Palin's Big Oil Experience

[heyheybooboo]

What is this 'great wealth of experience' by Sarah Palin in standing up to Big Oil?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Friday, Sept 05

More background on the $500+ million State of Alaska payment to TransCanada for pipeline 'permitting & preliminary work'. There is no requirement that TransCanada build the pipeline in Palin's 'Plan'. As a matter of fact the producers of the natural gas (primarily Exxon, Conoco and BP) have no interest in using it and Conoco/BP has proposed building their own gasline. Project Map for the Palin Plan

The dang leftist media has started looking at the pipeline in articles today - (if you consider Reuters leftist media)

Alaska gas project hailed by Palin still embryonic

A long-delayed natural gas pipeline championed by Gov. Sarah Palin that would carry supplies from Alaska to Canada and then to the lower 48 states exists in concept only and is years away from fruition.

The vice presidential hopeful, in her speech Wednesday to the Republican National Convention, said she fought to bring about "the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history" to bolster America's energy security.

"And when that deal was struck, we began a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence," Palin said.

Palin's state legislation entitles TransCanada to up to $500 million in subsidies for planning work, and it bars the state from striking a different deal with any other party.

A look at alternatives - including a trans-Alaska pipeline with LNG Terminal. Here is a map of the 'Trans-Alaska' pipeline which currently exists. Alternatives have been proposed that would utilize the existing route and construct an LNG terminal. Congress has approved $18 billion in guaranteed financing to Alaska for the projects.

Fast-developing LNG market could be killing Alaska pipeline
(April, 2007)

...US policymakers for years have yearned to see an Alaska gas pipeline built to unlock massive supplies of North Slope natural gas. But Feygin suggested that the window of opportunity may have closed because future US demand can likely be met more cheaply by importing liquefied natural gas (LNG) into the dozens of terminals now being built on the US coastline. ...

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chairman Joseph Kelliher has warned Congress in recent months that more delays in building the Alaska pipeline could render the project uneconomic, citing the commercial threat of increased LNG imports.

But Feygin suggested it may already be too late. "The short answer is... we don't see the likelihood of an Alaska gas pipeline before 2018 or 2020, if then ....

What's more, said Feygin, LNG supplies can be more flexibly deployed -- shipped to any number of LNG terminals around the country -- than any gas shipped into the United States via an Alaska pipeline. The Alaska gas pipeline (TransCanada) would flow all its gas to natural gas hubs near Chicago that are already well supplied by gas imported from Canada.

"There's no shortage of gas going into Chicago," Feygin said

Apparently this project by the Alaska Gasline Port Authority (AGPA) for a trans-Alaska pipeline and LNG terminal port was 'spec-ed' out by Governor Palin's proposal. ....

Alaska Legislature?s consultants deem Port Authority LNG project viable and beneficial to State and Producers (pdf)
(August, 2006)

....
The LNG project requires approximately four years to construct and would include an 800-mile gasline from Prudhoe Bay to Valdez where the gas would be liquefied for shipment on Jones Act compliant LNG tankers to the North American west coast. It would be built to accommodate an extension to Canada for the producers? project. To assist the highway project, the Port Authority has proposed to pre-build a larger capacity
line from Prudhoe to Delta Junction. The project would also accommodate spur lines for in state gas usage.....

The Alaska Gasline Port Authority was created in 1999 by the Fairbanks North Star Borough, the City of Valdez, and the North Slope Borough. Its objective was to obtain tax exempt status in order to provide an economic advantage for commercializing Alaska?s gas. The Internal Revenue Service issued a ruling in 2000 certifying its tax exempt status. AGPA is negotiating with six North American west coast LNG receiving terminals, including Sempra Energy?s Costa Azul terminal under construction in Baja, Mexico and Kittimat LNG, Inc.?s terminal in British Columbia, Canada, scheduled to begin construction this fall. Bechtel Engineering has contributed 55,000 man-hours on a detailed engineering study for the project ..... The project is also eligible to apply for up to $18 billion in federal loan guarantees .....

