Community Perspective
Alaska has many viable energy options
Cash assistance helps, but solutions are still needed
Published Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!Recently, as I ended a conversation with my son after telling him I had a hectic day coming up, he said, “Mom, try to go to bed early tonight.”
When did we switch roles?
Let’s take a look at another role reversal. Five years ago, the state government in Alaska was in big financial trouble. The price and throughput in the oil pipeline had declined. Then-Gov. Murkowski was cutting personnel and services, even sacred ones like the longevity bonus for seniors. It was a crisis. There was talk of how the state could implement a tax on the people to sustain state government. Well, you know the rest of the story — oil prices shot up to $60, $90, $100 — all the way to $140 a barrel. This year, the state enjoys an unprecedented surplus because of the high price of oil.
On the home front, residents of Alaska, and especially those in Fairbanks and rural areas, are struggling with the high cost of heating oil and electricity. Now, the talk on the street and in political circles is “How are the people of Alaska going to ‘tax’ the state?”
During the special session on energy, the Legislature debated proposals in great detail. Everything was on the table. Legislators tried without success to craft a new subsidy for heating oil, natural gas and electricity. Uncertainty about the overhead costs of proposals, combined with geographic differences in cost and energy accessibility, thwarted good attempts for compromise. For every plan, the devil was in the details.
Ultimately, the Legislature pumped its brakes and decided on a direct payout to the people, rather than to build a bureaucracy. Clearly, this was the only expedient short-term solution.
I hope Alaskans across our state will join me in thanking the governor and Legislature for the $1,200 energy rebate. Cash to Alaskans to help them through an expensive winter trumps gimmicky energy plans with high overhead costs.
Local residents are taking action to conserve energy. As I walk through neighborhoods in Senate District E, I see lots of homeowners adding insulation, replacing windows and taking many other conservation actions to reduce fuel consumption. They are making upgrades and repairs to their homes that will be reimbursed by the state through the popular home weatherization program. Low-income residents can obtain direct payments through the combined state and federal program called LIHEAP, which stand for Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program.
We will get through the winter; however, all of this highlights the need for mid-term and long-term energy solutions. We need to roll up our sleeves and get to work. There are good viable energy options for Fairbanks. Interior residents deserve the peace of mind that comes from knowing they can access affordable energy.
Natural gas is abundant in Alaska. We need a bullet line to bring gas to the Interior. To bring gas to Fairbanks in five years is achievable.
The Healy area has rich deposits of low-sulfur coal. Converting coal to liquid fuel is being done economically other places. Healy coal could provide an alternative to heating oil for the next 400 years. We could burn it in our furnaces without a conversion. Coal-to-liquid fuel qualifies as a synthetic fuel; its production is timely because the Air Force has committed to 25 percent of jet fuel being synthetic by 2011. Not only could this become a major industry for the Interior, but it could secure Eielson Air Force Base for the foreseeable future.
The state needs to demand the Healy Clean Coal Project be activated. Legal battles have kept the 50-megawatt power generation plant idle since March 2000. That is simply unacceptable.
Other energy options include biofuel, hydropower and other renewable energy sources. We need to pursue every avenue for affordable, reliable energy.
I anticipate a bright future for Fairbanks. I expect Fairbanks to thrive, and, in five or 10 years when we look back to this crossroads, we will see that the decision-makers boldly fought for solutions, not Band-aids.
Cynthia Henry is a long-time business owner, former member of both the Fairbanks School Board and Borough Assembly, current member of the University of Alaska Board of Regents, and Republican candidate for State Senate Seat E. The Democratic candidate, Joe Paskvan, outlined his energy relief proposa
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Henry has a lot of homework to do on energy...
But as long as she refuses to ask Randy Ruedrich- a proven crook- to step down as the chair of HER party, folks will ask if she can be trusted to not be part of the good old boy network that needs to be dismantled.
In addition, News-Miner- why not ask these candidates to all tell us if they support secret meetings in Juneau- AKA "caucus".
Cynthia Henry:
Legislation that allows BP to deduct their ongoing $170 million corrosion and leak repairs from its state tax bill. This deduction lowers state tax revenues by tens of millions of dollars per year.
