New Emissions Analysis Gives Alaska New Sales Tool For Large Alaskan LNG Project | news


Alaska has a new sales tool to approach customers for the planned Alaska LNG project with a volume of over 40 billion US dollars.

A last Thursday from the state-owned Alaska Gas Development Corp. published report shows that the life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for their liquefied gas project in Alaska are significantly lower compared to coal-fired power plants from China or competing LNG projects in the US Gulf Coast.

This is important for customers who want to obtain energy from lower-emission sources.

“The world is increasingly focused on the climate impact of new high-volume energy projects,” said Frank Richards, CEO of AGDC. “This assessment uses recognized and transparent methods to quantify the value of replacing high-emission energy sources in overseas markets with low-emission LNG from Alaska. The justification for Alaska LNG is compelling, ”said Richards.

According to the analysis, LNG from Alaska would release about half of the greenhouse gases warming the planet, compared to generating the same electricity in China with coal or 541 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent per megawatt hour of electricity produced compared to 1,085 kilograms of CO2 per megawatt hour of electricity with Chinese coal. The figure for China comes from a 2019 study by the Department of Energy’s National Energy Technology Laboratory, according to the report.

The AGDC’s report also compared Alaska’s LNG emissions to comparable LNG projects in Louisiana and Australia that underwent similar life cycle assessments. It shows that the production and supply of Alaska LNG also results in 50 percent less greenhouse gas intensity compared to these projects.

One advantage for Alaska in the Gulf Coast and Australia comparison is the shorter shipping distance to Asia, which lowers emissions. In addition, the Alaskan gas in the Prudhoe Bay and Point Thomson fields would be produced with integrated infrastructure, compared to Lower 48 LNG, which is produced in many areas and requires a wide network of pipelines and manufacturing facilities.

“This assessment uses transparent methods to quantify the value of replacing high-emission energy sources in overseas markets with low-emission Alaska LNG,” said Richards.

In June, the DOE ordered a new GHG analysis of the major Alaska project to include downstream uses of LNG in export markets.

A GHG analysis in a final environmental impact statement for the Alaska LNG project prepared by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission only considered the GHG emissions from the project itself, e.g. B. in gas production on the North Slope; Pipeline transport to a port in southern Alaska and operation of a large LNG plant in the port.

A new supplementary environmental impact statement, which is being drawn up by NETL for the DOE, will include the downstream uses of LNG, for example in electricity generation. NETL is expected to publish its report in mid-2022.

Richards said that AGDC hired consultants for its report who worked with NETL on similar greenhouse gas life cycle studies and relied on the model the lab will use in its report.

AGDC created the report to get its own downstream GHG impact assessment several months ahead of the NETL report, which is supposed to show similar results since the same assumptions and procedures were used, Richards said.

Other US LNG developers like Cheniere Energy have commissioned life cycle GHG studies, in the case of Cheniere for its LNG project Sabine Pass.

The Alaska LNG project would include an 800 mile, 42-inch pipeline from the North Slope to a major gas liquefaction facility at Nikiski on the Kenai Peninsula. The pipeline would run through the Matanuska-Susitna district and provide gas at an economical cost for heating residential, commercial and industrial uses.

It would also create a large commercial real estate tax base for the Mat-Su district and reduce reliance on residential real estate taxes.


Comments are closed.