The Alaska/Canadian highway project (TransCanada), as proposed by Governor Murkowski, and the oil producers would require substantial oil tax and other concessions. Critics also raise constitutional and antitrust issues and Canadian officials have indicated that the contract cannot proceed without some Canadian ownership. Despite Murkowski having called the legislature back into two special sessions, the contract has failed to win legislative approval. On August 22, Murkowski was defeated by former City of Wasilla Mayor Sarah Palin for the Republican party?s gubernatorial nomination.

So .... before Governor Palin 'stood up' to Big Oil, the proposed TransCanada pipeline by former Governor Murkowski was shot down twice by the Alaska State Legislature.

And it seems all is not 'happy-happy joy-joy' with Palin's 'exclusivity' deal for the TransCanada gasline ....

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: Progress Made in Licensing and Constructing the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Report to Congress, pg 3

There have been further developments with respect to two of the proposals that were not selected.

In an exchange of letters between Governor Palin and Conoco, the state took the position that the objectives of AGIA process had to be firmly adhered to, and Conoco indicated its disappointment that the state would not consider its proposal.

The Port Authority, the sponsors of a pipeline solely within the State of Alaska to supply a liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal and southern Alaskan markets, has asked Alaskan officials for reconsideration of their determination that its proposal was incomplete, but this request was not granted.

The lawyers are going to love this one. Palin's plan gives $500+ million in inducements and 'exclusivity' to TransCanada with no guarantee that the pipeline will be built. The gas suppliers had a previous project that was shot down because the former Governor was a crook and have no desire to use the TransCanada pipeline AND the intra-state project which is most effective and efficient, cheaper, and will get the natural gas to market more quickly was shot down by the Guv (not to mention shooting down the new proposal by the suppliers for a gasline?).



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
OP

The previous governor had negotiated a deal with the North Slope natural gas producers to build a pipe from Prudhoe Bay to the Alberta Connection in Canada and on to the Lower 48. In exchange for the construction of the natural gas pipeline the state would have reduced their taxes by 5%.

Alaska gets tough on Big Oil?
A faceoff between Alaska's governor and giant oil companies may scuttle plans to build a $25 billion natural gas pipeline

Palin nixed the deal with the North Slope gas producers - and 'opened' the bidding process. One company, TransCanada, submitted a bid and is receiving a $500 million subsidy for pre-engineering with no guarantee the 1,715-mile pipeline will be built. The deal with TransCanada includes other incentives, such as a coordinator to speed up permits, in exchange for TransCanada doing its best to secure the North Slope gas producers as customers.

Get this. BP and Conoco are partners on a new joint venture called Denali. The oil companies did not apply for the state license and $500 million subsidy. They are doing pre-engineering on their own North Slope pipeline project and the implication is that lawsuits will fly if the State of Alaska shows favoritism in the pre-construction and permitting process, both on the State and Federal level.

BP, Conoco Phillips and Exxon Mobil -- which control most of the Slope's prodigious 35 trillion cubic feet of gas reserves -- opposed the TransCanada license awarded by the Guv and the State of Alaska.

TransCanada gets Senate's OK

... Palin, who needed overwhelming support from Democrats to win the TransCanada vote, said in her press conference that the state never before had "commitments to build this line. Now we do."

That's incorrect.

TransCanada has not promised to actually build the gas line, one of the state's grandest and most frustrated economic development dreams.

The state license, awarded under the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act, or AGIA, which the Legislature passed at Palin's request last year, is not a construction contract and does not guarantee a pipeline will be built .....

Opponents said licensing TransCanada might only lead to years more delay. They said the license doesn't require construction, could expose the state to lawsuits, likely will waste the state's money, and ignores the key question of how much the state will tax gas production -- a major sticking point BP, Conoco and Exxon want settled before they sign contracts to ship gas on TransCanada's or anyone else's pipeline.

