More gas line discussion from one of our favorite commenters, Polarbear
While Polarbear and I don't always agree, he always presents his arguments well and without rancor.
The gasline issue does not split neatly down partisan lines. Lifelong Progressives are finding themselves in agreement with die-hard Conservatives. Making this into its own post gives everyone an opportunity to provide their commentary.
TransCanada is a service company. TC provides natural gas transportation. Exxon/Mobil is a natural gas producer company. TC sells their services to Exxon/Mobil. Hal Kvisle is wooing Exxon/Mobil's business, exactly what he should be doing at this moment. Kvisle has adopted a service tone, publicly underscoring the private conversations occuring in the background. "We understand you and your needs. We are very good at what we do. We are the best in the world at it. You can rely on us. We want your business. Tell us what you would like to accomplish." That is a service conversation. What else would we want our pipeline business partner to tell Exxon/Mobil? Whether Alaska builds its own gas line, or TC builds it, this conversation still has to occur. It is a much more effective conversation with a gas transporter company between Alaska and Exxon/Mobil. And yes, we have to hold our nose, Celtic.
With regard to the 2018 date, that has always been the date in the Transcanada talks, from the start. Indeed, other pipeline projects are already in the TC queue and will emerge before the TC Alaska line. Perfectly normal. Ten years from today to Alaska gas emerging into the TC North American network is a realistic date. After all, it is the largest construction project ever undertaken in North America.
John Harris is the typical Reudrich Republican, predictably trying to make cheap political points at the expense of the bipartisan coalition of Democrats and Republicans that supported the TC proposal. There is a great deal of progressive Democratic political capital tied up in the TransCanada license. The AGIA model may be used again, to cause stubborn projects to move forward in a manner where Alaska gets to set out the required values for the project, first, accompanied by some capital to show we are serious. AGIA is a progressive approach, and we ought to support it.
Your faithful reader...
The gasline issue does not split neatly down partisan lines. Lifelong Progressives are finding themselves in agreement with die-hard Conservatives. Making this into its own post gives everyone an opportunity to provide their commentary.
TransCanada is a service company. TC provides natural gas transportation. Exxon/Mobil is a natural gas producer company. TC sells their services to Exxon/Mobil. Hal Kvisle is wooing Exxon/Mobil's business, exactly what he should be doing at this moment. Kvisle has adopted a service tone, publicly underscoring the private conversations occuring in the background. "We understand you and your needs. We are very good at what we do. We are the best in the world at it. You can rely on us. We want your business. Tell us what you would like to accomplish." That is a service conversation. What else would we want our pipeline business partner to tell Exxon/Mobil? Whether Alaska builds its own gas line, or TC builds it, this conversation still has to occur. It is a much more effective conversation with a gas transporter company between Alaska and Exxon/Mobil. And yes, we have to hold our nose, Celtic.
With regard to the 2018 date, that has always been the date in the Transcanada talks, from the start. Indeed, other pipeline projects are already in the TC queue and will emerge before the TC Alaska line. Perfectly normal. Ten years from today to Alaska gas emerging into the TC North American network is a realistic date. After all, it is the largest construction project ever undertaken in North America.
John Harris is the typical Reudrich Republican, predictably trying to make cheap political points at the expense of the bipartisan coalition of Democrats and Republicans that supported the TC proposal. There is a great deal of progressive Democratic political capital tied up in the TransCanada license. The AGIA model may be used again, to cause stubborn projects to move forward in a manner where Alaska gets to set out the required values for the project, first, accompanied by some capital to show we are serious. AGIA is a progressive approach, and we ought to support it.
Your faithful reader...
Labels: 2018, AGIA, Alaska Gas Pipeline, Exxon/Mobile, Hal Kvisle, producer, TC, TransCanada
posted by CelticDiva at 6:29 PM
View blog reactions
4 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Great commentary Polar Bear. I couldn't agree more. Too bad that the supposed progressive radio station in Anchorage, KUDO, is buying into the Reudrich Spin. I can hardly listen to my former favorite station anymore. I have switched back to KSKA. I do check in from time to time though. I heard Cary Carrigan calling for a NO vote on AGIA for an All Alaska Line. I heard him this week calling those that voted for AGIA sell outs; that they were bought and paid for-including Democrats. Nice. I understand that Cary is going to be an auctioneer for some kind of Democratic Fundraiser next week. That really inspires me to donate! I hope the Dems take him to the woodshed. His ignorance is astounding.
Thanks for your comment. I did not know about KUDO. I confess to not listening to political talk radio of any persuasion. I suspect Carrigan's choices, like Fagan's, have more to do with keeping listenership up through sustained controversy. In their world, they have to sell advertising, and the Arbitron ratings rule.
Celtic: Thank you for your gracious hosting of this dialogue. Every time I read your blog and Phillip's blog, I learn something new and valuable. Your blog of the Democratic National Convention is much anticipated. And yes, come 5:30, I look more like that polarbear than I care to admit.
Post a Comment
<< Home