Showing posts with label economy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label economy. Show all posts

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Cruise Lines Score Win in Alaska

Looks like the tax the the government approved the tax to be lowered. And at the bottom of the article, it's rumored that Royal Caribbean is leaving the Port of Miami.

Cruise Lines Score Win in Alaska

Alaska's Senate has agreed to roll back a tax on cruise ship passengers that has angered the industry and led some lines to cut back on ships visiting the state.

The tax would be lowered o $34.50 from, according to news reports. The bill still must be approved by the Alaskan House.

The cruise industry has challenged the tax in federal court as an illegal entry tax and the Senate bill would reportedly settle the issue if enacted.

The Alaska Cruise Association said the state will see a 14.2 percent drop in cruise capacity this year, which is 140,000 passengers.

Association officials could not be reached immediately for comment, but the group's Web site noted: Miami-based Carnival Corp. & PLC (NYSE: CCL; NYSE: CUK) previously stated that the move of Holland America's 1,270-passenger Ryndam to Europe in 2011 and Princess Cruises' 710-passenger Royal Princess to P&O Cruises were in line with the continued drop in Alaskan deployments.

Carnival Corp. and Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. (NYSE: RCL) spokespersons did not have immediate comment on the bill's passage.

Richard Sasso, who leads the marketing committee for the Cruise Lines International Association in Fort Lauderdale, said: "We need to be careful that destinations don't underestimate the value of cruise ships going to destinations and the economic contribution that makes."

Overly aggressive taxation can put a burden on guests, adding to the cost of a cruise and generate concern among cruise operators that the taxes aren't justified, especially if the proceeds aren't being used to enhance infrastructure related to cruise ships, he said. "What happened in Alaska over the years is they escalated the tax to a point where it seemed to be not only unconstitutional but also not a favorable cost structure for cruise lines to wanting to operate there."

Maritime lawyer Jim Walker of Miami, who is critical of pollution caused by cruise ships in Alaska, wrote on his blog that the vote is a big win for Carnival and its subsidiaries.

In other news

USA Today's Gene Sloan has written an article about what he describes as "Royal Caribbean's slow-motion pullout" from its longtime hub at the Port of Miami.

His posting followed Royal Caribbean's announcement that the 3,634-passenger Liberty of the Seas will move to Port Everglades in November 2011.

Royal Caribbean's Oasis of the Seas, which is the world's largest cruise ship, is already based at Port Everglades and the sister ship, Allure of the Seas, will be based there later this year.

The tent-like roof of Royal Caribbean's terminal is a landmark at the Port of Miami, but Sloan noted the company will have only one ship left in Miami in the winter of 2011-2012.

Royal Caribbean can utilize the state-of-the art Terminal 18 at Port Everglades, which is the world's largest cruise terminal. Port Everglades officials have touted the port's next-door proximity to Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport as a key marketing advantage because it's the discount airline hub for South Florida.

Royal Caribbean's move may put pressure on the Port of Miami, which is contemplating building a new cruise terminal, as previously reported on Cruise Industry report.

The move could also enhance Port Everglades' efforts to challenge the Port of Miami as the world's busiest cruise port in upcoming years.


Thursday, April 15, 2010

cruise tax controversy

http://dcbureau.org/20100415360/Natural-Resources-News-Service/lobbying-rewards-cruise-lines-in-alaska.html

Alaska Lawmakers reward Cruise line Lobbyist
April 15, 2010
Written by David Rosenfeld
ShareThis 0diggsdigg
Gov. Sean Parnell

Gov. Sean Parnell

There are few times when lobbying efforts pay off so handsomely. The cruise line industry increased its spending on lobbyists at the Alaska State Legislature last year 35 percent. And what did they get from Gov. Sean Parnell who took office after Gov. Sarah Palin resigned in July?

Parnell became chief proponent in March of slashing a voter-approved $46 cruise ship passenger head tax that cruise lines have blamed for declining sales and the loss of ships this season resulting in about 140,000 less passengers. The legislature in the waning days of the session this week looks to pass Parnell’s bill just as the cruise line industry wanted, reducing the head tax from $46 to about $19.

Environmentalists and most of the Alaska public favor the tax – based on a ballot initiative in 2006 – as a way to improve local economies and protect the oceans from dangerous cruise ship wastewater pollution, as DCBureau.org reported in January.