"I did not hear a clear endorsement of this concept," said Sen. Charlie Huggins, R-Wasilla, one of the five senators voting no on the TransCanada license.

Ooops. I guess the Guv missed that one.

btw - - The U.S. Congress has already approved $18 billion in loan guarantees for the North Slope pipeline project which some have estimated to cost more than $30 billion. Best guesstimate for the pipeline actually moving natural gas is 2018, pending lawsuits and all that ...

That's the real story, fellow ATers. Look out for the 'spin'.

While I applaud Sarah Palin's efforts at cleaning out the corrupt politician on the Oil & Gas Commission in Alaska (here is the complete story), each of the state's members of U.S. Congress is under scrutiny for ethical lapses or illegal conduct. And from what I have read as many as 10% of the State's legislators are also under investigation. Apparently you can't throw a rock (if your arm is strong enough ) without hitting a crooked pol in Alaska.

My concern is that a political campaign is branding it's party 'Country First', spinning the resume of it's VP candidate for political gain, and screaming 'Sexism' when folks point out their lack of due diligence.

 

[Throckmorton]

Why do Alaskans love her?

 

[skyking]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Why do Alaskans love her?

Sexual favors.
Julia Roberts in 'Erin Brokovitch'
" I just went out there and performed sexual favors. Six hundred and thirty-four blow jobs in five days... I'm really quite tired. "

 

[351Cleveland]

Way to cite an article nearly a year old... here's a more recent update. Gosh, looks like she won the staring contest:

http://www.businessweek.com/bw.../db20080829_271957.htm

To most Americans, Senator John McCain's (R-Ariz.) choice of running mate, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, is a new face. To Alaskans, however, she's the woman who got a giant natural gas pipeline project off the ground, in part by telling big oil companies they'd get no sweetheart deals. Despite the national debate about drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), Alaskans largely favor development of their natural resources, a huge source of revenue for the state. For years, Alaskan officials have been dickering with the state's largest producers, ExxonMobil (XOM), BP (BP), and ConocoPhillips (COP), over construction of a pipeline that would bring the nation's largest untapped natural gas reserves to consumers in the Lower 48 states. The producers wanted long-term commitments from the state on what their tax obligations would be for producing the gas.

In 2006, then-Governor Frank Murkowski championed legislation that would have gotten a new pipeline going. Independent consultants hired by the state, however, concluded that the royalty and lease incentives in his proposal were worth some $10 billion to the oil companies. The deal would have also hampered the state's ability to raise taxes on the producers for decades. "Governor Murkowski had proposed a truly abysmal deal," says state Representative Beth Kerrtula, the Democratic Party's minority leader. Palin criticized the Murkowski bill as one negotiated in backroom dealings and as a giveaway to the big three producers. In August 2006, she beat Murkowski in a Republican Party primary.

After winning the general election in November 2006, Palin pushed for a gas deal of her own. Rather than negotiate with the big three producers, Alaska legislators passed a bill offering inducements to pipeline operators. Initial expenses of up to $500 million would be reimbursed by the state. Late last year, five companies submitted proposals. Palin championed one from TransCanada (TRP), a Calgary-based company that is North America's largest pipeline operator. State legislators officially awarded TransCanada the license on Aug. 1, and Palin formally signed the bill on Aug. 20.
Big Oil Falls into Line
But a funny thing happened on the way to the independent pipeline award. In April, BP and ConocoPhillips announced plans to construct their own giant pipeline, called Denali. The $30 billion project would be North America's largest construction project. It would supply 4 billion cubic feet of gas per day?about 7% of U.S. demand?through a 2,000-mile line snaking from Alaska's North Slope to the border of Canadian province Alberta. It was exactly what Alaskan officials wanted from the producers. "One time they were talking about locking up taxes for 25 years," says Kurt Gibson, deputy commissioner of Alaska's Oil & Gas Div. "Now the story they're telling is 'We'll figure out the taxes later.' That's a pretty stark departure."

