Alaska's Peak Gas

You know it just figures. We fight to stop further drilling in Alaska, and the "Powers that Be" are already planning routes for the pipeline. But, let's add insult to injury shall we? According to Alaska's consultant on energy, Douglas Reynolds's, Alaska's natural gas should peak in 2007. He says that more efficient extraction has accelerated the peak. The gas may not peak until 2008, but it will "then it will be followed by an even sharper fall." In other words, before they even get permission to drill, or pipelines constructed, natural gas will have peaked in Alaska.

In Reynolds's interview with Bill White from the Anchorage Daily News, he made a statement that is the reverse of what we usually hear: "The bottom line is the U.S. is in big trouble. The only really easy substitute for natural gas is oil. Coal and nuclear power will take time. But oil is tight, too."

Wait a minute. I thought that the push was for natural gas to replace oil - not the other way around. And as he noted, oil is "tight" too. Shall we read that within the context of Alaskan oil? Is he saying that Alaskan oil is also at or near peak - even without ANWR? If so, drilling in ANWR becomes an atrocity. The drilling for oil and gas that would disrupt, if not destroy the vulnerable caribou grounds; disrupt and endanger hundreds of species; and destroy the culture of Alaskan tribes, is pointless before it even starts.

Amazingly, Reynolds makes the following statement about oil and gas resources in general:

"The thing I am surprised about is how relaxed most energy economists are about how desperate the situation is for the United States. The U.S. really needs Alaskan natural gas, and if anything it will be the U.S. Senate that will be grilling the producers on why they haven't struck a deal with Alaska so that America can get our gas."

Even though he acknowledges that Alaskan gas will peak in 2007 or 2008, he wonders why there isn't more rapid movement to turn the government-owned gas projects over to private energy companies. Is this guy for real?

One thing that is clear, and which we already knew, was that increasing reliance on natural gas as an oil replacement is on a very short track. What I didn't know was that natural gas was so close to the peak in Alaska. That raises all kinds of questions about the real motivation to open ANWR. Someone (can't remember who) argued some time ago that the real reason for pushing ANWR was to open U.S. coastal waters (including Alaska) to drilling. That seems even more likely with this news.