Administration re-evaluating its short-term energy plan
Published Saturday, May 31, 2008
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!JUNEAU — Gov. Sarah Palin’s administration is re-evaluating its short-term energy relief plan in response to criticisms that it is unfair and could actually work against the state’s long-term goals, according to Steve Haagenson, the governor’s energy coordinator.
“We’re looking at the pluses and minuses of the whole plan,” he said Friday, adding that he expected some changes would be made.
Palin announced the plan earlier this month in response to dramatically increased energy prices around the state. Under the plan, every Alaskan would get $100 a month to spend on heating fuel, gas or other energy-related expenses. Electric utilities would receive subsidies big enough to reduce the cost of electricity for consumers by roughly half.
In a written statement on the plan, Palin restated her commitment to finding long-term solutions, such as using less diesel fuel in rural areas and finding alternative fuel sources, but she added that Alaskans need help now.
Haagenson said Friday the administration was looking for a plan that would help Alaskans, was simple and fair, and could be implemented easily.
“Alaskans are hurting,” he said. “The question is, what’s the fastest way that we can get a plan out there?”
Since the plan was announced, the state has received a wide range of comments, Haagenson said.
Some people say they like the plan and want it implemented as soon as possible, he said. Others criticize the plan as unfair because it doesn’t adequately address regional differences in energy prices, or unwise because it would decrease the incentive to reduce energy consumption — one of the goals of Palin’s long-term plan.
State lawmakers considered a handful of short-term energy relief plans during this year’s legislative session, including direct cash hand-outs, but ultimately put money into state energy efficiency and weatherization programs instead.
Alaskan environmental groups have recently expressed strong concerns about Palin’s plan, largely because of the belief that it would reduce the incentive for energy conservation.
David van den Berg, head of the Fairbanks-based Northern Alaska Environmental Center, argues the governor’s energy plan would likely cause people to use more energy.
If electricity costs half as much as it does now, people would likely use more of it, he said Thursday. If the state pays for $100 worth of gas every month, the incentive to buy a fuel-efficient car or use a bicycle instead is reduced.
Van den Berg said he sees the governor’s plan as inconsistent with her support for expanding state programs involving energy-efficiency and home weatherization.
Rep. Mike Kelly, a Republican from Fairbanks, has also expressed concerns that the plan “dulls the price signal” that would encourage things like conservation.
Haagenson acknowledged the concerns Friday and agreed with Kelly.
“The enemy of conservation is low price,” he said.
Haagenson said he and others were considering ways to encourage conservation while still providing relief.
Palin’s plan already includes a cash incentive for electric utilities that reduce overall consumption between 2007 and 2008, but some question whether the incentive would work.
Palin spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said the governor hopes to formally introduce a plan to the Legislature by June 20. Lawmakers are scheduled to gather in Juneau on Tuesday to take up gas pipeline issues.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Sell state royalty oil to the refinery under contract at an affordable rate- say $25.00 per bbl.
Problem solved.
Anchorage does not have a problem, nor does Southeast. The Interior and rural villages are getting killed. ISER reports thousands are fleeing the villages due, in part, to high living costs. Will the NAEC be happy when the Northern part of the state is depopulated? While there is merit to conservation, the arrogance expressed by van den Berg is beyond belief. And I'd still like NAEC to stop playing games and come out and express support for a Susitna hydroelectric project. Clean, renewable energy... what's not to like? Crazy.
So how many Fairbanksans,especially those on fixed incomes, spent every penny they could scrape together on fuel last winter? How many had to use credit? It looks like it will be even worse next winter, reaching a level of desperation for many. Long term plans are irrelevant when the wolf is at the door.
5050,
It is obvious you do not care for NAEC and will take issue with whatever stance they take. Did you note that Mike Kelly and the Governor's energy coordinator took the same stance, that cheap energy will not encourage conservation? Will you chastise them as well?
I suspect there will indeed be a de-population of the interior, but the blame can hardly be placed on the Northern Alaska Environmental Center. Boy, talk about agendas!
Dave Van der Berg stated above,"If the state pays for $100 worth of gas every month, the incentive to buy a fuel-efficient car or use a bicycle instead is reduced"
OK, so here we Alaskans are presumably having trouble paying for gas. I guess we can all afford to go out and buy a fuel efficient car.
Since not many of us can afford that option I guess we better plan on riding our bikes to work, that will be really fun in the winter!
Van der Berg also mentions putting more money into weatherization programs - with all of the new housing that popped up here recently, I have to wonder how many houses really aren't that efficient anymore.