In Alaska, where energy companies wield power as in few other places, Palin's independence was seen by many as radical?and caused abundant consternation among many in her own party. "She is not in bed with them, she's not adversarial with them," Gibson says of the governor's relationship to Big Oil. "She's acting as any responsible chief executive would in managing an asset in your portfolio. Under Murkowski we were beholden to the major energy company interests."

ConocoPhillips spokesman Charlie Rowton said in an Aug. 29 e-mail that the Houston company had, with BP and ExxonMobil, spent more than $125 million to date studying the project and that "Denali represented the next stage in advancing a gas pipeline."

In the end, no one expects two pipelines to get built. Most likely TransCanada and the big producers will join forces in some manner. Presently both the Denali partners and TransCanada are performing the initial fieldwork on their projects. They plan on soliciting customers by 2010. At the earliest, says Tony Palmer, who heads TransCanada's pipeline operation, the new line could open by 2018. That effort would be expedited, he says, if the Republican ticket wins. But he notes that Democratic candidate Barack Obama also supports a gas pipeline.

"Barracuda" with Backbone
Marty Rutherford, deputy commissioner of the state's Natural Resources Dept., headed a team that developed the pipeline inducement program. She says the state's major goal was to keep the pipeline open to all producers. A pipeline owned solely by the big three operators might make it difficult for other companies to gain access. She says a number of independent producers including Anadarko Petroleum (APC), BG Group (BG.L), and Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD) hope to exploit Alaska's natural gas reserves.

Palin, 44, came to prominence in the state as ethics commissioner of the Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission, where she raised concerns about ethics violations on the part of two prominent local officials, the state's Republican Party chairman and Attorney General, both of whom later resigned. She faces ethics charges of her own involving alleged pressure by a member of her staff to fire her former brother-in-law, a state trooper who is involved in a child custody battle with Palin's sister. Still her approval rating is a sky-high 76%, according to a recent poll by Anchorage's Dittman Research, although that's off from the 86% rating she got in February. Palin's husband, Todd, is a union member who works for BP at oil fields in the North Slope. She is a former mayor of her hometown of Wassila, Alaska, where she earned the nickname "Sarah Barracuda" for her aggressive play on the basketball court.

Deputy Commissioner Rutherford says Palin has been under constant pressure from the big oil companies to alter her pipeline plans. "It took a lot of backbone to make the deal that she did," Rutherford says. "The governor has that in spades."

So... where the previous governor was going to give $10billion away in tax breaks, Palin was able to move the deal forward DESPITE US Congressional feet-dragging at a cost of $500million. She took on "Big Oil," and now has them moving on the project because there is a real concern they could LOSE it. She called their bluff. Remember, there was NO MOVEMENT on this deal for 30 years. She has been office for 2 years, and already there is a signed deal with a company to build it, and now "Big Oil" is scrambling to compete.

Let's assume that the pipeline DOESNT get built by TransCanada but instead "Big Oil" beats them to it.... well hell, still seems like a good spend on $500million considering that "Big Oil" was scheduled to get $10billion in tax breaks. I disagree with your interpretation that a commitment necessarily means a signed agreement, but toss that aside for a second... she could do this same $500million deal 20 times and STILL be ahead of the game compared to the previous deal of $10billion.

Oh... Barack Obama supports the project too...

EDIT: Damn, I could highlight the entire article, but I think I got the key parts

 

[Genx87]

/thread

 

[TechAZ]

So which blog did you get this off of?

 

[shrumpage]

The original plan was scuttled due to corruption: Veco (now under new management).


I followed this story on the radio, if i remember correctly, there were certain requirements in the proposals that had to be met. Requirements that either could not or were refused to be met by the other companies, thus Trans Canada go it.

Why do Alaskans love her?

