Posted on 10/14/2008 5:13:49 AM PDT by thackney
Russian Gazprom's top managers have visited Alaska to look into projects in the US state, Gazprom said Tuesday.
The Russian gas giant could share its expertise in Alaska as climatic conditions at its traditional gas production regions in northern Russia are similar to those in Alaska, it said in a statement.
A Gazprom delegation consisting of CEO Alexei Miller, his deputies Valery Golubev and Alexander Medvedev and others, met with representatives of Alaska's natural resources department, management of Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, which represents local business interests, and ConocoPhillips CEO Jim Mulva.
"Gazprom is ready to provide its abilities and experience. I think in the future we could conduct joint scientific research," Miller said in televised comments broadcast by Russian Vesti news channel from Anchorage, Alaska.
Miller in June 2008 disclosed his company's interest in joining a planned project to build a gas pipeline from Alaska to the Lower 48 US states.
"Our interests are not limited to the European continent only...Gazprom has unique experience, knowledge and modern technology and is the leading company in transporting gas by pipeline. That is why we are interested in such a large-scale project as construction of the gas pipeline from Alaska," he said in a speech at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum.
Mulva said at the time that ConocoPhillips would study Gazprom's proposal.
There are two rival planned pipeline projects in Alaska, one led by TransCanada and the other by two North Slope producers, BP and ConocoPhillips.
Miller said Tuesday timeframes for both projects envisage implementation by around 2018.
Gazprom said in a statement that besides the two planned pipeline projects in Alaska there should be opportunities considered for the construction of an LNG plant in Alaska.
Gazprom also suggested that a complex plan for gas production, transportation and supply system in Alaska would be "rational" for the development of the state's hydrocarbons.
Gazprom is leading a similar unified plan in Russia, for the development of East Siberian and Far Eastern gas fields.
ping
Plz send Gazprom back across the Bering Strait....in small kayaks.
That can’t be. CNN said Russia and Alaska never have any sort of relations.
What a boon to the KGB, having Russian construction of any significant US pipeline will make it easy to plan disruption should Russia wish to sabotage us
No US pipeline construction by Russia as long as they have troops in Georgia or are doing nuke business with Iran
What, do we need skills in making mud highways?
Yes, by all means - keep job creating foreign capital out of our country.
Perhaps they can teach us how to plan shutdowns that hold the customers hostage.
This is what they did in Germany. Buying the German Greens to protest nuclear power, in return for covert money to the Green Party.
Commies/Greens/Thugs, hand in hand.
Investment in the USA by powers that hate us ...is not a good investment. As we are just beginning to recognize. It’s never “just business” for them
American capital to create American jobs? What a quaint idea- maybe time to try
So who decides what is or is not a good investment? Secretary of Commerce? Department of Energy? Barney Frank? I thought conservatism promoted limited government, which almost always is the problem inhibiting economic growth...
American capital to create American jobs? What a quaint idea- maybe time to try
We have - it was "quaintly" called the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act.
Hopefully the Governor of Alaska will have a lead role in deciding who gets to build her state’s gas pipeline
A bad investment is signing contracts with someone who wishes you and your ideals dead and is using your money to undermine your values everywhere in the world ... not that tough imho
Would you be as sanguine if Chris Dodd moved to Alaska and won the governorship?
The fact that it took more than ten years to build the pipeline Palin got started should tell you something. Oil is the most over regulated industry we have, and energy prices reflect that. When you put government in charge of when business gets done, you are putting idiots in charge and you have fewer jobs, which are awarded to political supporters. In my book that is socialism.
Under your test - whether the bidder for the project "hates us" or "wishes you and your ideals dead," a political decision must be made before a business deal can get done. It is always bad to put government first, which is the model you are advocating for. When you start down that populist road, where does it end?
As far as the decision being that tough - I would fight for my freedom to make any deal I want to - to the death, as our forefathers did for liberty from English decisions about what deals they could make.
They haven't started building this one yet. Also, it is a Natural Gas, not Oil, pipeline being proposed.
I stand corrected
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.