June 12th, 2009
09:45 AM ET
14 years ago

Palin defends massive pipeline project

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/06/12/art.pipeline.gi.jpg caption="Palin is praising a deal to build a $26 billion pipeline in Alaska."](CNN) - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is pushing back against critics of the proposed $26 billion natural gas pipeline in her state, saying demand for natural gas is on the rise in the United States.

"By probably 2030, we’ll see about a 40 percent increase in demand for natural gas," Palin told CNN's Wolf Blitzer in an interview set to air at 6 p.m. ET on The Situation Room. "Domestically, we have the supply. The resources are up there in Alaska, and it’s time that we build this infrastructure and flow that very valuable resource into hungry markets throughout the U.S."

Palin's comments come in the wake of questions by some critics of the proposal whether there is an adequate demand for the massive expenditure.

The Alaska governor called those views "short sighted" and said the project is "right for our nation’s security and for our environment, for our economy."

The former Republican vice presidential candidate also praised the recent alliance of TransCanada and Exxon Mobil - the two rivals in the years-long battle of who would build the pipeline - and take a stake in the future revenue it generates.

Palin, who has long courted such a deal, was on hand in Texas to announce the joint-project.

"It’s a great venue that we have, a vehicle called AGIA, the Alaska Gas Line Inducement Act, and believe me, Exxon, the largest company in the world, and TransCanada, the best pipeline building company in the world, I’m sure they would not have aligned and committed to building this project had they not crunched the numbers and figured out that for their bottom line," she said.

Watch Sarah Palin's full interview at 4 and 6 p.m. ET on The Situation Room

Filed under: Sarah Palin
soundoff (55 Responses)
  1. GOPer

    Nice to see Palin doing her job for Alaskans! Good Job Mrs. Palin, now get back to work in Alaska!

    June 12, 2009 10:26 am at 10:26 am |
  2. Wolves 4 Palin Charlotte, NC

    This is nothing more than another of her political "bridges to no- where." This has not and most likely won't be approved for years, if at all. Remember, this is the same pipeline for hwich she took credit "for building while she was Governor."
    Palin, just keeping her name in the news.

    June 12, 2009 10:27 am at 10:27 am |
  3. KirksNoseHair

    So, when Obama spends on infrastructure projects = Bad

    But when Palin spends on infrastructure projects = Good


    June 12, 2009 10:28 am at 10:28 am |
  4. Southerner

    Exactly Governor, you are so smart, lets hire Canadians instead of Americans because Canadians are the best in the world. Here in Georgia we have a pipe building company that is not too bad either. By the way, who really wants Exxon to be part of their future???

    June 12, 2009 10:28 am at 10:28 am |
  5. Tulsa

    Oh, I see, when a Republican gives billions to a foriegn company to build infrastructure it's ok, when our PRESIDENT spends money here at home on infrastructure to put AMERICANS to work it's SOCIALISM.
    Gee GOP, hypocrite much?

    June 12, 2009 10:28 am at 10:28 am |
  6. David

    If that $26 billion is tax dollars, shouldn't we all be screaming "soshulizm" or "corporate welfare" for the oil and natural gas industries? If this is so great, let private industry pay for it. Isn't that right conservatives? Private industry needs to take personal responsibility?

    June 12, 2009 10:29 am at 10:29 am |
  7. Naldo

    So...she sold the soul of every inhabitant of Alaska to the oil barons? One company controlling everything with no oversight? So they will hold us hostage to price hikes just like the gulf oil companies? How is this good?

    June 12, 2009 10:32 am at 10:32 am |
  8. Too True For You

    I never could understand how this folly flew so far under the radar during the campaign. In her typically ignorant fashion she jumped the gun with this project, starting without securing agreements with Canada and her First Peoples. How stupid is that? How did she expect to get the pipeline from the edge of Alaska to the lower 48? Doh! Canada and the First Peoples now hold all the cards, so it will end up costing tens or hundreds of millions to pay for her mistake.

    June 12, 2009 10:32 am at 10:32 am |
  9. Vancouver, BC

    Palin overlooks the fact that there has been no approval from either the Canadian Regulatory Board, the Canadian people nor the Canadian gov't. Her pipeline has huge obstacles to get through before this is even close to a reality.

    June 12, 2009 10:34 am at 10:34 am |
  10. katiec

    Of course Palin is going to support her plan. What happened to her hypocritical mention of alternative fuel?
    She has proven she cares nothing about environment, survival of extinct wildlife or anything other than her ambition, greed and unacceptable beliefs.
    This woman is a dangerous part of the right wing extremists that incite hate, anger, fear and division of our country.
    Isn't this domestic terrorism??