Gershon Cohen, who co-authored the initiative that first instated the head tax with Responsible Cruising for Alaska, said Parnell is simply pandering to the industry.

“The most important thing is that people voted for this (cruise ship head tax) statewide,” Cohen said. “People voted for this in almost every area of the state, even in Southeast Alaska where the cruise lines are such powerful economic players. So now here’s this one guy who’s not even in an office he was elected to saying let’s undo what the voters did just a few years ago. To say it’s inappropriate is an understatement.”

Chalk it up to influence. Lobbying records examined by the Juneau Empire show cruise line companies took a focused approach to Alaska beginning in 2006 when the head tax first passed. In 2009, they spent $433,000, up from $315,000 in 2008, according to the paper. Now it appears the industry’s efforts are paying dividends.

Attacking the Tax

In its latest move to combat the head tax, the Alaska Cruise Association agreed to drop a lawsuit against the state over the tax as long as the legislature passed Parnell’s bill “without material amendment,” according to the New York Times.

The bill calls for reducing the head tax from $46 to $34.50 and crediting ships for taxes paid to individual ports such as Juneau and Ketchikan, which charge $7 and $8 per cruise ship passenger. Most ships would therefore pay around $19 per passenger, more than a 50 percent reduction from what voters approved four years ago.

In recent years the cruise ship head tax has generated about $46 million annually, and cruise lines largely passed the tax onto customers. To put it in perspective, Carnival Corporation alone netted $1.8 billion in net income last year.

Part of the Alaska cruise ship head tax that will not be affected is an additional $4 that pays for the state’s Ocean Ranger program, which puts independent inspectors on board cruise ships to monitor sewage and other wastewater releases. The program represents the most rigorous cruise ship regulation in the western hemisphere. State regulators cited Princess Cruises – a Carnival subsidiary – for most of the two-dozen violations last year for exceeding state pollution standards.

Industry Deems Advocate Too Controversial

The power of the cruise line industry hit home for Cohen earlier this year when Alaska Department of Environmental Quality Commissioner Larry Hartig was forced to remove Cohen from a cruise ship science advisory panel because of pressure he faced from the industry. The event sparked a media firestorm mostly within the state as a handful of legislators came to Cohen’s defense.

Meanwhile, the legislature mandated a cruise industry seat on the advisory panel, currently held by Lincoln Loer an attorney for Stoel Rives, which represents cruise lines on water regulatory issues. But Cohen was viewed as too controversial.

“Here’s the cruise industry dictating to the state who will be on an independent panel to evaluate technologies that might be used in their industry,” said Cohen, who’s no stranger to government committees. He advised senators and served on past water quality advisory groups for two governors. “The really big issue here is the whole notion that corporations should have this much influence over government. That’s the real disease here.”

Head Tax Blamed for Cruise Ship Woes

The cruise industry largely blames the Alaska head tax on slumping sales figures within the state in 2009, not to mention the country was going through the biggest economic recession since the Great Depression.

Carnival Corporation Chairman and CEO Micky Arison has been one of the most vocal critics of the tax. He told a group of investors in a conference call in March that the full impact of the tax had not been fully realized until last year, basically implying the economic collapse was secondary in its effects on the cruise industry to the Alaska head tax.

“When this initiative passed, the backers have no skin in the game and have little understanding of our industry,” Arison said. “After one year for something to happen and nothing did, they claimed victory. Now years later they are feeling the impact of the initiative. It will take a similar if not longer time to recover.”

Arison felt confident the industry had gotten through to the governor. “Based on what has happened and the understanding the governor now has on the way the industry operates and the huge negative impact it (the tax) has had on the state of Alaska, there’s a likelihood the bill will pass,” Arison said. “But I don’t know. I obviously don’t know the sentiment of the legislature, but that the governor is fully supportive of the bill that he has introduced.”

Surging in Europe

In response to a 13 percent slump in North American business, Carnival and other cruise lines began this year to shift more of its business to Europe where regulations are vastly less stringent. Coupled with an upcoming requirement by the International Maritime Organization for all ocean vessels to switch to cleaner burning fuels 200 miles off the Canadian and U.S. coastlines, it may just be the regulations that have cruise lines fleeing U.S. waters.

