I have been saying for many years that the only possible method to finance an Alaska gas pipeline that originates on the North Slope is for the project to be the primary financial responsibility of the United States federal government participating with private investments and corporate management.
Funding by the United States Congress as a national security requirement with the participation of the private market system is the solution that can work with a pipeline that begins hundreds of miles from port that competes internationally with gas that is located at port.
Any financing method of this wildly expensive project that does not prioritize federal funding is to be considered a threat to the Permanent Fund Dividend and living standards in Alaska.
The primary alternative to a gas line from the North Slope is the development of natural gas in Southcentral Alaska that has an order a magnitude less expensive up-front cost.
The lower Susitna Valley is rich in coal seams that contain multiple gas resources including sand bed methane, coal bed methane, and conventional trapped gas that is estimated to be in excess of 157 trillion cubic feet. With an up-front development cost less than one-billion-dollars compared to the maybe $44 billion to over $70 billion for a gas line from the North Slope this project is to be a serious alternative if federal funding is not immediately available.
I welcome supporters of the Alaska State Bank to consider the documentation of Susitna Valley gas development.
