Though he is not boring, Steve Porter, a longtime analyst of gas pipeline issues in Alaska, says that the decision-making process on that topic should be methodical, steady and above all, boring.
He didn't mention the speech Sen. Ted Stevens gave Friday in Anchorage to Commonwealth North calling for immediate action on a gas pipeline or the comments in recent weeks by legislators who are growing impatient with what they perceive as ponderous plodding by the Parnell administration. But in a blog posting Sunday at http://alaskanadvocate.com, he defended the cautious approach.
Given the long and tortured history of gas pipeline politics and economics in Alaska, it's reasonable to be wary of calls for instant action, when the total cost is not known.
"Good decision-making process is boring. It is slow. It is methodical. It does not enflame or excite. It does not get politicians elected. It does not make headlines. But it is good leadership. It results in direction that ultimately benefits the people of Alaska," wrote Porter, a former deputy revenue commissioner and state consultant.
He continued:
Sometimes the state should make a decision to support a project financially, but it should not be because of a dynamic speech, or an enflamed public. It should only be made after a boring, methodical analysis of all alternatives.
Some say we have waited too long. We need to act now. My answer to them is they are probably right. We have waited too long, but that does not mean we throw out good process. It means we put our heads down and get to work. Just because the state has waited a long time to thoroughly evaluate an issue does not provide justification for circumventing process in an effort to make a quick decision. Be leary of those who recommend speed at the risk of sacrificing process.
The in-state gas issue is an emotional one for Alaskans. Many believe that Alaskans should have had access to “Alaska’s gas” years ago. It is easy to get Alaskans emotionally excited about bringing North Slope gas to Alaska, but perhaps they would not be so excited if they understood the relative economics of that option evaluated against other options that may be equally economically viable.
The public will make their own determination of what they believe is right based on what the media and politicians feed them. Most do not have an independent source of information. It is up to the legislature and the media to provide them with good information. Good information comes from good process. Good information comes from methodical analysis. Good information comes from boring process. It is time-consuming, but the result is much better than the alternative.
An in-state gas pipeline may be the right answer, but it will only be the right answer if the proper process is followed. The public should understand an in-state gas pipeline in the context of understanding the relative economics of a large diameter pipeline. What are the chances of success of a large diameter pipeline? What is the timing of such an endeavor? If Cook Inlet needs gas before the completion of a large diameter gas pipeline, what are the option that could accommodate that need? What are the costs of importing liquefied natural gas (LNG), short-term and long-term? Without state financial support, the economics of LNG imports both short and long term may be more economic than bringing North Slope gas to Cook Inlet. What are other alternatives that may be available to span the need for short-term gas in Cook Inlet?
If an in-state gas line is built, what are the potential upside opportunities that may eventually be created because of its existence? If an in-state gas line is built, what are the ramifications on a large diameter gas line? Some believe that a large diameter gas line would then be uneconomic. A methodical, boring evaluation would shed some light on this issue.
The open seasons will shed additional light on what is necessary to bring North Slope gas to market, but in the meantime the state needs to maintain a slow and boring process that would provide them with information necessary to understand their alternatives in the event it looks like the large diameter pipeline will be delayed or perhaps never get built.
We are now entering a major election cycle - lots of speeches, lots of emotion. But it’s time to be boring. It is time to be methodical. It is time to follow rational process to get to reasoned decision-making. If someone’s speech gets you excited and makes you want to support one option over another, take a second to think about how much information was provided to get you to that conclusion. Was it based on emotion or substance. Always lean toward boring substance. It leads to better decision-making every time. In an election year it is still time to be boring.
Mr. Porter says,
"Some say we have waited too long. We need to act now. My answer to them is they are probably right."
Right after this, though, he also says,
"We have waited too long, but that does not mean we throw out good process. It means we put our heads down and get to work. Just because the state has waited a long time to thoroughly evaluate an issue does not provide justification for circumventing process in an effort to make a quick decision. Be leary of those who recommend speed at the risk of sacrificing process."
I agree with him. My big fear is we'll panic and do something in a rush, heedlessly, which will drain our state's financial resources without satisfactorily solving our very pressing problems. Look, the politicians want to spend our money and want to appear as if they are addressing our problems and our demands. They want our money to go into their pockets and they want to be re-elected. If we aren't very careful, the politicians will get what they want and we'll end up royally screwed.
If we had our ducks in a row to any extent there would be vision and leadership taking us purposely and thoughtfully into what we should become and be beyond non-renewables and the colonial status it confers on us.
Instead we react to other events world-wide rather than assert our collective will and intelligence in making destiny our own.
What is so hard about projecting where we want to be in 50 years by beginning to think of who and what we will be then by starting right now?
Our dependency on oil and soon, gas revenues, will bite us if we do not begin to find ourselves and our place now, not when it runs out.