Holland America relocated just one of its Alaska lines to Europe this year, said Sarah Scoltock, spokeswoman. “In general, Alaska’s been just a tough place to operate these past few years with the laws they passed up there,” she said. “You’ll find the same response when you speak to other lines, but we are seeing a lot of demand for cruising in Europe. The one thing ships have over hotels is that we can move them when we see more demand in different locations.”

Carnival's cruise ship The Carnival Pride. Photo: Stan Shebs

Carnival's cruise ship The Carnival Pride. Photo: Stan Shebs

This year, six cruise lines announced reductions in its Alaska travel itineraries and more were reported for 2011. If the cruise industry gets the reductions it wants in the Alaska head tax it will keep an estimated $20 million this year split among a handful of companies, mere pocket change to corporations such as Carnival, which earn as much in net income every four days. Recent press reports show Carnival “poised to ride a wave of success” off an economic rebound.

Cohen said the whole question of corporate profitability has lost sense of reality. “One of the things that’s really missed in our rhetoric is that the issue of how much these corporations are making are really not ever part of the equation,” Cohen said from his office in Haines, Alaska in the southeast part of the state. “They make billions of dollars a year, but if they are off by a half percent from the quarter before, then that’s a problem. Whoever guaranteed you were going to make more profit than the previous quarter for the rest of your lives? I thought this was a free market.”

Thursday, April 8, 2010

Cruise Tax bill to Increase Tourism

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36051424/ns/business/

Alaska governor plans to introduce cruise tax bill

By BECKY BOHRER
Associated Press Writer
updated 9:52 a.m. ET, Fri., March. 26, 2010

JUNEAU, Alaska - Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell introduced legislation Thursday aimed at reducing the state's head tax on cruise ship passengers and bringing more tourists to the state.

He first made the proposal last week after returning from a cruise ship trade show in Florida. He sees a rollback — from $46 a person to $34.50 — as a way to address industry claims that Alaska's cost of doing business is too high. He hopes it will lead to increased ship deployments and help settle a lawsuit with the Alaska Cruise Association, one the attorney general last year pledged to vigorously defend.

There are no guarantees.

Story continues below ↓
advertisement | your ad here

Leading lawmakers, while open to a tax reduction, earlier this week balked at combining it with a measure allowing tax credits for corporations contributing to statewide tourism marketing efforts. Parnell's proposal includes a tax credit provision for corporations making money off tourism in Alaska, capping contributions eligible for credits at $20 million this year.

It also allows for offsets of local head taxes that Chip Thoma, president of Responsible Cruising in Alaska, said will drop the state's tax share to $19 a passenger — potentially providing millions less for capital projects. His group called Parnell's plan an "industry-written measure" that amounts to "cap and skim."

The governor's office released a copy of the bill late Thursday.

Parnell spokeswoman Sharon Leighow confirmed the bill would further reduce the head tax to $19, including deductions of charges in Juneau and Ketchikan.

Voters approved the head tax in 2006, and it's been a thorny issue since. Supporters said the tax is meant to help cover the cost of infrastructure needed for large ships coming to port. Critics countered that it's onerous and unconstitutional.

Cruise Association President John Binkley has blamed Alaska's regulatory climate and tax costs for the expected loss of three ships, accounting for about 142,000 passengers, this season. But some, including those who helped lead the voter initiative, are skeptical the tax is keeping ships away and point instead to factors like the recession.

Parnell sees his proposal as a win for all involved — and not as a corporate giveaway.

"I made a very pointed case (to industry representatives) that they would need to demonstrate that, in a public process, that this would bring ships. That it would create Alaska jobs and not just be a transfer of dollars from the state to their bottom line," he told reporters.

Parnell said one company agreed to postpone deployment decisions until May, to see what legislators do. He said he's asked other cruise lines to do the same, and to testify publicly, to make their case for the changes.

Binkley said there are discussions under way with Attorney General Dan Sullivan on a possible "stipulation" to end the pending federal lawsuit. He declined further comment, saying in part that he wanted to see Parnell's proposal.

The Legislature is currently scheduled to adjourn April 18.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Back in Business!

Signs of recovery for cruise industry, and debate on Alaska
In Miami Beach, Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell hears that cruise ships seek out business environments more favorable than his state's. Industry execs say 2010's outlook is bright.
BY MARTHA BRANNIGAN
mbrannigan@MiamiHerald.com


Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell came to the Seatrade Cruise Shipping convention in Miami Beach Tuesday to deliver a message that Alaska is open for business to the cruise industry.

