Yukon Pacific LNG Site - Denied

A swift FERC denial of the Yukon Pacific request to extend the commencment of the Anderson Bay LNG plant. Nice going Feds - Another window slammed shut.



See the full document at (LINK) Search Docket "CP88-105"

Denali PowerPoint and Time Lines

Check out the latest from the Denali Pipeline. (LINK)

The time lines grabbed my attention - Is there any way to move those milestones to the left by a few years?



Seriously 2020?

Yukon Pacific LNG - Anderson Bay

Who would want to build an LNG plant near Valdez I wondered when the TransCanada/ExxonMobil open season documents came out describing an optional line to Valdez. I figured ConocoPhillips / Tokyo Electric - Tokyo Gas would surface as likely LNG plant builders, or maybe the Chinese or Koreans. Scratch that prediction - turns out Yukon Pacific (owned by CSX) has filed with FERC for an extension . (LINK to Petroleum News)

Yukon Pacific argues that the current open season efforts justify an extension. Quoting from the FERC filing:

There is now an additional reason for extending Yukon Pacific’s deadline. Since the Commission’s 2007 extension, industry efforts to commercialize North Slope gas have increased dramatically. The most visible and meaningful of these are the “pre-filing” steps taken by the two leading projects for delivering North Slope gas to Alaska and Lower-48 markets. The implementation of either project would greatly facilitate LNG exports by, among other things, creating pipeline infrastructure that can be leveraged. Given these developments, it is important that the LNG option represented by Yukon Pacific’s proposal remains viable as the “open-season” and other market-related activities for these projects play out. The ongoing effectiveness of the place of export approval granted in this docket is critical to that viability.

Of course every Alaska Gas silver lining has an associated cloud called Tom "Playa Hater" Irwin. A couple of years back he denied a Yukon right of way request. (LINK)

Maybe the stars can align for the LNG option -


View Larger Map

Shale Gas - Is the magic wearing off?

The Alaska Dispatch carried Larry Persily's recent speech on the future of the Alaska Gas Pipeline. (LINK). According to Persily:

I'm not here to tell you it will be built this decade. But I assure you it is not dead; shale gas has not driven a silver stake through the Alaska pipeline; the market has not forgotten us. It may not be paying as much attention as we would like, but that could change.

What about shale gas? Well ExxonMobil (XOM) joined the shale game through acquisition of XTO. Exxon has ideas about exploring for shale gas around the world. XTO cost Exxon $41 Billion (with a "B") in stock. My guess is that Exxon's investment in shale gas will pay off with the greatest successes in Europe.

Chesapeake Energy on the other hand shows signs that owning big shale gas plays + debt + $4/MMBTU may be a bad business plan. Yesterday they announced a $600 million cash infusion from Asian investors (LINK).

In a separate announcement Chesapeake says

Through a series of transactions over the next 24 months, including the preferred stock placement announced today, the company is planning to raise up to $5.0 billion in order to repay up to $3.5 billion of senior indebtedness and increase its investment in liquids-rich plays by up to $1.5 billion.

So judging from their actions it looks like $4/MMBTU shale gas can break you and leave you wanting some liquid hydrocarbons. So I tend to agree with Mr. Persily - Shale gas at $4/MMBTU is not going to drive a stake in the heart of the Alaska Pipeline, that's a job for the politicians.