So, if any of these people use their brains, they may figure out that there really isn't a fair way to plan a handout.
In Kotzebue when the barge arrives stove oil is projected at $10 a gallon. With the governor's plan, a hundred dollars will buy 10 gallons of heating oil, $1200 a whopping 120 gallons. Royalty oil will not have any effect since the fuel is delivered once a year.
People here have begun to have their telephones turned off as a way to save some money. Milk is now 12.99 a gallon and a loaf of bread 6.99. I won't compare Fairbanks with rural villages. I will probably be able to heat my home more effectively with the hot air that comes out of the energy special session, then any action the legislators take. Yes, I choose to live here as do people in their homes in the rest of Alaska.
Well I agree with 5050 as far as Mike Kelly he just needs to keep on step'en right out of office. He seems to be even worse then Jay.
New blood and outside the box ideas is what we need not the same old same old.
"The enemy of conservation is low price." And thusly, the friend of environmentalists is pain and suffering. For without pain and suffering, the masses are not smart enough to do any conservation. In this view, Alaskans are nothing but a bunch of stupid mutts, anxious to rape and pillage the land. And that is the belief of the extremist environmentalists. I've read it in these blogs. It is the belief of NAEC.
Shame on you, Mike Kelly, for parroting these extremist views while your constituents might well have to pack up and leave. Not me. I'll still be here, and I'll remember. I expect this anti-human poop from leftist environmentalists, but not from you. Here's a new name for Republican environmentalist placaters: "McCainists".
These windfall profits belong to Alaskans. Not the legislature, or the governor.
That is our money that were talking about. Dont forget that fact.
Public officials that celebrate the high cost of fuel in favor of conservation will face the wrath of the voters. Heating oil is north of $4.30 and the summer has just begun. Meanwhile State coffers are bursting at the seams with windfall oil revenues. Steve should think carefully about the best way to help Alaskans, certainly. But part of the reevaluation should be whether $1.2 billion is too low. The voters need to watch their legislators carefully, as special interest groups quietly look to advance their latest government project.
Hey Husky,
I'll admit it, I take issue with NAEC. In this case, it is a narrow-visioned organization, who can't seem to look at this problem statewide. Whad does a fuel-efficient car, or riding your bike mean for those not in urban areas? Nothing! I'm not just talking villagers, ... but basically anyone who isn't living in Fairbanks, Anchorage, or Juneau. Van de Berg only points out one "forced" idea of what the $100 per resident fuel card could produce if implemented. He fails to concede the point that the fuel card is intended to purchase various energy: gasoline, home heating oil, propane, etc.
It seems everyone is failing to recognize that Palin has said this is a 1-year deal, it addresses the very quick, very short energy needs, ... which is exactly what we need. Quit confusing the issues, the long term energy plans are needed and we need our administration and elected officials to take accountability for working out those long term needs. For now, let's allow each resident to get some short term relief from funds made off of resources that each resident owns partially.
Finally, I work in an okay job, ...my wife as well. We are not rich by any means and struggled through last winter the same as everyone else. We have one child and own a townhome. We do not qualify for the extended weatherization programs, ... we make too much money. What?! The success of these programs, or the reinvigoration of said programs are hailed as true victories from environmentalists who claim this will reduce consumption. Okay, so what about families like mine, or even those that make slightly more. We are not well off, we are not rich, we do not qualify for the programs. Our collective homes will not be re-weatherized come winter. $100 fuel cards sound mighty nice in that instatnce, ... but wait, Van de Berg and others claim the cards will aren't fair because they disproportionately favor Anchorage and Juneau. Please. Why doesn't NAEC focus their efforts on helping promote weatherization programs that allow all Alaskans to take advantage of and not just the poor, or low-low class? They won't, because they believe people like me unjustly deserve to pay for these services and believe governement should ONLY take care of those that can't afford it. Well, guess what? I can't afford it, but I'm still not worthy to them.
I would be more in favor of listening to what environmentalists have to say if they would only concede their talking points that make no sense, or are themselves, biased to suit their own ideallyic visions.
As for the short-term energy needs of the state, let's all be weary ...and try not to condemn Palin's plan to death even before legislators have a chance to refine it to be fair to all and quickly enacted before winter.
I haven't seen it in the News Miner but ADN had an article about the change in home sales in Fairbanks. The number of houses for sale is up and those being sold down. The average sale price is $212,000. The exodus may be delayed due to inability to sell a home. It took a South American Dictator to help rural Alaska with the cost of fuel, not the State of Alaska. Do you really think these people will do anything but a token gesture to help. It all goes back to taking care of yourself, I forgot the State has tried to reduce subsistence lifestyles by the restrictions it has placed on the people's use of resources and land.