    June 12, 2009 10:34 am at 10:34 am |
  11. LacrosseMom

    Twenty six billion is a lot of money. Question is what is the demand for natural gads? If we were going to be driving natural gas fueled vehicles, I can see that we would need the pipeline, but my understanding is that this form of fuel for our vehicles is still in its infancy. Need to do some research on this.

    Peaceful Friday to everyone!

    June 12, 2009 10:35 am at 10:35 am |
  12. barking republican ankle biters

    Big oil and gas have a great paid shill in Sarah Palin.They throw the people of Alaska a nice bone to stay quiet,while they pillage the resources of the land to sell to Japan.

    June 12, 2009 10:35 am at 10:35 am |
  13. Four and The Door

    This is an excellent project to put support behind and get accomplished because of the advantages it provides in several critical ways. Alaska is fortunate to have Sarah Palin as their governor and America will be fortunate when she comes to Washington DC.

    June 12, 2009 10:36 am at 10:36 am |
  14. Dawn in Pa

    Govenor Palin, great, the last time I heard those exact same words is when we had an oil embargo, The Alaskin Pipeline, this was built so that we would not depend on foreign oil, well we get what about a eighth of your natural crude oil and the rest is exported out. Exxon-Mobil, British Petroleum and Coneco. My brother found Natural gas on his proerty in Tioga Counry and he is leasing it for the natural gas and he will get some sort of royalities from that.

    Remember this is in Anwar, she has been trying to drill baby drill on that reserve since she was made Governor... You betcha I am a bleeding heart liberal who values land and animals who would have to be relocated somewhere else...

    June 12, 2009 10:36 am at 10:36 am |
  15. phoenix86

    Obama is blocking new drilling, pushing the US to become even more dependent on his friends in the Middle East. Doubling renewable energy will increase it to 2% of total US energy use, putting upward pressure on prices.

    If we don't increase our supply of domestic energy, we will transfer all out wealth to the Arab world. Green energy won't be an alternative in sufficient quantity.

    Palin is absolutely right.

    June 12, 2009 10:38 am at 10:38 am |
  16. Todd Shriver

    sounds like a good plan

    June 12, 2009 10:40 am at 10:40 am |
  17. ghost

    Does this mean she is looking for an 'earmark' to pay for this? maybe she's looking for stimulus money to pay for it. I mean, it is an infrastructure project, right?

    In all honesty, unless there's some natural reserve issue (ANWAR) then I see no problem with this. However, it is a temporary job, which means that she should be against it. As well as there being no way to pay for it. can't her state pay for it themselves? Better yet, let the gas company pay for it.

    June 12, 2009 10:40 am at 10:40 am |
  18. lynn in NM

    Of course, we don't want to do anything to the pipeline in Alaska. We want to send all of our money overseas. Why would we ever want to give Americans jobs? This way, we can make all Americans beholden to the government.

    June 12, 2009 10:42 am at 10:42 am |
  19. Mallory Oberlinsk

    Gee, what a change that a state would actually be planning ahead....

    June 12, 2009 10:42 am at 10:42 am |
  20. JT

    Why can't the oil and gas companies use ships to export their product instead of having the people of Alaska shell out $26B? Who elected this excuse for a governor?

    June 12, 2009 10:45 am at 10:45 am |
  21. confused

    Palin – I agree.

    June 12, 2009 10:45 am at 10:45 am |
  22. young conservative from NJ is win

    Well it's tough to say WHEN the demand will increase, but surely it will over time. In the least, increasing the supply of natural gas will lower the costs to homeowners so I don't think it's a horrible idea... $26 billion is an awful lot though so I hope she has the money to pay for it...

    June 12, 2009 10:46 am at 10:46 am |
  23. Bridgette

    Check her pockets and see what big endorsement or donation she has recieved. This woman does not do anything for the good of the people.

    June 12, 2009 10:47 am at 10:47 am |
  24. Duck Fallas

    The pipeline is in poor taste. It's not cool, it's not funny.

    June 12, 2009 10:49 am at 10:49 am |
  25. Patrick - Indianapolis

    By 2030 if we don't have a new method of making energy, then we are going to have some very serious problems. Fossil fuels are so 20th century.

    June 12, 2009 10:52 am at 10:52 am |
1 2 3