
Speaker B
61:37 - 62:27
"So far about 20 million barrels have been produced, and so that would imply potential— potentially 80 million barrels of oil left that could be technically produced, and how much of that is economic would be a lesser number than that."
“So far about 20 million barrels have been produced, and so that would imply potential— potentially 80 million barrels of oil left that could be technically produced, and how much of that is economic would be a lesser number than that.”
So far about 20 million barrels have been produced, and so that would imply potential— potentially 80 million barrels of oil left that could be technically produced, and how much of that is economic would be a lesser number than that. And so that testimony from AO GCC really implies a lower incremental oil production from Point Thompson than what we've baked into our baseline modeling. Probably something closer to the 67.5 million barrels of additional oil production scenario. And so, what we've presented in the modeling is kind of the two goalposts being the full 270 that's baked into our baseline modeling and a zero incremental production from Point Thompson and then three intermediate scenarios.
Department of Revenue modeling shows that if the Alaska LNG project costs $60 billion instead of the baseline $46.2 billion, the price needed to break even in global markets would jump by $1.60 per thousand cubic feet, significantly affecting project viability and the state's fiscal analysis of competing tax proposals.

Alaska Department of Revenue modeling shows the Alaska LNG project could cost the state $16.2 billion through 2062 under worst-case production scenarios combining Prudhoe Bay oil losses with Point Thompson underperformance at $100 per barrel oil prices.
