By ROBERT SEITZ
The Alaska Industrial Export and Development Authority is considering a loan to HEX/Furie to support 5 years of drilling. HEX ha stated it needs relief from the 12.5% royalty payment, which would provide lower price gas and leave HEX some margin to allow some profit so it could keep on drilling and producing.
The problem has been stated but the State of Alaska has still not taken action to ensure increased production of natural gas in Cook Inlet. Just standing by and letting our Cook Inlet gas run out so we can import LNG makes no sense.
This is our most critical emergency which demands immediate action. Even if we get more production going on the Norh Slope we still need cheap energy on the Railbelt to be able to support that activity.
I have been pushing on this issue of Increased Cook Inlet Gas production for more than a year now, and we still have no viable action yet. That the greatest benefit of Cook Inlet gas is not for its value to the Permanent Fund, but as an energy source for the Railbelt communities. The Crisis is even more urgent than it was last year. I am extremely disappointed in the will and motivation of Alaskans to get this important thing done. Every department, every agency (AEA, AIDEA, RCA, DNR, Alaska House and Senate members) and citizen of Alaska should be working to get things in place to ensure that this increased production of Cook Inlet Gas is accomplished immediately.
As for other aspects of Railbelt energy, I agree with Alex Gimarc’s Oct. 18 column in Must Read Alaska, “Gov. Dunleavy’s Eklutna decision was reasonable,” with my focus on the point that the Eklutna Lake level may have to increase, which in my mind gives room for “pumped hydro” as a means to provide that increased level behind the dam. I think the action retains the water supply and electrical power generation capability.
Now I will address the advancement to more renewables on the Railbelt System. In my column, “Power transition if more complicated than many realize,” I brought up a number of problems that utilities are faced with as they have greater penetration of renewable energy that are inverter based resources.
Just as modern vehicles with enhanced electronics provide more problems as the various features fail to function properly, all these complexities with the addition of more and larger arrays of wind and solar installations. Sustainable, reliable or resilience have nothing to do with decarbonization when living in Alaska. We need power and energy systems that will keep on working no matter what the weather brings, or volcanic eruptions or earthquakes. If something does happen, we need to be able to quickly restore operation to an acceptable level. The utilities and the IPP’s need to have these complexities well worked out between themselves before committing to any utility scale additions to the Railbelt. The communications and the controls will be and complicated. The more complex and complicated the system, the more likely to have failure.
Some of the reason I favor pumped hydro and geothermal for additions to the Railbelt system is for the rotating machines and the inertia they would provide with their operation, that would result in more normal response for an electrical system. I have been considering the use of rotating condensers, which might be power by renewables and energy storage device to also provide high inertia rotating machine interface with the utilities. I encourage everyone to look at interfaces other than inverters as a way to have a better system.
And as the new legislative session will be upon us soon, I will continue to advocate against mandated growth of renewables incorporated into the Railbelt and definitely I advocate against any form Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPF). All the examples across the nation where RPF and RTO have been established, the electrical prices have risen, the system operations have been complicated, and the interaction of all the new entities involved with the grid systems have multiplied and added additional complexity. Electricity is not getting cheaper with the addition of wind and solar.
If Alaska begins building a gas line from Prudhoe Bay and it gets as far as Fairbanks, that would do a lot of good for the state. I’ve been waiting 46 years for a gas line through Fairbanks. All the problems with expensive fuel oil, and high particulate pollution from the burning of wood for heat would be greatly reduced. One great benefit would be the ability to have a natural gas-fueled power plant to feed the Intertie from the other direction.
Now to end where I started, with the increased production of Cook Inlet gas and the part we all have to play in it. Let’s all get behind this and support whatever actions are necessary to get the aid the affected producers need to get that gas to market. Are we ready for another cold winter?
Robert Seitz is a professional electrical engineer and lifelong concerned Alaskan.
Very good article and reasoning. So, let’s get er DONE!
You have to love the Conservative movement, capitalism is the way to go but we want subsidies for businesses to provide cheap products to us. Here’s a hint if you can’t make enough profit off of the gas developments raise the price you charge for the gas! That is capitalism!
We’d be fine if the EPA wasn’t stepping on our toes. Never had this problem in the past, when Alaska was known as the most strict for environmental regulation. Odd that now we need the EPA to stop our production.
By subsidies you of course mean less taxation.