It is our oil and our money but we can not be trusted to make the right decisions regarding its use. Thank god the NAEC and Mike Kelly are here to keep us out of trouble. Oh but wait I'm not sure the PC folks at NAEC believe in god. Personally I think it's a sin that the state with the most oil pays the highest prices for it. Of course they probably only think you can sin against nature not mankind. Mankind being the sin against nature that it is.
Selling the royalty oil to the refinery at a discount will only help ensure that more of it goes to Anchorage to fuel cargo aircraft.
Without a dramatic change in the market (which some hopeful persons in the economics game have projected, by the way), my guess is that Fairbanksans will be looking at between $5.00 and $6.00 per gallon of #1 heating oil at some point, this coming winter.
I feel sympathy for you Suomi. I told folks years ago that when the People in the bush and rural Alaska are priced out of the ability to live there, the heated arguments over rural vs. urban subsistence will subside; no one except the shamelessly wealthy will be able ro afford to LIVE in rural Alaska at that time. Looks like it's upon us, and the current demographics reveal that there appears to be a notable emmigration from rural Alaska to Los Anchorage. My expression of sympathy and condolences to you are sincere. Rural Alaska's hopes are having the life-blood squeezed from them by this profiteering that some are engaging in.
Folks say that "the grass isn't greener," to those who contemplate moving southward, yet ignore the fact that Fairbanksans have a 6 to 6-1/2 month winter to heat their homes through, while folks in, for example, Interior Oregon, have maybe half of that. And Fairbanksans pay some of the highest rates of property taxes in the United States on top of that!!
I won't leave unless I absolutely have to, and if I do leave, it'll be for another country, not someplace over-run with ordinances, intrusive busy-body neighbors, and folks who restrict liberty in the name of celebrating it.
When the subsidies and revenues that are calculated via the number of persons in residence drop, due to persons leaving the State, even moreso than when Alaska achieved a negative population growth in the later 80s, and the shipping price on goods rockets even higher, 'cause shipping greater volume is cheaper, on a per piece basis, and the amount of demand has dropped, and the life's savings, represented by the home you built, that you thought you'd keep and give to your kids, is worth half of what it is now (or even a quarter or less, as also occurred in the later 80s, though for a shorter time period, as that was a recession, and THIS, despite GW's delusions, is a DEPRESSION), will THAT wake up the legislature and politicos as to the depth of the current crisis?? Or are they too busy drinking at the Baranoff and cruising on others' dimes, to notice that the ship is sinking around them??
Yes, Americans HAVE used energy like there was no tomorrow. No, most of us can't afford a new Prius Hybrid (though it's nice of those who live by sucking blood from us can recommmend it).
I'm not sure what to do, but I can envision, in hopeful imagery, that if the heads of Exxon, ARCO, Connoco Phillips, BP, OPEC, or Flint Hills should happen to walk past on the street, goofy enough to be wearing a name tag announcing who they are, I'm apt to do something that I wouldn't ordinarily entertain with a mere passer-by. I'm apt to spit on them.
van de Berg and Rep. Kelly don't live out in Rural or Remote Alaska, and cannot imagine how much we have conserved in our villages. Rep. Kelly and van den Berg act as though the money that will be spent on relief is their own personal money. All the money coming into the state's treasury is ALL of our money. How dare they take such an attitude of how we can live our lives out here.
That oil money is ours and we are demanding it so we can survive. For some reason some legislators and bureautcrats are thinking they are the masters and we, the voters, are the servants. Well, we the masters are demanding our oil money in the form of immediate relief and we need it right now!
Holy Moly! I am on Mike Kelly's side?!
I say this every time this issue is discussed, a $100/month relief program is like giving money to heroin addicts to provide relief for their disease, the only beneficiaries will be the drug lords.
For every disaster that needs government relief you can point to warning signs screaming to the victims: "CHANGE"! It was clear that the 9th Ward was below water level, that Chinese buildings are just stacks of bricks ready to collapse, that the Juneau power line was in an avalanche path, that Alaska villages needed to find other energy sources, and that soccer moms should quit driving <15 mpg SUVs.
What we can do with the windfall is to:
Provide assistance to install small scale alternative energy in the bush NOW, don't eliminate the diesel generators but save them for those days that the sun doesn't shine or the wind doesn't blow.
State funding for the SNAP programs,
Change the payment structure in utilities so that small scale producers get the market rate for energy production.