But the governor and a contingent of Alaskan tourism officials got a strong message back from the cruise lines: Faced with stiff environmental regulation and taxes in Alaska, cruise ships will sail off to more friendly waters, industry executives on a panel at Seatrade agreed.

The cruise industry has slashed the number of berths devoted to cruising in Alaska in 2010 by 17 percent from 2009. That means 140,000 fewer tourists.

Panelist Stein Kruse, president and chief executive of Holland America Line, said cruise ships ``faced with overzealous regulations'' will use their flexibility to move to favorable business environments.

In a punitive regulatory environment, ``we can and will redeploy our ships,'' Kruse said.

Disappointing ticket prices for Alaskan cruises last year also contributed to the pull-back in ships in Alaska, as recession-battered consumers looked for bargain trips, often with little or no airfare costs.

The debate over Alaska came as top cruise industry executives told a standing-room-only crowd at Seatrade that the industry is making a comeback from the darkest days of 2009.

So far in 2010, demand for Alaska cruises has improved, as has demand more broadly.

``We're seeing solid signs of recovery, albeit one that will play out over the next couple of years,'' Kevin Sheehan, chief executive officer of Norwegian Cruise Line, told the crowd.

The cruise industry, which is based in South Florida, was forced to resort to deep discounting to fill ships during the economic downturn, sometimes offering two-for-one specials and free airfare as come-ons. That cut deeply into revenue and profits.

But in recent months, cruise bookings have picked up and prices are slowly strengthening. Perhaps the most definite sign of a brighter outlook is that some lines are starting to order ships again after a 20-month hiatus during the downturn.

``Last year was a year we were saying, `Oh my God, How are we going to fill our ships?''' Gerald R. Cahill, chief executive officer of the Carnival line, told the crowd. ``If the consumer thinks the pricing is going to go down if they wait longer, they've got the wrong story.''

He added: ``Personally, I think we're going to see a lot of growth in North America.''

The cruise industry is set to introduce 26 new ships through 2012. That marks an investment of almost $15 billion and an 18 percent net increase in capacity.

But Carnival's Cahill predicted more moderate growth in new ships ahead, with more emphasis on refurbishing older ships to keep them fresh.

``The growth [in new cruise ships] to 2013 is going to sustain a healthy industry for a very long time,'' added Adam M. Goldstein, president and chief executive officer of Royal Caribbean International, concurring with Cahill's prediction of more moderate growth in cruise fleets.

After the panelists' update, several executives met with the Alaskan governor to discuss Alaska's tax and regulatory issues.

In an interview, Gov. Parnell told The Miami Herald, ``I heard clearly the need for some change to the head tax and the need to have environmental regulation based on good science.'' The governor added: ``I'm going to try to work to reduce costs for the [cruise] industry,'' in a bid to spur the state's economy.

Tourism is Alaska's second-largest industry. The state adopted a $46 per passenger head tax in 2006 following a ballot initiative. A group of cruise lines have filed a lawsuit challenging that tax.

Meanwhile, the ballot initiative also made the state's wastewater discharge standards among the strictest anywhere.

At the Seatrade conference, Holland America's Kruse complained that other industries aren't required to meet the same wastewater treatment standards.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/17/1532821/signs-of-recovery-and-debate-on.html#ixzz0ip61ykDv

Saturday, March 13, 2010

Governor: Alaska exports total $3.3 billion, down 8.1 percent from 2008

Governor: Alaska exports total $3.3 billion, down 8.1 percent from 2008

By Sean Manget
Alaska Journal of Commerce

Alaska exports totaled $3.3 billion in 2009, marking the fifth best year for trade in state history, said a press release from Gov. Sean Parnell's office.

Things didn't look so positive for exports at the beginning of last year, as first quarter exports were down nearly 30 percent from the first quarter of 2008, the release said.

Fourth-quarter results faired far better; exports went up 12.3 percent from a year earlier.

"Alaskans work hard every day to harvest our resources and produce our exports," Parnell said in the release. "I'm emphasizing improvements in education, workforce development and transportation infrastructure, and that should prepare us to compete and succeed in international opportunities in the future."

Even so, Alaska still lagged behind the previous year overall, with an 8.1 percent decrease in exports from 2008 to 2009, the press release said.

Nationally, exports declined 17.9 percent, with 46 other states posting greater decreases in export value than Alaska.

