあたる天然ガスを輸送できるようになり、エネルギー安全保障の強化に役立つ。

New York Times　2008/4/9

2 Oil Firms Plan Alaska Gas Pipeline

Two of the world’s biggest oil companies, BP and ConocoPhillips, joined forces Tuesday to try to break a longstanding deadlock over Alaska’s vast reserves of natural gas. They said they would spend billions to build a pipeline from the North Slope to feed energy-hungry markets in the United States and Canada.

The proposal won praise from Alaska’s governor, Sarah Palin. “It’s a good day,” she told reporters in Alaska.

The announcement comes at a time when consumption of natural gas in the United States is increasing and conventional production is declining. Natural gas is cleaner than other power sources, like coal, and analysts say it is becoming increasingly critical to the nation’s energy needs.

BP and Conoco will initially spend $600 million in the next three years to drum up support for the project, seek state and federal approval, and secure gas supplies for the pipeline. BP and Conoco said the project would be the largest-ever private sector construction project in North America.

The project, which would include a $5 billion gas-processing facility on the North Slope, would cost about $30 billion and take at least 10 years to complete.

At a time when both energy prices and construction costs are soaring, the endeavor would dwarf the 800 mile trans-Alaska oil pipeline, a momentous project completed in 1977 and that brought jobs and revenue to Alaska. As oil production from the Prudhoe Bay field declines, Alaskans are hoping that natural gas will take over from oil.

An Alaska gas pipeline has long been sought as a critical component of the nation’s energy security. The planned pipeline would have a daily capacity of 4 billion cubic feet of natural gas, or almost 7 percent of current United States consumption.

But the companies will have to overcome some huge hurdles, said Christopher Ruppel, an energy analyst at Execution, a brokerage and research firm.

“We’ve had a long record of Alaska pipeline projects coming out of Alaska and Canada, and they have consistently been delayed because of political opposition and rising costs,” he said. “The United States and Canada desperately need the gas. But the question is, is it doable?”

The companies will need to secure more than 1,000 permits from local, state and federal authorities in both the United States and Canada, a process that will most likely take years. They need to negotiate with native tribes along the pipeline’s route to secure the right of way. If the oil pipeline is any guide, the gas line will also require vast engineering feats.

But with higher prices, and a growing appetite for natural gas, the economics of such a large project are starting to make sense for oil companies. The companies said the initial plan is to build a 2,000-mile pipeline from Alaska’s North Slope to the Canadian province of Alberta; that would add to the total North American gas supply, freeing some Canadian gas for export to the United States. Eventually, the pipeline might be extended 1,500 miles, to Chicago.

“This will be a massive undertaking,” said Doug Suttles, president of BP Alaska. “It is going to take the big team to get this going.”

The plan to build a natural gas pipeline to export the state’s vast gas resources has been tangled in Alaskan politics for years. Today, Alaska’s estimated 35 trillion feet of gas reserves are either re-injected into oil fields or left dormant because of a lack of export facilities to bring them to consumers.

When Governor Palin took office in late 2006, she interrupted pipeline negotiations that her predecessor, Frank H. Murkowski, had been pursuing with the North Slope oil operators, BP, Conoco and Exxon Mobil.

She started from scratch after criticizing the previous talks as not being competitive enough, and sought to bring in new operators in order to secure better terms for Alaska. Her administration is evaluating a proposal made by a Canadian pipeline operator, TransCanada.

But the oil companies complained about the delays and said the governor’s procedure was unrealistic. Eschewing 避ける　$500 million in potential subsidies from the state, BP and ConocoPhillips declared on Tuesday that the economics of natural gas have reached the point that they can finance the pipeline on their own.

James L. Bowles, the president of Conoco Alaska, said that while the companies would seek no state subsidies, they will try to meet requirements outlined by Alaskan authorities, like offering local delivery points on the pipeline to meet the state’s natural gas requirements.

“This project is moving forward on its own,” he said.

Ms. Palin welcomed BP’s and Conoco’s proposal, while stopping short of formally endorsing it. She told reporters that she would meet with executives from the companies to find out more about the joint project. Still, she added, “it sounds great for the state of Alaska.”

The plan came as a surprise to Exxon, which said it had been invited to participate only a few days ago. The company will now “evaluate all options,” according to Margaret Ross, an Exxon spokeswoman.

BP and Conoco said they would welcome Exxon’s participation.

Many analysts have voiced concerns that natural gas prices would keep rising as domestic demand grows and Canada’s exports fall because of increased consumption there.

Without a natural gas pipeline, the United States will increasingly depend on imports of natural gas in liquefied form, a source that is costly and potentially vulnerable to political instability in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America. Greater demand is already pushing prices higher, and adding to pressure to open deeper waters off the country’s coast for exploration.