Provide assistance to get gas hogs off the road.
Provide real mass transit with more routes and more frequent buses.
Paint bike lanes on the roads.
More money for energy efficiency assistance.
Long term planning, design, and change the way and types of energy we use.
In the 1970's we went through an energy crisis, there were gas lines, people stealing fuel and gas, we were all in a panic! Nixon instituted nation-wide daylight savings time to save energy, we all bought more fuel efficient cars, started car-pooling, reduced the speed-limit to 55, turned down our thermostats, added more insulation to our houses, turned off unneeded lights, etc. Guess what? Demand went down, prices went down...then we all forgot.
In the '80s and '90s. We started buying gas hogs again, we drive said hogs like maniacs, built huge trophy homes miles away from where we work and play, we bought snow machines, ATVs, jet skis, Motor homes, flew south 10 times a year, provided fuel assistance to villages so they could burn diesel like there was no tomorrow.
Assistance? Sure, we need assistance for our own stupidity and shortsightedness! We ONLY have ourselves to blame!
Whew...sorry, end of rant.
If you think fuel prices are high now, just wait, they will drop again, but not for long, that's when the REAL crisis comes.
If we can all miraculously reduce our fuel and electric use in half this summer we will still be paying more than we did last winter! Heating oil is over $4.25 and electricity will be jumping up to almost .22 kWh soon. If you were having a tough time last winter you better be thinking real hard about how you are going to make it this winter. Add to this the 25%-30% increased cost of all other commodities and you can start to see the scope of the problem that we are facing.
Dear Suomi,
Powdered milk is a whole lot cheaper and you can in fact bake your own bread for next to nothing. I've tried both and they work. Honest.
lfreeman is exactly the type of holier than thou person that I meant in my previous post. Giving Alaskans their own money is like giving junkies heroin? Puh-leese.
I know, let's paint bicycle lanes on the highways.
Fbksgas: Ain't nothin' yet, look down the road a couple of years. Even if ANWR opened, when would we see the oil? When is the gasline going to be built? Do you really think either of these things will provide us with energy security?
Yeah, I feel the pain of those on fixed incomes, and they probably do need assistance. But, I hear about people burning in excess of 1000 gallons a month...I don't think $100/month is going to make a much of a dent. We've been subsidizing diesel burning in the bush communities for decades, it was the stupidest program we've ever had. We should have been helping those communities find local, sustainable sources of energy.
$100/month will not fix the problem, at best it's like a band-aid on an arterial bleed-out (on a self-inflicted wound).
Alaskans live in sprawling areas, often with much further to drive to their respective work places than other geographic areas. Was this our 'fault'? Yep, but it was affordable, & supported a way of rural living, etc.
Someone in the 'comments' section recommended we buy sportscars and motorcycles, as means by which to beat fuel costs. It was obvious that this 'advice' came from a bachelor, or person in a relationship with no children, who lived on a paved road, with relatively flat surfaces. I have three kids, live on a orad that's infrequently plowed, and NEED 4-wheel drive at least part of the winter.
Was it our 'fault' to have built here? Yep. But at that time, it was affordable, offered an alternative to the noisy, polluted, & bizarre scene in urban living, which is why we've frequently lived in a rural setting.
My pick-up truck now sits in the driveway as much as I can let it. I use it to haul supplies, meat, and for purposes for which a car won't suffice. My wife's 1992 4-wheel drive stationwagon gets better mileage than a new Matrix, though it's not as shiny. We're working hard to maintain it. Another 4-wheel drive wagon here will get a mechanical make-over soon, matching the mpg ratings of a new Matrix.
We'll return to burning wood, despite the pollution, increased risk of fire, and the fact that for decades I'd burned wood as a primary heat source (with no back-up) and had swore, 10 years ago, to cease.. Times change.
This winter we will live as our friends in Germany do; with the heat set at somewhere near 60 degrees f., or even cooler. Hot soup, hot drinks, and extra sweaters can compensate for a lot of fuel oil. Some of our friends in Europe are now reportedly paying between $8 & $10/ gallon of fuel.
None of this will completely compensate for the fact that ALL of the goods that we buy in order to live are affected by the current scourge, and our property values will, almost guaranteed, drop like anvils in still water.
I read an article the other day that reported the cost of producing a bbl of oil is still around $25.00. Hmmm.
Queen Elizabeth enacted the 1601 Elizabethan Poor Laws (the template for our later welfare laws) to keep the peasants from raiding the castle. I wonder if she'd be nervous today??
Thanks g'less, I'm not holier than thou, just a heathen that could see the fuel oil wasn't going to stay at $.90 for ever.