While seafood and energy exports declined in that period, minerals, precious metals and forest products all saw increased export values.

The state's zinc and lead ore exports increased by 33.5 percent from the 2008 value, coming to $784.7 million. Red Dog mine is the world's largest zinc mine, and accounts for more than three-fourths of all U.S. zinc and lead ore exports, the release said. Korea, Canada, Spain, Japan, China, Italy, Finland, Belgium, Australia and Germany all imported Alaska ore.

Precious metal exports went up 6 percent to $152.6 million. Some $146.6 million of gold went to Switzerland, and $5.1 million of gold went to Canada.

Exports of coal went up 42.8 percent to $33.1 million, and liquefied natural gas accounted for $256.7 million. Liquefied natural gas has been shipped to Japan on a regular basis for more than 40 years, the release said. Pacific Rim countries are key markets for Alaska's energy exports, according to the release.

Refined petroleum product exports fell 70 percent to $38.4 million, a figure the release blames on the international economic crisis. Reduced jet fuel demand as a result of scaled-back flights between Anchorage and Asia left the market for refined petroleum in the tank.

Forest products saw an export increase of 5.5 percent to $87.8 million. Seafood exports fell 9.8 percent to $1.6 billion.

Parnell's office drew these numbers from the U.S. Census Bureau. According to the release, the numbers don't account for Alaska resources transported to and warehoused in other U.S. states before export.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Alaska Governor's Infrastructure Plan Appears Shot

Gov. Sean Parnell's $100 million deferred maintenance proposal is unlikely to pass the Legislature by next week's target date, and his administration is partly to blame, a Republican state lawmaker said Monday.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Port Talks

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/pushes+deepwater+port+Alaska/2597781/story.html

U.S. pushes for deepwater sea port in Alaska

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Don Young seen in a file photo.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Don Young seen in a file photo.

Photograph by: Fred Chartrand/Pool - Harper, Alex Wong/Getty Images - Young

In a further sign of the ongoing transformation of the melting Arctic into a new strategic base for military and commercial activity, U.S. lawmakers are pushing for the construction of a deepwater sea port in Alaska near the western entrance to the disputed Northwest Passage.

"Now is the time to be investing in our infrastructure and laying the groundwork," Rep. Don Young, an Alaskan member of the U.S. House of Representatives, said in introducing legislation partnered with a proposed Senate bill for a new northern port.

"As other countries develop interests in this region, we need to ensure the protection of the U.S.'s interests and make moves now to lay our claim."

The Canadian government has already announced plans to construct a deepwater port near the waterway's eastern gate, at Nanisivik on northern Baffin Island.

But a leading expert in polar geopolitics, University of Calgary professor Rob Huebert, suspects the U.S. "could quickly overtake us, because they'll have more funding and more capabilities" to get the Arctic docking facility built.

"It'll be like the Olympics," predicts Huebert. "Yes, we got the jump on them in looking at it ahead of time. . . . But then they'll pass by us. We won't own the podium, so to speak."

Last fall, the U.S. navy issued a report calling for greater investments in the Arctic to protect U.S. national security and guarantee American economic interests in the region.

"This opening of the Arctic may lead to increased resource development, research, tourism, and could reshape the global transportation system. These developments offer opportunities for growth, but also are potential sources of competition and conflict for access and natural resources," the report stated.

"While the United States has stable relationships with other Arctic nations, the changing environment and competition for resources may contribute to increasing tension, or, conversely, provide opportunities for co-operative solutions."

The U.S. push for a deepwater Arctic port comes at a when commercial and diplomatic interest in the region is rapidly growing. An Alaska-based company, prompted by retreating sea ice, announced plans last month to run a 16,000-kilometre-long, Tokyo-to-London undersea cable through the Northwest Passage.

Meanwhile, global oil companies are jockeying for control of potentially petroleum-rich tracts of Arctic Ocean seabed — including a disputed section of the Beaufort Sea, north of the Yukon-Alaska border, that is claimed by both Canada and the U.S.

Shipping through Canada's Northwest Passage and along Russia's Northern Sea Route is expected to rise steadily in the coming years, along with Arctic tourism, fishing and mining.

But as the five Arctic Ocean coastal states — Canada, the U.S., Russia, Norway and Denmark — press forward with infrastructure projects to prepare for the expected polar business boom, there are signs of both tension and co-operation between northern nations and stakeholders.