Senators in passing HB 3001, a sweeping oil tax overhaul that sets their new tax rate at 22.5% of their profits. Seekins also voted against an amendment* that would have prohibited BP from deducting the cost of their corrosion repairs on the North Slope.
This new tax structure allows the oil industry to use Enron-like accounting gimmicks to reduce their tax bill. As a result, litigation will probably determine whether the estimated $170 million cost for BP's ongoing corrosion repairs will be deducted from their taxes, according to Fairbanks Daily News Miner columnist Dermot Cole. Responses to legislative inquiries seemingly confirm BP's intent to ultimately deduct these expenses from their taxes.
Web posted August 10, 2006
Senate tosses out 'produce or pay' oil tax proposal
Lawmakers decide on base rate of 22.5 percent
By MATT VOLZ
The Associated Press
JUNEAU - A Senate committee on Wednesday dropped what was supposed to be a compromise production tax bill, opting instead for a more familiar plan to tax oil companies' profits.
Now, the bill would set a base tax rate of 22.5 percent of companies' profits from their Alaska operations. That tax rate would rise by .25 percent for every $1 rise in the price of oil above $55 per barrel.
At current prices, the tax rate would be about 28 percent of companies' profits, estimated Senate President Ben Stevens, R-Anchorage.
HB3001 OIL/GAS PROD. TAX Relating to the production tax on oil and gas and to conservation surcharges on oil; relating to ...
criminal penalties for violating conditions governing access to and use of confidential
information relating to the production tax; amending the definition of "gas" as that definition
applies in the Alaska Stranded Gas Development Act; making conforming amendments; and
providing for an effective date.
Relevance:
"An Act relating to the production tax on oil and gas and to conservation surcharges on ...
oil; relating to criminal penalties for violating conditions governing access to and use of
confidential information relating to the production tax; amending the definition of 'gas'
as that definition applies in the Alaska Stranded Gas Development Act; making
conforming amendments; and providing for an effective date."
SB3001 OIL/GAS PROD. TAX "An Act relating to the production tax on oil and gas and to conservation surcharges on ...
oil; relating to criminal penalties for violating conditions governing access to and use of
confidential information relating to the production tax; amending the definition of 'gas'
as that definition applies in the Alaska Stranded Gas Development Act; making
conforming amendments; and providing for an effective date."
Relevance:
"An Act relating to the production tax on oil and gas and to conservation surcharges on ...
oil; relating to criminal penalties for violating conditions governing access to and use of
confidential information relating to the production tax; amending the definition of 'gas'
as that definition applies in the Alaska Stranded Gas Development Act; making
conforming amendments; and providing for an effective date."
"I urge your prompt and favorable action on the bill."
Sincerely yours,
Frank H. Murkowski
Governor"
http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/get_t...
P_Davenport, wow way to stimulate responses. Copy and Paste is a great feature right, thanks Billy Gates….
I feel like this Henry lady is coming up with some valid and interesting solutions to our energy crisis in Fairbanks (and all of AK). We don’t all agree with Ruedrich but I think Henry has the interest of the state (particularly the interior) rather than “HER” party’s typical stances.
I agree that the energy rebate is great for Alaskans and a better plan than growing government and establishing new state positions to run alternative energy plans. Henry is right in that this is a crossroads for the interior and a permanent energy solution is intimate.
Origin Eyes $8 Billion Joint Venture With Conoco to Fend off BG
By Fayen Wong and Tom Bergin
September 8, 2008
PERTH/LONDON (Reuters) - Australia's Origin Energy Ltd struck a joint venture deal with U.S.-based ConocoPhillips and promised an extra shareholder payout, a move that could either defeat an $11 billion bid from Britain's BG Group Plc or force a higher offer.
Origin and Conoco said in statements on Monday that Conoco would contribute up to $8 billion toward a 50-50 joint venture that will develop the massive coal-seam gas (CSG) assets and build a liquefied natural gas (LNG) project.