In addition, what do you think our undeveloped reserves will be worth if we warehouse them for the future?
I understand the implications of shutting down fields and losing (for the time being) their prime on the reservoir pump but we are in the infancy of drilling and extracting techniques and I believe we will be able to get it later, perhaps massive CO2 injection will provide part of the answer?
I just know we cannot go on with our heads up our place where the sun don't shine and continue to discount the value of our resources for temporary gain because other places have cheaper development costs. Not only are we running out of quantity to fill the 48" line we are also approaching a place where tankers can move oil out of the Arctic via a scaled down system with ice class tankers 4 months out of the year if climate remains relatively constant as now constituted.
Same goes for gas if we choose to do so.
Let's wake up and smell the coffee, folks, we're not in Kansas or for that matter, Texas.
They are what can be expected of a thoroughly ensconced bureaucrat who does not and has not had to participate in the squalor and misery high fuel/energy prices have caused so many in this state.
Plan, study, plan, study, plan, study. Sounds like a job description Mr Porter might recognize.
Porter can obviously afford to wait and seems willing to pass on his career to succeeding generations of little Porters.
Well, THIS AIN'T GOOD ENOUGH!
The people of Alaska need real relief and we need it Now!
Just wait for the next oil spike (this year) where the state will not have ol' free marketing Palin's largess to throw around in heating oil rebates to every man, woman and child, needful or not.
You are full of BS, Porter.
It is past time we got off our collective dead butts and shoved you and your ilk away from the trough so we the still-living might see in our lifetimes the benefit of reasonably priced energy rather than soley targeting resource revenues/ allocations for the perpetuation of the bureaucratic jungle (The State of Alaska) you have lived in so successfully in spite of the detriments to the population in general for all of these years.
The state constitution states plainly the resources are for the people of Alaska, not for the unsustainable monster state government has become. And you refuse to let go of it on that basis.
You people on the Juneau "in" forgot it's about the people a long time ago and now consider yourselves indispensable if not immutable on the subject.
Who appointed you to the Office of Omniscience?
So stay boring, Porter, we the people have a job to do and are going to get something done here, just get out of the way.
Burn your charts and graphs, here, I'll light 'em up with this here natural gas flame.
Power to the People, a statement that cuts both ways.
There is a certain arrogance to Porter's remarks. As others here have noted, we've been "studying" this for a hell of a long time.
How long?
Since 1954- before we became a state.
The 1954 study was completed in three months. It had a all the basics: How many linear feet of pipe needed. How to deal with ice roads and permafrost. How many bridges. How many compressor stations.
47 years after the first study was completed Alaska voters had had enough and they passed a law- 41.41.010 mandating the All Alaska Gasline be built.
Now, 56 years after the first of many studies we still hear this nonsense that we need more studies while Alaskans do not have affordable energy or clean air.
Anyone else had a bellyfull of this nonsense?
"There are only two practical solutions that have the power to solve this problem. One is for the state to back down on the price of royalty crude that is destined to become heating fuel. The other is to make use of the vast quantity of gas on the slope that has been flared off and wasted for thirty years. Bringing gas into Fairbanks is not the solution. Why? Let me ask a question. Is there cable tv and internet at any distance from the city center? Answer...no Why? It is
economically unfeasible to run the lines. So, how long do you think it will be before gas would be made available outside the core areas of town? The best way to bring gas to town is in the form of electricity. The current idea of hauling gas down in trucks is ridiculous, but certain elements figure they can make something out of it. If a large gas turbine power plant were erected on the slope, and a heavy duty power line was run down the haul road, less expensive energy could be delivered to everyone in the interior on the existing electrical infrastructure. This requires no treatment plant, no storage facilities, and no parade of trucks hauling highly volatile and combustible gas down the road. Furthermore, once this back bone line is
in place, smaller lines can be run to the many villages and communities in the interior that currently rely on very expensive power generated by diesel engines.
The only impediment to this is that certain well known public figures might not be able to make a lot of money out of it or secure jobs for
themselves after they leave office. Unless you have been asleep, you know what I am saying."
I've asked him why he won't run for office; says he doesn't want to get crucified. Too bad; he's far from stupid, AND is honest.
Maybe the reason there is more passion these days is because the oil pipeline is currently two-thirds empty and is dropping at the rate of 5% - 7% each year! That coupled with the state budget depending on this single-source for 90%
of the budget does cause a certain angst and
concern. So, Steve, we apologize for getting a little amped up but most of us are aware that we are running out of time!
Micro-tunneling is very boring..
it will also save billions in construction costs.
Why cut down a big swath of forest and dig a big open trench just to put a 48" horizontal hole in the ground ???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA1wzNnfHY4
====
http://www.tbmexchange.com/index.php
After more than 35 years of nothing being done to get north slope natural gas to Fairbanks .. some folks might say that we are 'bored' enough.