Last week, the Canadian government opened the door to negotiations with the U.S. over the Beaufort Sea territorial dispute. Yet no resolution is in sight for the thornier question of whether Canada's view of the Northwest Passage as "internal waters" can be reconciled with the American position that the sea route is an "international strait."

And while Canada has announced plans to host a five-nation Arctic summit in late March to discuss the need for multilateral thinking on environmental protection and economic development, the move has rankled three excluded Arctic Council countries — Sweden, Finland and Iceland — and prompted loud objections from northern aboriginal leaders who are demanding a seat at the conference table.

Canada and the other coastal states are also gathering geological data throughout the Arctic Ocean to secure new seabed territory under a UN treaty. Overlapping claims are likely to be submitted for the sea floor near the North Pole and in other areas where maritime boundaries meet, but the "Arctic 5" nations have pledged to let scientific evidence and international law — not military might — decide the outcome.

Huebert has raised alarms about potential challenges to Canadian interests in the Arctic — including Russia's resurgent militarism — while fellow Canadian Arctic expert Michael Byers has downplayed the likelihood of conflict.

Writing in the inaugural edition of Global Brief, a new Canadian magazine on world affairs, the University of British Columbia professor argues: "whatever future the Arctic holds, it will likely be based on co-operation, consent and international law. There is no race for Arctic resources, and no appetite for conflict."


Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Don Young seen in a file photo.

Photograph by: Fred Chartrand/Pool - Harper, Alex Wong/Getty Images - Young


Sunday, February 21, 2010

More on "Environment or Economy"

http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=11893021

Representative opposes Cook Inlet habitat designation

Millett introduced a resolution which opposes the designation of Cook Inlet as a critical habitat for beluga whales. (Daniel Hernandez/KTUU-DT) Millett introduced a resolution which opposes the designation of Cook Inlet as a critical habitat for beluga whales. (Daniel Hernandez/KTUU-DT)

by Ted Land
Wednesday, January 27, 2010

JUNEAU, Alaska -- Rep. Charisse Millett hopes the feds will pay attention to what she calls a threat to Alaska's economy.

The Anchorage Republican introduced a resolution on the House floor Wednesday which opposes the designation of Cook Inlet as a critical habitat for beluga whales.

The National Marine Fisheries Service is considering protecting 3,000 square miles of Cook Inlet, but Millett says this will only harm Southcentral Alaska's economy, as the state would have to meet new environmental regulations.

She also says shipping at the Port of Anchorage would be disrupted.

In October, the National Marine Fisheries Service released its annual Cook Inlet beluga population estimate.

They say the 2009 population of 321 whales is down 54 from the year before, and way down from more than 650 counted in 1994.

They say the population is not recovering as anticipated.

Millett looks at the numbers differently, and points out that in 2005, the population of Cook Inlet belugas was estimated at 278, and last year's estimate of 321 shows a 4 percent yearly increase.

She says the critical habitat is unjustified.

"I think that this is not a good idea. I think it's just a way to slow down development and I really think that ESA's and listings like this are used to a detriment to our state, especially, singled out all the time," Millett said.

House Joint Resolution 40 now goes to the House Resources Committee for consideration.

Contact Ted Land at tland@ktuu.com

China New Gas Customer for Alaska

http://www.nwasianweekly.com/2010/02/chinese-seen-as-potential-alaska-gas-customer/


Chinese seen as potential Alaska gas customer

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to MySpace

By Becky Bohrer
The Associated Press

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Alaska officials are looking to China, in what some believe will be that country’s strong demand for natural gas, to help the state advance its long-held pipeline dreams.

Gov. Sean Parnell has invited an official with China’s National Energy Administration and others to visit Alaska, following up on a trade mission Lt. Gov. Craig Campbell helped lead to China in December.

Campbell returned from that trip believing the rapidly developing communist nation, already a leading export market for such Alaska products as seafood, zinc, and lead ore, could also become a major investor in or export market for Alaska natural gas or its byproducts.

The potential for Alaska is huge, said Harold Heinze, chief executive of the Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority, who was with Campbell on the trip. He sees several possibilities for the Chinese, from building a plant to convert ethane to pellets that would be used in manufacturing to signing on with a major natural gas pipeline project. Ethane is a component for plastics that he says is found in the Prudhoe Bay region.

“One thing you look for in a partner is, do they have money and do they have more money than you. And these guys have money,” he said. “They’re major players in the world.”