You miss the point. We want cheap energy. Raising the price is not the direction of cheaper energy. There are problems because the oil and gas tax credits were abandoned so that left hydrocarbon properties with extra burden. The objective is still to increase Cook Inlet Gas production with the lowest cost possible. This will make the best possible scenario for capitalism and free market as Alaska fights back from anti-hydrocarbon policies.
“The problem has been stated but the State of Alaska has still not taken action to ensure increased production of natural gas in Cook Inlet. Just standing by and letting our Cook Inlet gas run out so we can import LNG makes no sense.”
This is why I wrote the governor. I would encourage more people to do the same. I, for one, would prefer to be able to keep gas and electricity going to my home. I certainly don’t want to IMPORT it!
Crack open your wallet, AFF!! You should be happy to volunteer to pay pay! Pay! On behalf of everyone
It has been previously suggested a natural gas pipeline could be constructed between the North Slope and Fairbanks or Anchorage, but not to the Kenai for an export terminal, could be more cost efficient than importing LNG. Mr. Sietz has passingly suggested building a pipeline from the North Slope to Fairbanks where natural gas could be used to generate electricity, including supplying the railbelt from the north.
Considering the engineering and construction costs associated with constructing gas transmission between the North Slope and Fairbanks, would it be cheaper and feasible to construct power production facilities on the North Slope and building a transmission line to connect to the railbelt in Fairbanks? Electric transmission lines are expensive to construct, but they are far cheaper than hydrocarbon pipelines. This would however put an end to the dreams of an LNG export line, but would address the needs for Alaska businesses and residents. There could even be federal grants and loans available to help fund the project.
My suggestion for a pipeline to Fairbanks is not just for electricity. Once there is natural gas in Fairbanks then natural gas for heating fuel would then be available. Maybe even end up with gas distribution around the North Star Borough. Lets not focus on the reason not to think about these things, but focus on the benefits that can keep Alaska as a productive state.
Here is a good video showing what underwater sonar and windmills are doing to the whales. Our whales are being killed by green energy.
“Thrown To The Wind”
‘https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/9/20/watch-thrown-to-the-wind
Thank you, Robert Seitz, for making the point that “That the greatest benefit of Cook Inlet gas is not for its value to the Permanent Fund, but as an energy source for the Railbelt communities.” The State of Alaska has a responsibility to deploy State-owned resources, which includes Cook Inlet gas, to provide low cost, reliable, and sustainable energy to heat and power our homes and businesses and to serve as a foundation for industry. To fulfill this responsibility, and to avert the energy crisis brought about by the State’s inaction, the State of Alaska should be pulling every lever available to get Cook Inlet gas into the pipes that heat our homes and fuel our electricity generation. The most obvious lever to pull is to provide the leaseholders with the royalty relief they have been seeking.
Why should Anchorage get subsidies for gas production ? What about the rest of the state ? CookInlet has an abundance of gas reserves . Trillions of cubic feet in the ground , known discovery’s . Maybe cut back on the burdensome bonding and regulations . Jim White prevailing in court should have created some development on fee simple land in south central . It hasn’t . He fought in court until well into his nineties and finally won . He fought the ridiculous bonding requirements for drilling a simple gas well . It’s not much different than drilling a water well . Goofy rules a regulations are preventing gas production in Alaska , not lack of gas . Got to walk before you can run . Should be a small scale bonanza in Kenai drilling gas on private land .
And by the way the production of oil from the North Slope is going to double in the next 40 months . Not sure subsidies will produce more gas in the inlet , just less red tape . No subsidies were needed on Slope to find and drill more oil , other than high prices .
This is not a benefit only for Anchorage. This benefits all of Alaska. If we fail to supply a fuel source to the Railbelt, and we have an unreliable energy supply, people will leave Anchorage and other communities along the Rail system. Who then would be around to support the people in the bush? How many few airplanse would land here? Oil production is not the same as gas production.
If a producer says he needs help to be able to provide natural gas at a price that will keep energy prices low, that is not much of a subsidy. Considering that both the Alaskan and Federal administrations are responsible for the financial mess with Cook Inlet oil and gas, and we need the gas, we all need to pitch in so those who can help are encourage to do so.
I beg to differ with you . When Cook Inlet was awash in Natural gas they were shipping it out and one the largest fertilizer plants in North America was in south central . In addition One of the largest single gas production wells in the world blew out in North Cook Inlet in early sixties and it took a year and half for Red Adair to snuff it out . Had to build special tools .