I have a friend who occasionally deals with the state legislature, and this is what he related to me with:

One of the things that changed when she took office, was she was willing to work with the opposition. Where the previous admin would stone wall or play hard ball on issues - Palin was willing to talk, work with and most importantly come to an outcome that would satisfy both sides. Granted that could not be done with every issue, but when it couldn't it wasn't done in a dickish manner like the previous admin. The charged atmosphere of 'us vs them' lessened.

She is Alaskan, not career politician (yet), she understand very Alaskan specific issues like hunting and fishing - not because she studied them - because she lives them. I live in a community that was screwed over by the federal crab rationalization program - having a governor who understands that type of issue, and fights against it, is pretty important. Find all the little issues like that, and it doesn't take long to figure out why Alaskans love her.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

LOL...heyheybooboo pwned. I guess the sad part is that the truth of the matter will likely not make the slightest impression on him.

 

[shrumpage]

In Alaska, where energy companies wield power as in few other places, Palin's independence was seen by many as radical?and caused abundant consternation among many in her own party. "She is not in bed with them, she's not adversarial with them," Gibson says of the governor's relationship to Big Oil. "She's acting as any responsible chief executive would in managing an asset in your portfolio. Under Murkowski we were beholden to the major energy company interests."

this

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

In Alaska, where energy companies wield power as in few other places, Palin's independence was seen by many as radical?and caused abundant consternation among many in her own party. "She is not in bed with them, she's not adversarial with them," Gibson says of the governor's relationship to Big Oil. "She's acting as any responsible chief executive would in managing an asset in your portfolio. Under Murkowski we were beholden to the major energy company interests."

this

Clearly this is not what we want in DC. We need to beholden to the sierra club, big law, big ag(corn ethanol), and the insurance industry.

 

[OCGuy]

Alaskan citizens are getting a nice check in the mail ($3500?) from their oil revenue this month. I was just up there, and believe me, they love it.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: TechAZ
So which blog did you get this off of?

His two links are from Fortune magazine (you've heard of it, right?) and the Anchorage Daily News, the biggest newspaper in the biggest city in Alaska, home to 40% of ALL the residents of Alaska.

I don't suppose you'll now man up and admit your lazy, troll mistake, or will you?

 

[TechAZ]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ
So which blog did you get this off of?

His two links are from Fortune magazine (you've heard of it, right?) and the Anchorage Daily News, the biggest newspaper in the biggest city in Alaska, home to 40% of ALL the residents of Alaska.

I don't suppose you'll now man up and admit your lazy, troll mistake, or will you?

He just happened to stumble across articles from a year ago and 4 years ago. Where is the Fortune Magazine connection?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ
So which blog did you get this off of?

His two links are from Fortune magazine (you've heard of it, right?) and the Anchorage Daily News, the biggest newspaper in the biggest city in Alaska, home to 40% of ALL the residents of Alaska.

I don't suppose you'll now man up and admit your lazy, troll mistake, or will you?

Blogs typically post links to legitimate websites. I think he was asking which blog posted these links with misleading statements that fooled the OP into posting this thread.

 

[TechAZ]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ
So which blog did you get this off of?

His two links are from Fortune magazine (you've heard of it, right?) and the Anchorage Daily News, the biggest newspaper in the biggest city in Alaska, home to 40% of ALL the residents of Alaska.

I don't suppose you'll now man up and admit your lazy, troll mistake, or will you?

Blogs typically post links to legitimate websites. I think he was asking which blog posted these links with misleading statements that fooled the OP into posting this thread.

Thought it was apparent.

 

[Genx87]

You may want to edit out the mod calling. It really isnt needed and only gets you vacations

 

[QED]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ
So which blog did you get this off of?

His two links are from Fortune magazine (you've heard of it, right?) and the Anchorage Daily News, the biggest newspaper in the biggest city in Alaska, home to 40% of ALL the residents of Alaska.

I don't suppose you'll now man up and admit your lazy, troll mistake, or will you?

His links may have been from Fortune, but I seriously doubt the OP just decided to do a little original research on his own, stumbled across these out-dated articles, analyzed them, and then came to the conclusion that Palin was beholden to the oil companies. I'm guessing he found someone else on another blog who had, and then just copied the results here.