Amy Myers Jaffe, an energy analyst at Rice University, said a gas pipeline was badly needed, in addition to the liquefied natural gas projects under consideration. “In the long term it’s not going to mean we are not going to need L.N.G., but we would need a lot more L.N.G. if Alaska does not happen,” she said.

Natural gas consumption rose by 6.2 percent in 2007, to 23 trillion cubic feet, from 21.7 trillion cubic feet in 2006, according to the Energy Information Administration.

Natural gas prices, which averaged $2 a thousand cubic feet in the 1990s, have soared in the last decade. It recently traded at $9.74 a thousand cubic feet on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

---

April 21, 2008 newsminer.com

Oil giants make push for pipeline in Congress

The North Slope’s two biggest oil producers were on Capitol Hill last week pushing their plan to build a $30 billion pipeline to carry Alaska natural gas to markets in the energy-hungry Lower 48.

Doug Suttles, president of BP Alaska, and Jim Bowles, chief executive of ConocoPhillips’ Alaska operations, met with members of Alaska’s congressional delegation Thursday, following meetings the day before with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Suttles said the Denali Pipeline, as the project has been named by the partners, has been well received by lawmakers and federal officials, who see in it partial relief for the rising energy costs afflicting the nation.

The pipeline would deliver 4 billion cubic feet of gas per day to the Lower 48 market, or about 8 percent of the nation’s daily demand.

“I don’t usually use this word, but I’m excited,” Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, said. “This is going to put an impetus on the pipeline to make this a project that everyone will be talking about by the end of the year.”

ConocoPhillips and BP say they have the experience and capital necessary to kick-start the pipeline, which has for three decades been one of Alaska’s dearest economic development dreams.

State officials, who are considering a competing proposal by pipeline giant TransCanada, welcomed the ConocoPhillips-BP announcement but said more information was needed to properly evaluate the proposal.

“There are a number of details that are as yet unknown that will ultimately determine whether this is good for the state or not,” said Marty Rutherford, deputy commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources.

Alaskans will be able to see firsthand the commitment on the part of BP and ConocoPhillips as initial design and cost-estimate work on the project gets under way this summer, Suttles said.

Previous negotiations on the pipeline have broken down over the need for fiscal concessions from the state, which the companies maintain are necessary to get shareholders to approve investing the tens of billions of dollars the project will ultimately cost.

Bowles said the difference between where the companies were last year and where they are today comes down to the issue of how much they should pay the state in taxes and royalties for commercializing the gas.

“What ConocoPhillips submitted last year was a proposal (for) ... some discussions we had hoped to enter into with the state on a fiscal framework,” he said. “What we’re doing today is entirely different ? the project’s started and we’re actually doing pre-steps to an open season.”

Gov. Sarah Palin’s administration has said it is willing to consider fiscal changes, but only after the companies provide more detailed cost estimates.

“What we’re doing today is moving out on the project without any type of requirement from the state,” Bowles said. “We will come back at some point in the future, as the governor has suggested, and see if we can have a discussion on fiscal framework. But it will be after we have better data on the pipeline.”

In 2001, the pipeline was estimated to cost about $20 billion. Bowles said that number is closer to $30 billion today.

Despite the administration’s tough stance, Bowles and Suttles said they understand Palin’s reasons for pushing for greater competition in the pipeline process.

“The governor’s process has clearly kept a spotlight on it and her,” Suttles said. “She’s clearly committed to doing this, and so are we and a lot of people.”

Investing in the pipeline

Under the ConocoPhillips-BP plan, the companies would stretch a 48-inch diameter pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to Alberta, Canada. From Alberta, the gas would be shipped through existing pipelines to Lower 48 consumers or, if necessary, a new pipeline to Chicago could be constructed.

The pipeline would follow the existing trans-Alaska oil pipeline corridor from the North Slope to Fairbanks, where it would split off alongside the Alaska Highway to Alberta.

ConocoPhillips and BP have promised to spend $600 million during the next two summers to get the project to open season ? when gas producers have the opportunity to bid on capacity in the pipeline.

The companies say they will begin field work on the Alaska side of the border and meet with aboriginal groups and other stakeholders in Canada this summer to scope out potential stumbling blocks.

The Tanana Chiefs Conference has already received a contract to conduct right-of-way studies on its land around Fairbanks.

The partners also plan to begin hiring staff for their Anchorage headquarters.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said she left her meeting with Suttles and Bowles “feeling good about the future of the state.”

“This is more than talk,” she said. “There are real things that are happening on the ground that should give the people of Alaska hope for the future of the state.”

The state stands to earn billions of dollars from taxes and royalties on gas production once the pipeline is completed. The project would also inject thousands of construction jobs into the state economy at a time when the nation as a whole is suffering a downturn brought on by the mortgage crisis.

