Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Sponsored by: Janke <br /> <br />CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA <br />RESOLUTION 2001-002 <br /> <br />A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, <br />ALASKA, SUPPORTING THE AL-CAN HIGHWAY GAS PIPELINE ROUTE <br />TO MOVE NATURAL GAS TO MARKETS IN THE LOWER 48 STATES <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the natural gas fields in Alaska's North Slope hold a minimum of 35 trillion <br />cubic feet of natural gas, representing 20 percent of the known US. gas reserves. The potential <br />exists to find much more gas as producers and explorers begin to search for gas reserves on the North <br />Slope; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the price of natural gas in the Lower 48 States has been steadily increasing. <br />The increase in gas prices has changed the economics of building a natural gas pipeline, and has <br />triggered the proposals to build a gas pipeline originating in Alaska to be routed through Canada. <br />One proposal would route a gas pipeline along the North Slope of Alaska and down through Canada <br />via the Mackenzie River Delta. A second proposal would involve a gas pipeline routed south <br />through Fairbanks, crossing through Canada via the Alaska Canada Highway. A third proposal <br />would route a gas pipeline to South-central Alaska at which point the gas could be liquefied and <br />carried to market by Liquefied Natural Gas vessels or converted to gas by-products through Gas to <br />Liquids technology for market use; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the option which generates the maximum value to the State of Alaska as a <br />whole with minimal environmental impact is the natural gas pipeline route through Fairbanks and <br />down the Alaska-Canada Highway to the Lower 48 States. This route was envisioned and supported <br />by the 1977 U.S. Canadian agreement and is far ahead of any alternative in permitting clearing and <br />engineering. The construction cost for this option is estimated to be $6 billion to $10 billion, with <br />a substantial portion of the project being carried out within Alaska's boundaries. Such a project <br />would provide huge gains in employment for Alaskans for years to come and would trigger hundreds <br />of millions of dollars in support sector jobs for existing Alaskan businesses; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, there appears to be sufficient gas reserves in Alaska to support a gas pipeline <br />spur route from Fairbanks to Southcentral Alaska to provide Alaska consumers and industry with <br />a steady, economic supply of gas and to allow for whatever forms of export products are marketable. <br />In addition to lowering the cost of fuel for Alaska, access to natural gas reserves provides Alaskan <br />companies with a raw material that is used in a multitude of commercial applications. Access to <br />such natural gas may generate value-added manufacturing for Alaska and encourage the creation of <br />new industries within the State. This will serve to diversify and strengthen :the ovetall, Alaska <br />economy; and <br />