OPEC Suggests Production Will Be Left Untouched
OPEC president says organization is likely to keep crude output steady
By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer
VIENNA, Austria September 9, 2008 (AP)
OPEC oil ministers will likely decide to keep output at present levels, the group's president said Tuesday, suggesting that most members could accept prices at $100 a barrel.
OPEC nations account for two-thirds of the world's known oil reserves, and about 40 percent of the world's oil production, affording them considerable control over the global market.
9-9-08
5 CEOs of some of the biggest oil companies were on Capitol Hill today.
PastPresentAndFutureAlaskan
"If"
"If" you had read the laws I posted and how they effect us right now with higher fuel, gas prices.
What is written in it. You would understand who, where, how and why we are paying high fuel prices. But not eveyone wants valid facts and not rumors or false statements. Copy and paste laws is a great feature right to validate, thanks Air Head….
Copying and pasteing laws is a great feature to validate without lies from party ties.
You want some valid and interesting solutions to our energy crisis in Fairbanks and all of AK . http://www.dnr.state.ak.us/ or http://w3.legis.state.ak.us/index.php or http://www.eere.energy.gov/ or http://www.dnr.state.ak.us/commis/
I dare you to look up all of Alaska's resources locations to locations of communities &/or villages. You will see there is a resource that can be developed quick at each. Quicker, cheaper, localized, jobs for that location. We should look in exporting our NLG and capitalize on it.
ANALYSIS-U.S. LNG importers turn to export markets for help
08.22.08, 11:42 AM ET
United States - By Joe Silha
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S. liquefied gas market, traditionally an import-only business, may be poised for some big changes that would allow under-utilized regasification terminals to export the super-cooled gas to more profitable overseas destinations, industry experts said.
While the nation's only liquefaction plant in Alaska has been exporting LNG for 40 years, and some natural gas is exported by pipeline to Mexico, LNG has not yet been shipped overseas from the continental United States and may heighten concerns about having enough supply to meet future demand.
http://www.forbes.com/reuters/feeds/reut...
Take the LGN straight to liquefaction plant. Why has it taken so long for us to progress? Oh yeah let Texas & Ok. get rich. Like with Flinthills, PetroStar, Kush. Let's pay higher prices to outsiders to get them rich on our oil, let's limit their taxes & repairs so Alaska pays them like with BP & the pipeline.....
You are not looking at all resources in the state as a whole to address the needs locally. You want 1 or 2 resources to cover the whole state which is time comsuming and defeating to Alaskans. In 40 years how has the liquefaction plant in Alaska helped those outside of their service area?
“Of all races in an advanced stage of civilization, the American is the least accessible to long views… Always and everywhere in a hurry to get rich, he does not give a thought to remote consequences; he sees only present advantages… He does not remember, he does not feel, he lives in a materialist dream.”
—Moiseide Ostrogorski (1902, 302-303)
Not much has changed in 106 years.......
Not mentioned in Henry's article is any concern about the CO2 from burning coal. The proposed gasification/liquids from coal technology is supposed to capture and sequester the CO2 output from the process. Using the experimental coal plant in Healy however won't do that.
Susitna, as originally proposed, so overreached on what was needed, the discussion was to subsidize Kaiser Aluminum to build a smelting plant at the north end of Cook Inlet. Scale down to what we need and there is less risk. Had we been focusing on serious conservation like we are now starting to do, even less power would be required.
A bullet line should have been built years ago, using natural gas as a bridging fuel source toward sustainable alternative energies.
Short term solutions vs. long term solutions - it's a mixed bag. But, no, we don't need to be pursuing EVERY option, just the ones that are sustainable. A few billion here, a few billion there, pretty soon we are talking real money.
It sounds like Henry is alligned with other interior republicans when they shipped energy rebate money to anchorage instead of giving it to those that need it, Fairbanks being one of those places. Our Fairbanks republicans again left us down, and where was jean Therriaut when it came time to vote on the energy rebate.... in China watching the olympics. For Real.
She is right on with her views on energy. She did not mention any co2 capture with the coal plan. The fact is co2 capture is a complete waste of money and would do nothing either way for for so called global warming.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.