In theory, if the interest and money are there, that could also spur progress on a pipeline that many Alaskans have long looked to for new jobs, reliable energy, and a source for more state revenue amid projections of slumping oil production.

But there are plenty of uncertainties, from permitting and pricing — how gas holds up against other energy sources — to what China’s true long-term demands for gas will be over alternatives like coal, and the level of competition Alaska would face from other producers to meet the gas demand.

And there are the various pipeline options and plans, each with diehard constituencies and questions about their viability.

Estimates released last month by the companies working with the state to advance a major line put the project costs at $20 billion to $41 billion, depending on the route.

One route, the cheaper option, estimated at $20 billion to $26 billion, would run from the harsh North Slope to Valdez, Alaska, where gas would be liquefied at a facility that another entity would build and then shipped elsewhere, possibly overseas. The plant cost isn’t included in the estimates.

The costlier option envisions a pipeline going from the North Slope to Canada, where gas could move on existing systems to North American markets.

But there have been numerous other proposals through the years to move North Slope gas, even a bullet line to move the gas to the most populated part of the state, southcentral Alaska.

“The Chinese may, because they’re interested in resources, be able to do things and invest in things that don’t look economic in market terms,” said James Jensen, a consultant in natural gas economics.

“In fact, if the Chinese said, ‘Gee, if we could get this thing going and we could tie up a certain amount of American gas for our own use,’ they might do something that I wouldn’t think would be economic,” he said.

“But they might do it.”

Officials with TransCanada Corp., based in Calgary, Alberta, and Irving, Texas-based Exxon Mobil Corp., say the project is economically viable and hope to move toward an “open season,” when they can court gas producers and try to secure commitments for shipping deals, by May.

The companies, in a recent filing with federal regulators, estimated 35 trillion cubic feet of proven gas reserves on the North Slope.

Through a process in which TransCanada beat out applicants, including a Chinese company several years ago, the state agreed to reimburse up to $500 million of the eligible costs of the project.

A TransCanada spokeswoman declined to comment on whether there’d been interest from China on the project, saying, “All discussions with individual customers are confidential and we would not be able to discuss any individual details as a result of that.”

A rival project by Britain’s BP PLC and Houston-based ConocoPhillips is also moving ahead.

Campbell said he’s not advocating any specific project, but he’d like the Chinese officials to visit “earlier, rather than later.” They’ve indicated a “huge demand” for natural gas, he said, and Alaska wants a market. ♦

Friday, February 12, 2010

Princess Cruises Investment in Alaskan Excursions

Not related directly to Anchorage... but still shows investment by the cruising industry in Alaska.

Sunday, February 7, 2010

WIND ENERGY

CIRI is investing in innovation, technology and a diverse portfolio of clean, dependable and economic energy options, including wind power.

FIRE ISLAND

Nabors 106E drilling rig

A photo simulation demonstrates a possible wind farm on Fire Island. Image courtesy of Chugach Electric Association.

CIRI is developing Alaska's first commercial-scale wind energy project on company land on Fire Island, in Cook Inlet just west of Anchorage.

Southcentral Alaska uses natural gas to generate more than 90 percent of its electricity. However, Cook Inlet gas reserves are running out. Clean, renewable wind energy could diversify Railbelt power resources, which would increase reliability and decrease ratepayers' vulnerability to gas shortages and price increases.

The project is expected to include 36 turbines capable of producing 54 megawatts of electricity, enough to power more than 19,000 homes.

Site preparation on Fire Island is underway, with infrastructure work to commence in 2010.

The location was initially selected by Chugach Electric Association as a site that could provide commercial quantities of electric power to key load centers on the Railbelt grid.

WHY WIND?

- Wind energy is renewable, so it won't run out
- The long-term cost of wind-generated electricity is cheaper and more predictable than fossil-fuel powered sources
- Wind power reduces greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental impacts
- Wind power could offset the need to burn natural gas, so that Cook Inlet oil and gas reserves would last longer
- Using wind energy locally could let the state take full advantage of escalating petroleum prices by selling more Alaska oil and gas to the rest of the world
- Alaska wind energy resources would be built and operated in-state by Alaskans

http://www.ciri.com/content/company/FireIsland.aspx

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

As Sponsors Fall Away, the Iditarod Tightens Its Belt


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/sports/02iditarod.html