“We’re looking now at certainty that we’re going into a period of real development,” Stevens said. “I think that changes the dynamic of the Alaska economy.”

ConocoPhillips and BP expect it will take three years to reach open season. Assuming enough gas is committed to the pipeline, the next step would be to apply for certification from U.S. and Canadian regulators, a process that is expected to take an additional two years.

At the moment, Bowles and Suttles have their bosses’ approval to each spend $300 million on the project. Before construction can begin, though, they will have to get the OK of each company’s board of directors ? a bridge they plan to cross once they’ve received certificates from FERC and Canada’s National Energy Board.

“At that point, you actually have permission to build the line and you can go to sanction,” Suttles said. “You know you have customers ? shippers that will bring gas to it ? and then you move to construction when a massive amount of money is spent.”

Gas would flow down the pipeline beginning in 2018 if the project stays on its current timeline, Bowles said.

Filing the pipe

ConocoPhillips and BP combined hold rights to about two-thirds of the 35 trillion cubic feet of proven gas reserves on the North Slope. The companies say, like other potential shippers, they will commit their gas to the pipeline once it’s shown to be economical.

“Obviously, we have a lot of confidence we’re going to get there or we wouldn’t be spending $600 million, but we need to go through that step,” Suttles said. “We have to create a schedule, we have to create a cost estimate and convert that to a tariff.”

FERC will determine the tariff based on the cost of the pipeline and the amount of gas it transports and other factors. More gas means lower shipping fees, which will benefit the state and explorers with gas to get to market but no ownership in the pipeline.

The owners of the pipeline also stand to benefit from lower tariffs. However, since they would essentially be paying themselves, some administration officials question whether they would seek the lowest possible shipping rates in an attempt to discourage competition on the North Slope.

“FERC has some really clear (antitrust) rules about how you have to separate your shipper role and your pipeline role,” Suttles said. “I don’t anticipate that will be a problem.”

The companies likely are basing their tariff estimates on 35 Tcf of gas shipped over a 20 year depreciation schedule, though the cost of building the line could be recouped over a longer period.

“I think the 35 Tcf we have now is enough to get this project moving,” Suttles said. “Ideally, over the life of this project, there will be more gas coming. But there’s enough gas to fill the pipeline for the first 20 years.”

Federal geologists estimate the North Slope contains as much as 200 Tcf of as yet undiscovered gas.

“Our challenge right now is to do the proper work, give people confidence at open season that this is going to be a good project and that there’s a tariff which will generate a good return for gas owners,” Suttles said.

Circling tiger

Exxon Mobil remains the biggest question mark surrounding the ConocoPhillips-BP proposal.

The partners believe they have the financial wherewithal and experience to build the pipeline without Exxon, but they still need the world’s largest energy company to commit its gas ? a full one-third of the North Slope’s proven reserves ? in the line.

“We’d like Exxon to join the project, but it’s not required. If they chose that it’s not the right thing for them to be in the pipe, that’s fine,” Suttles said. “We have the experience, we have the knowledge, we have the fiscal capability ... to do this.”

Bowles agreed that Exxon’s absence would no hinder the project in the early stages.

“While it’s important that we secure them as a shipper in the future, it’s not absolutely necessary that they’re in the pipeline project going forward,” Bowles said.

Even if Exxon doesn’t join the project, BP and ConocoPhillips still need to reach an agreement with the Irvin, Texas-based major on producing gas from the fields ? Prudhoe Bay and Point Thomson ? where they are co-owners.

“The practicality of having a successful off-take would be greatly enhanced if we had all of the owners aligned on how that gas off-take occurred into a pipeline,” Bowles said.

Point Thomson

The Point Thomson field presents its own unique challenge. Its 9 Tcf of proven gas reserves are crucial to a successful pipeline project.

However, the state is in the process of deciding whether to disband the 106,200-acre field and revoke the underlying leases held by Exxon, BP, ConocoPhillips and others for failure to develop. A decision from the Department of Natural Resources is expected by June.

“The Point Thomson gas is critical to this project,” Bowles said. “We have to know before we get to open season who owns that gas. It’s doubtful the project could move without that gas.”

2007.3.2

Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA)

セイラ・ペイリンSarah Palin 知事は、アラスカ・ガスライン・プロジェクト計画の早期実現を図るため前フランク・マコウスキー知事の推進していた計画を見直し、ガスライン建設の投資家に対する新たなインセンティブなどを盛り込んだ "Alaska Gasline Inducement Act”を、3月2日アラスカ州議会に提出しました。その法案の内容及び知事の上院議長宛の文書、また知事室のプレスリリースなど、下記にてご覧ください。 http://www.gov.state.ak.us/agia/

March 2, 2007, Juneau, Alaska

Governor Palin Unveils the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act

Governor Sarah Palin today unveiled the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act (AGIA). The Governor’s gasline bill heads first to the Legislature to begin the public review process.