Maybe I'm just be generous, because I'd like to think noone here would purposefully use outdated articles to make a false point.

 

[QED]

Originally posted by: Genx87
You may want to edit out the mod calling. It really isnt needed and only gets you vacations

Yes, leave the mod part out, as it has nothing to do with the fact that he can be a troll at times. You can leave the word "elite", "senior", and "troll" all there, though, in whatever order you deem most applicable.


You really shouldn't have gone there as that's a Mod Callout

Anandtech Senior Moderator
Red Dawn

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: TechAZ

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ
So which blog did you get this off of?

His two links are from Fortune magazine (you've heard of it, right?) and the Anchorage Daily News, the biggest newspaper in the biggest city in Alaska, home to 40% of ALL the residents of Alaska.

I don't suppose you'll now man up and admit your lazy, troll mistake, or will you?

He just happened to stumble across articles from a year ago and 4 years ago. Where is the Fortune Magazine connection?

Well, I didn't think you'd man up to your lazy, troll mistake, and you didn't.

But even I didn't think you'd follow up with more dead-nuts wrong facts and outright stupidity.

The Fortune article has FORTUNE on it's masthead in big bold type, and is from one year ago.

The Anchorage article is dated August 2, 2008.

You fail at personal integrity, you fail at reading comprehension of the most basic level, and you FAIL at the facts.

You are full of fail, my little troll friend.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: QED

Originally posted by: Genx87
You may want to edit out the mod calling. It really isnt needed and only gets you vacations

Yes, leave the mod part out, as it has nothing to do with the fact that he can be a troll at times. You can leave the word "elite", "senior", and "troll" all there, though, in whatever order you deem most applicable.

Quoted.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Alaskan citizens are getting a nice check in the mail ($3500?) from their oil revenue this month. I was just up there, and believe me, they love it.

And yet they lead the nation in per capita entitlements. If Texas would extract more taxpayer money from the other states and cut me a check, I'd love it too.

 

[TechAZ]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ
So which blog did you get this off of?

His two links are from Fortune magazine (you've heard of it, right?) and the Anchorage Daily News, the biggest newspaper in the biggest city in Alaska, home to 40% of ALL the residents of Alaska.

I don't suppose you'll now man up and admit your lazy, troll mistake, or will you?

He just happened to stumble across articles from a year ago and 4 years ago. Where is the Fortune Magazine connection?

Well, I didn't think you'd man up to your lazy, troll mistake, and you didn't.

But even I didn't think you'd follow up with more dead-nuts wrong facts and outright stupidity.

The Fortune article has FORTUNE on it's masthead in big bold type, and is from one year ago.

The Anchorage article is dated August 2, 2008.

You fail at personal integrity, you fail at reading comprehension of the most basic level, and you FAIL at the facts.

You are full of fail, my little troll friend.

What does that have to do with what I posted Perknose? Are you just trolling me and copping a condescending attitude like you're known for? Blogs frequently post links to dated sources. Now, don't you have some flaming to do about Biden being drunk, go take your bipolar meds.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: TechAZ

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ
So which blog did you get this off of?

His two links are from Fortune magazine (you've heard of it, right?) and the Anchorage Daily News, the biggest newspaper in the biggest city in Alaska, home to 40% of ALL the residents of Alaska.

I don't suppose you'll now man up and admit your lazy, troll mistake, or will you?

He just happened to stumble across articles from a year ago and 4 years ago. Where is the Fortune Magazine connection?

Well, I didn't think you'd man up to your lazy, troll mistake, and you didn't.

But even I didn't think you'd follow up with more dead-nuts wrong facts and outright stupidity.

The Fortune article has FORTUNE on it's masthead in big bold type, and is from one year ago.

The Anchorage article is dated August 2, 2008.

You fail at personal integrity, you fail at reading comprehension of the most basic level, and you FAIL at the facts.