Looking back a small diameter gas line should have been built to Fbks in the mid sixties . Lots of reasons looking back that it did not happen .
So maybe what you are saying is the cheap gas was sold off and industry profited off most of the easy and cheap to find natural gas in the inlet . And State coffers for profit had benefit of taxes ?
A group drilled an oil well on west side of CookInlet and found a huge gas find , 2TCF ( that’s two trillion cubic feet ) . Had issues cementing it in and had water issues . $150 per barrel processing fee to get rid of oily water and contaminants. In lower forty eight a typical disposal facility charges a buck a barrel . Made producing the project uneconomical. Needed oil find for return on investment .
The Supreme Court action that Jim White fought and won ( after his death ) about bonding requirements , should create a gas rush . For some reason industry is slow to react . Possibly because of no credible press in Alaska .
The electricity rate payers in interior Alaska have funded that ridiculous wind farm in Healy and now through the total mismanagement of our interior utility , now paying the highest utility rates in Nation . That’s a runaway freight train of bureaucrats and pensioners running GVEA . The worst , Fbks will paying 50 cents a kilowatt hour here soon .
Robert are you getting paid as a lobbyist ? Your writings are not passing the smell test in my mind . I’ve pointed out very clearly some of the obstacles and history of CookInlet gas issues as an investor and entrepreneur. If so , your better clearly state that you are not receiving money for writing about CookInlet gas issues ? Spit it out
The theory of utilizing solar and wind energy is intriguing. But the technology to capture, store and distribute energy from these sources remains primitive, it’s ludicrous to attempt to incorporate them for the foreseeable future.
In fact, it’s reckless and not defensible for serious discussion let alone endangering the existing infrastructure. The risk to the public is not acceptable.
From both environmental and economic standpoints it is very destructive and will lead to impoverishing the public and lead to further depopulation, at least for the critical people involved in industries and fields that actually produce anything of actual and useful value.
The practise of subsidizing useless projects mandated by government command and control management using borrowed and printed paper bank notes has led to astronomical amounts of public debt. This is what is not sustainable. Oil, natural gas and coal are sustainable and essential.
When the current financial system and US Dollar collapse, which is a question of when, not if, we need to be in a position to survive and thrive here in Alaska.
I still consider that the installation of wind and solar projects in the remote communities of Alaska is good and profitable. As long as the scale of renewables is small enough and we are working against the price of diesel fuel in those communities these alternative energy projects are desirable and functional and afforable.
I very much appreciated the details addressing the current and ongoing issue of Cook Inlet gas production as presented by Mr. Seitz. Likely a naive question, but given the concerns for potential natural gas ‘blackouts’ in south central due to low or limited stockpiles of natural gas for this winter as suggested by Enstar management in a recent report by KTUU, why has there not been a moratorium on new construction, both residential and commercial, in Anchorage and the Valley? If there’s a concern of running out of gas where residents could have restrictions heating their homes, how can more construction be justified?
Thank you, Robert, for a thoughtful essay.
.
Seems reasonable to assume a professional electrical engineer knows about impedance, resistance, and reluctance.
.
The apparent premise that productive Alaskans must stop what they’re doing, march on the Holy City of Juneau, demand their lobbyist-legislator team do something immediately and by the way, gas producers are ready to help, seems… forgive us, unrealistic at best, hilariously stupid at worst.
.
If the writer and his professional colleagues can’t convince Alaska’s lobbyist-legislator team of this most critical emergency, what can the Deplorable Garbage do except provide cannon fodder when their lights (and heat) go out?
.
HEX bought a $60K per year lobbyist. If it can’t handle a most critical emergency, maybe John Hendrix should fire it, buy an army of lobbyists who know what they’re doing, solve the problem once and for all?
.
Of course, the Deplorable Garbage, would generously donate their lobbyist, but they don’t have one, Robert, which is arguably why no one on Alaska’s lobbyist-legislator team listens to them, or -more importantly-, has to listen to them.
.
Impedance, resistance, reluctance… if one hired a professional electrical engineer to mitigate their effects in the electrical grid, where does the engineer start, how would he evaluate this problem?
.
Impedance, resistance, reluctance in the political grid, but seemingly unconstrained by any law, including Ohm’s or Hopkinson’s… what sort of engineering is needed to find, fix, and finish this problem, assuming such an outcome is possible?
Comments are closed.