
Dan Stickel
112:17 - 113:09
"we ran scenarios ranging from zero up to the 270 million incremental barrels of production. We ran scenarios for Prudhoe Bay looking at the zero oil impacts up to a 500 million barrel net reduction to oil production. And those scenarios, you know, they still show a positive impact to the state under our spring 2026 revenue forecast. If you were to assume higher oil prices, then yes, there are potential scenarios where the gas pipeline would be a net negative to state revenue."
“we ran scenarios ranging from zero up to the 270 million incremental barrels of production. We ran scenarios for Prudhoe Bay looking at the zero oil impacts up to a 500 million barrel net reduction to oil production. And those scenarios, you know, they still show a positive impact to the state under our spring 2026 revenue forecast. If you were to assume higher oil prices, then yes, there are potential scenarios where the gas pipeline would be a net negative to state revenue.”
Some of the testimony from AOGCC just earlier this month suggests that it could— the incremental oil production would still be positive, but potentially a lot less than that. And so we ran scenarios ranging from zero up to the 270 million incremental barrels of production. We ran scenarios for Prudhoe Bay looking at the zero oil impacts up to a 500 million barrel net reduction to oil production. And those scenarios, you know, they still show a positive impact to the state under our spring 2026 revenue forecast. If you were to assume higher oil prices, then yes, there are potential scenarios where the gas pipeline would be a net negative to state revenue.
Alaska Senate Finance Committee demands actual commercial and financial data for proposed $46.2 billion gas pipeline before considering state investment role
