Laying Pipe

You hear a lot of platitudes these days amount the need for "energy independence," especially on the campaign trail. But while a lot of people talk about "energy independence" in vague generalities, you don't actually here a lot concrete plans for actually moving America closer to it.

That's why the news that ConocoPhillips and BP are planning to build a natural gas pipeline from Alaska to the lower forty-eight--as reported in yesterday's WSJ-sub req--was such a breath of fresh air:

The perception that there may be a natural-gas pipeline by 2018 could send exploration into overdrive in the North Slope. "It enhances the probabilities and possibilities that any explorers or drillers would want to go to work right away to find new gas," says Scott Heyworth, chairman of the Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority. The scale of the proposed gas pipeline, which ConocoPhillips and BP are calling Denali, is enormous. It would stretch 2,000 miles to reach Alberta and an additional 1,500 to its final destination near Chicago and require five million to six million tons of steel. It would also require more than 1,000 permits.

When it arrives in the lower 48, the Alaskan gas could also help tame prices for the relatively clean-burning fuel, which closed just shy of $10 per million British thermal units Monday on the futures markets, up 30% from a year ago. The proposed pipe would carry 4 billion cubic feet of gas a day from the Alaska North Slope. Some of the gas would be used to light and heat Anchorage. More of it could be used to develop Canada's oil sands deposits, and the rest would be routed through North Dakota into Chicago.

That my friends is energy independence. Our natural gas being piped directly into our country. And using some of it for the Canadian oil sands makes it even more attractive from an energy independence perspective. More natural gas from Alaska and more oil from Canada is just what America needs.

Since everyone is in favor of energy independence, this is the kind of project that everyone should support. Right?

Although it will be buried underground and run parallel to the existing oil conduit, the pipeline will likely raise objections from environmental groups.

Ah yes, those environmentalists. They too claim to favor energy independence for America, but for some reason whenever a proposal actually emerges that would move us in that direction, they find a reason to oppose it. Drilling in Alaska, nuclear, clean coal, you name it and they're against it. You almost would think that they're not in favor of energy independence for America as much as an America independent of energy.

Given the strong state support, this opposition seems unlikely to derail the project.

Let's hope that prudence prevails.

The article also includes a map showing the proposed pipeline route:



It's tough to tell on that map, but from some of the more detailed abstracts that I've seen, it's actually slated to run right through Atomizer's back yard. Underground of course. We applaud Atomizer for his IMBYism and think his sacrifice is a small price to pay for energy independence.