Michael Giberson
For 30 odd years there has been talk of building a natural gas pipeline from the North Slope of Alaska into Canada and down to the lower 48 states. For a time it seemed almost a necessity given the prospects of diminishing gas supplies in the lower 48 and the cost of competing on the world market for LNG imports. Then, of course, the boom in shale gas production, which has upset what “everybody knew” about the future of natural gas supplies in the U.S. and moderated gas prices in the process.
Is it still a good idea to spend $20-40 billion for a pipeline? The WSJ offers: “Latest Risk to Alaska Gas Pipeline: More Gas.”
(HT to NewsWatch: Energy.)
By the way, interested in learning a bit more about the shale gas boom? One perspective is offered by the documentary film Haynesville, which follows the effects of that shale gas play on several Louisiana landowners. I haven’t seen it yet, but have heard good things. (I am hoping to arrange a showing in Lubbock. Lubbock area folks should let me know if you are interested in seeing the film.)