Candidates for governor are raising their voices on a natural gas pipeline, talking up old and new alternatives to the administration's current plan -- one that Gov. Sean Parnell is sticking by, and strongly.

In some ways, he has to.

Parnell stepped into the state's top job in July when Gov. Sarah Palin quit nine months after a whirlwind run for the vice presidency. Parnell was left with a gas line plan, the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act, that Palin had championed on the trail as a sure thing, the state's only hope for future revenue, and Alaska's duty to feed "hungry" U.S. markets.

Parnell could have taken either of two routes on AGIA. He could have scrapped the whole thing, as some state lawmakers called for during Palin's last, contentious session in Juneau. Back out, take a financial hit, and refocus the state's sights on a smaller, in-state gas pipeline.

Or he could stick by AGIA, already barreling down a track toward big milestones like an open season set for this summer, when companies can bid on space in the line. Those bids are like money in the bank for the pipeline builders, who face the daunting next step of securing financing for the line, estimated to run as high as $41 billion. That's when the project is expected to show its true commercial colors.

Parnell has opted to stick with AGIA, asking Alaskans to be patient as the open season approaches. He has, however, toned down the talk. Parnell has been clear that AGIA is not a project, but a path to a project -- and he points to that in referencing the line TransCanada and its partner, Exxon Mobil, have named the Alaska Pipeline Project. Parnell says that project is the direct result of AGIA, and is closer than Alaska has ever been to realizing a gas line dream.

"(The Alaska Pipeline Project) has made significant progress since we were high-centered about two and a half years ago," Parnell said in a recent interview, pointing at millions spent and hours invested in developing a project. "TransCanada and Exxon and the state, really, are now moving forward on a large-diameter pipeline."

The governor is no stranger to oil and gas issues. Working as a state attorney under Gov. Frank Murkowski, he worked on AGIA's predecessor, negotiations Murkowski made with the Slope's top three producers under the Stranded Gas Act. Parnell's job was to concurrently hammer out terms with TransCanada. Using a third-party builder was seen as a way to protect the state's interests -- a move informed by years of legal wrangling wrought by differences over the big oil pipeline built in the 1970s.

Those months under Murkowski taught Parnell a lesson, he said: The state cannot negotiate separately with three different companies -- too much of Alaska's interest is given away, a piece to each deal. What became clear, Parnell said, was this: The state could only look out for its interests by negotiating with a single project. (Under AGIA, the state is still expected to negotiate fiscal terms like tax rates and long-term lock-ins.)

Murkowski's plans were tainted by a corruption scandal reaching into state and federal political circles. Some say the plans were dead on arrival before the Legislature regardless, with a state give that was too high.

Thus, AGIA -- a single project that spurred Denali, a second, competing proposal by producers BP and ConocoPhillips. Parnell echoes industry analysts, insisting that the two projects will merge into one, reining in the support of the state, all three producers, and a third-party pipeline builder.

"I think these projects should merge and they all should show up at the open season," Parnell said. "That is, basically, what I'm hearing."

As oil declines in legacy fields like Prudhoe Bay, gas production will become more economic, helping offset the higher costs of oil.

"That's what is moving this process, is the economics," he said. "I believe Alaska's gas will go to market. Gas, over the long run, will become much more profitable for the companies than oil. That's the transition -- and that's the transition we're in at this juncture."