Much debate revolves around who should be president of the United States. But either winner, Kamala Harris or Donald Trump, is going to need Alaska’s natural gas. Instead of a long pipeline through Canada, a better idea is a large-diameter, high-pressure, dense-phase pipeline to Anchorage, where gases and liquids would be separated and liquified natural gas (LNG) would be made. Then the LNG could be sent to California and other places by way of existing reversible pipelines inland to other states, but also to Japan, and current Japanese LNG imports from the Middle East could be transferred to the Lower 48 East Coast. This would also induce some Japanese financing.
Then both natural gas and propane could be used by existing Alaska cars and trucks by simply converting to one or the other fuel, as is done in many parts of the world. The propane could be shipped to coastal villages or by river from Fairbanks to inland villages and even by road or train to Tok, Glenallen or Seward, among others. Plus, lengthy above-ground tubes could take gases as far away as Fort Yukon. The propane could also be shipped and sold in the Lower 48.
Such a project does not in anyway diminish the need for renewable energy, both in Alaska and the Lower 48. It is just that the renewable changeover will take time and where relatively cheap oil and gas can help the economy make the changeover quicker than otherwise. Indeed, lots of mined minerals will be needed for the changeover, making a road and roadside natural gas pipeline to the Ambler Mining District necessary. Then a trans-Alaska dense-phase natural gas pipeline would become all the more important to Alaskans and to Alaska mining in order to help speed up the renewable changeover.
Now in the election debate, even regarding Kamala Harris, it is said Joe Biden’s administration caused oil and gasoline prices to go up, which also helped induce general inflation. Interestingly, though, in 2016, due to a Chinese economic lull, oil prices fell to about $41 per barrel and U.S. Lower 48 shale oil production fell. Then in 2017, when oil prices rose by 20% to $51 per barrel, U.S. Lower 48 shale oil production rose by a substantial 10%. In 2020, due to COVID-19, oil prices fell to about $42 per barrel and U.S. Lower 48 shale oil production fell. Then oil prices went way up a whopping 70% to $75 per barrel, yet U.S. Lower 48 shale oil production continued to fall, completely opposite to the 2017 experience. That can only mean one thing: U.S. Lower 48 shale oil is at peak production and will soon go into devastating decline, as a new academic article I authored shows.
With U.S. conventional oil long past its 1970 peak, U.S. Lower 48 shale oil peaking and U.S. and Alaska deep offshore oil limited, U.S. peak oil is close at hand, with a production tumble much greater than that of the 1970s in store. U.S. Lower 48 shale oil production will soon be going down much faster than Lower 48 conventional oil did in 1970, as predicted in 1956 by the famous geologist M. King Hubbert. While renewables and electric vehicles will help overcome an oil crisis, the economy may require more solutions. By using renewables to electrolyze water into hydrogen gas, existing internal combustion engine cars and trucks can run on clean internal combustion hydrogen gas instead of gasoline and diesel fuels. This can also help global warming.
Douglas B. Reynolds, Ph.D., was a professor of petroleum and energy economics for 23 years at the University of Alaska Fairbanks and has studied Alaska’s and the world’s oil, gas and energy industries for over 30 years. His latest book, “Energy Odyssey: The Hubbert Trojan Horse Scenario,” explains much of our energy dilemmas. He can be contacted at [email protected].
The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to [email protected] or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.
Source link : http://www.bing.com/news/apiclick.aspx?ref=FexRss&aid=&tid=66bbe640233f46efbfa64c8962008484&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.adn.com%2Fopinions%2F2024%2F08%2F13%2Fopinion-the-next-president-needs-alaska-natural-gas%2F&c=17803300490090993323&mkt=en-us
Author :
Publish date : 2024-08-13 09:28:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