You are full of fail, my little troll friend.

What does that have to do with what I posted Perknose? Are you just trolling me and copping a condescending attitude like you're known for? Blogs frequently post links to dated sources. Now, don't you have some flaming to do about Biden being drunk, go take your bipolar meds.

You posted a series of mistruths.

You posted that one of the two articles was from 4 years ago, when it was from one month ago, as the DATE at it's beginning clearly shows.

You posted apparent ignorance that the FORTUNE article was from FORTUNE, depsite the big, bold type FORTUNE banner at it's top.

You originally posted that the OP got his info from a blog, apparently without bothering to click on his two links, from FORTUNE and the ANCHORAGE DAILY NEWS.

When challenged, you have repeatedly ducked answering direct questions about your "mistakes."

That's what the above has to do with what you posted.

Keep shucking and jiving and NOT admitting your multiple, obvious mistakes.

Here, you have repeatedly failed to post the truth, and then, when exposed, repeatedly failed to admit your failures. That's the living, breathing definition of a troll, imho.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: TechAZ
So which blog did you get this off of?

As opposed to you I do my own research. What you see here you got it first, AZ, from me, by way of the Alaska newspaper of record, The Anchorage Daily News, and from Fortune Magazine, prior to the nomination of Palin. Please note the date the Alaska Senate approved the TransCanada $500+ million subsidy.

The article in Business week came after her nomination. You do the math.

I find some responses comical. One bid was submitted that met qualifications. I also find it interesting that Fortune Magazine noted:

Governor Palin doesn't think Big Oil needs such inducements. With a pipeline delivering 4.5 billion cubic feet a day to market, the producers stand to gross up to $1 billion a year each at current prices.

'Inducements' whereby the producers received a 5% discount on taxes for building a $30 billion dollar pipeline. If other suppliers of natural gas were so concerned about access perhaps they could have volunteered to participate in the capital cost of the pipeline?

They cannot be denied access to the pipeline. Those 'other' producers would have to negotiate transmission fees to use the pipeline because they choose not to negotiate in an open fashion. I agree public debate is good - and there was no reason not to open negotiations after Veco and consider all the options available.

The other 'producers' can't have it both ways ... pay me now or pay me later

From that standpoint the proposal (though it was out of specification) by AEnergia was the most interesting. It would allow the construction of the pipeline from the North Slope to Alberta and would be jointly owned 74 percent by the natural gas producers, 25 percent by the State of Alaska, and 1 percent by AEnergia.

here's the link. It's from the FERC. Hope you do not have a problem with that - lol

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TechAZ
So which blog did you get this off of?

His two links are from Fortune magazine (you've heard of it, right?) and the Anchorage Daily News, the biggest newspaper in the biggest city in Alaska, home to 40% of ALL the residents of Alaska.

I don't suppose you'll now man up and admit your lazy, troll mistake, or will you?

He just happened to stumble across articles from a year ago and 4 years ago. Where is the Fortune Magazine connection?

Well, I didn't think you'd man up to your lazy, troll mistake, and you didn't.

But even I didn't think you'd follow up with more dead-nuts wrong facts and outright stupidity.

The Fortune article has FORTUNE on it's masthead in big bold type, and is from one year ago.

The Anchorage article is dated August 2, 2008.

You fail at personal integrity, you fail at reading comprehension of the most basic level, and you FAIL at the facts.

You are full of fail, my little troll friend.

What does that have to do with what I posted Perknose? Are you just trolling me and copping a condescending attitude like you're known for? Blogs frequently post links to dated sources. Now, don't you have some flaming to do about Biden being drunk, go take your bipolar meds.

Keep shucking and jiving and NOT admitting your multiple, obvious mistakes.

Here, you have repeatedly failed to post the truth, and then, when exposed, repeatedly failed to admit your failures. That's the living, breathing definition of a troll, imho.

What have you contributed to this thread besides flamebait? Now please go look in the mirror.