“We must move a gasline forward as expeditiously as possible. We need low tariffs to maximize the returns to Alaskans. We envision an open access line so new fields will be explored and new reserves developed and shipped through the line for decades to come,” said Governor Palin. “I am confident that this vehicle, the AGIA, gets us there and gets us there quickly, but ALWAYS with the best interests of Alaskans in mind.”

The AGIA accomplishes six primary goals:
・ Initiates an application process open to any project sponsor
・Takes all possible steps to promote the construction of a gas pipeline as quickly as possible
・Ensures the North Slope basin is open to long-term exploration and production
・Ensures reasonable natural gas tariffs
・Ensures North Slope natural gas is made directly available to Alaskans
・Creates natural gas pipeline jobs for Alaskans

“Our plan focuses on what’s best for Alaskans: beginning with an open and transparent process, followed through with absolute “must-haves” for Alaskans and a strong commitment to low tariffs, while maintaining focus on becoming a viable and significant player in the nation’s energy plan,” said Governor Palin.

The bill contains specific mandates from any entity or coalition of entities interested in constructing the gas pipeline, which will protect Alaska’s best interests:
・Applicants must commit to expanding the pipeline project when justified by enough new gas
・Applicants must commit to propose and support tariff rates that would produce the lowest reasonable costs to produce the highest price at the wellhead
・Applicants must offer “distance-sensitive rates” to delivery points in Alaska
・Applicants must provide a minimum of five off-take points in Alaska
・Applicants must commit to establishing a local project headquarters, and local hiring offices in Alaska and to hire qualified Alaskans, as allowed by law

In return, Alaska will provide a matching state capital contribution on the cost of obtaining the initial regulatory certificate. The state is willing to contribute up to $500 million during this high-risk phase to induce an applicant or group of applicants that become the state’s AGIA licensee, to move toward FERC or RCA certification.

“It is my intention to use the $300 million that has already been set aside by the Legislature. This predictable amount will induce construction of a gasline on our terms,” said Governor Palin. “I am confident that we will see the state’s half billion dollar commitment returned to us over and over again throughout the years in the form of lower tariffs which will result in high royalties from production. In addition, by committing state dollars to get this project going, we can avoid the loss of billions each year the project slips. Simply moving forward is in everyone’s best interest.”

The bill also sets the “evaluative criteria” which will be used during the selection process. The criteria the state will use to determine the best project include: the proposed project timeline, the proposed method to manage cost overruns, the proposed tariff rates, the ability of the project design to accommodate expansion, the percentage of the state matching fund that will be used, whether the project is feasible, and the applicant's ability to perform.

Based, in part, upon public input and the evaluative criteria, the commissioners would express their intent to issue a natural gas pipeline project license and forward the notice of intent to the Legislature. The Legislature would have 30 days to disapprove the commissioners' proposed action.

The goal of AGIA is to prepare our licensee to begin fieldwork by the summer of 2008.

---

CBC News January 4, 2008

TransCanada alone meets Alaska's criteria for gas pipeline
Calgary-based company's application to enter public comment period

A Calgary company has come one step closer to having the exclusive right to build a natural gas pipeline from northern Alaska.

The application from TransCanada Alaska Co., LLC/Foothills Pipelines, Ltd., a subsidiary of Calgary-based TransCanada Corp., was the only one that met all the state's requirements for building the North Slope pipeline, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said Friday at a new conference in Anchorage, Alaska.

"We have long stated that it only takes one good application. We're thrilled to have a project sponsor willing to build a pipeline on terms that benefit all Alaskans," Palin said.

Five applications were submitted for the exclusive right to build the 5,600-kilometre pipeline, which is expected to cost more than $20 billion US. The line, if completed, would transport gas from the state's North Slope, through the Yukon, British Columbia and Alberta to markets in the U.S. Midwest.

Companies had until Oct. 1 to submit proposals to the state for construction and operation of the pipeline.

TransCanada's application will now be evaluated by the state government to determine whether it maximizes the benefits to Alaskans and merits issuance of the exclusive licence.

As part of that evaluation, a 60-day public-comment period on TransCanada's application opens Saturday.

Afterward, if the state determines that the application meets those requirements, it will be forwarded to the Alaska legislature for approval.

As the winning bid, the company could receive, among other incentives, a $500-million US matching grant from the state.

Applications were submitted under the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act, or AGIA, passed by the state in May 2007.

The other four applications were from the Alaska Gasline Port Authority, AEnergia LLC, Sinopec ZPEB and Alaska Natural Gasline Development Authority.

Those companies were notified Friday that their applications did not meet the requirements set out by the law, and will not be evaluated further.