It's a sunny day out there, think I'll go enjoy it. Suggest you do to.
People do use powder milk and bake bread, actually two products that are not healthy for anyone and giving them up doesn't hurt. A traditional diet is the best way to go. The biggest challenge facing Alaskans is the willingness to change life styles and not expect the government to pay for your lifestyle. I read that people do not believe they should have to do this. Has anyone ever wondered where Alaska would have been today if oil was not discovered and produced. Maybe better off. But you cann't change what is. Many people use to put villagers down for accepting government handouts, but now it looks like everyone whats them under the veil that it is our money and oil. Like they say what goes around, comes around.
Now that does make sense...
Suomi,
Now your talking sense. Pardon the previous sarcasm.
Oil has made it easy for us to grow the population, and each of us can produce far more using its energy than we ever could have without it. But, I agree, maybe we would have (as a species) been better off without it. It's been too easy to let oil work for us and now we have to learn some new skills and re-learn some old ones. But, are there too many of us now to be able to go back to a traditional diet and low-impact way of life?
glacierles-
Here we go again.
The money belongs to the people of Alaska equally, and to repeat g'les (and myself from previous posts),
NOT to the executive and/or legislature.
Getting merely some of our own money returned to us is NOT a government handout.
It's the least we could get in these times of huge windfalls into the state coffers. The state is the collection point of our money.
The only fair way to distribute some of our money back to us is in equal shares--as the shareholders we are.
Some of you people simply amaze me. Referring to folks needing help keeping their house warm as "heroin junkies"???? You obviously either dont live in the interior or are overly wealthy. The bottom line is this, folks need help now! They will also need help in 10 years but unless something is done now for this coming winter we "ARE" going to see a depopulation of the interior, no questions asked. This will in turn affect local businesses in many ways and the suffering will be a simple chain of reactions. The state has the money, they need to use it to keep its residents healthy. This crap about conservation is wonderful but living in a place than generally has sub zero temps for near 6 months of the year, you have to heat your home somehow! Riding bicycles is not an option and most people selling their trucks for cars are taking $1000's in losses, but they are doing it. You just cant take a place like interior Alaska and put it in a crash course in cutting the umbilical cord from fossil fuel usage....period! I hope to god that the Governor and her people realize this or the times ahead are going to be real ugly for many families. Yes its cheaper to heat a house in Anchorage than in Fairbanks and they might not need as much help as interior residents do but any help WILL be appreciated by the people, that you can bank on! I cant tell you that even with both my wife and myself having good jobs that I havent considered seeking jobs in warmer places. When the money you make that you would normally have to enjoy, is simply aiding you in getting by the value of life here changes drastically. Like many of my friends and co workers have said, if you cant afford to do the things that you live and love Alaska for .....why live here?
Kelly and Van de Berg, once again, don't get it. I expect folks in Fairbanks to be shortly abandoning their homes and heading south. I paid over 5 grand for fuel oil last winter, and thus will be paying over 15 grand when oil hits $300/barrel. Few can afford such prices. If the State does not use some of the revenue it collects to subsidize home heating in a place where it goes to -40 every winter, the State will see its citizens flee as they'll have no other choice.
Of note, the Sunday News-Miner now has 2 classified sections, with one section consisting soley of homes for sale. Is this an indication of folks leaving?
I heard someone once say let Alaska be Alaska. Alaska will have a way to rid itself of those who do not understand this. Talk to the old timers who love and enjoyed Alaska before oil. If your mind is set in California living the Arctic and subArctic is not for you. Like the Goldminers, when they money ran out so did they.
LFreeman likes to preach that $100 a month will not fix our long-term energy needs, ... and LFreeman is right. It was never meant to be a long-term solution, the Palin administration has said so from the very beginning. Instead, LFreeman and others liken the $100 energy/fuel debit card idea to a drug deal, feeding the addiction of the masses, ... a crack-like energy addiction.
LFreeman and others try to sway their argument to the long term, always. "Even IF we drill in ANWR, we won't see a drop of it for ten years," "ANWR will only amount to a drop in the bucket of our energy needs," ...blah, blah, blah.
FairbanksGas, I respect your opinion, ... would like to know your predictions on oil futures? My opinion, as I've stated numerously over the course of the past few months, ...is simple, and probably does not include all pertaining factors, but, ... I believe that should we begin to develop/explore our own resources, ... sure the outcome wouldn't reach market for years, but it would act as a larger signal or shout out to OPEC nations and those markets that directly effect price that the U.S. will no longer play their game. If we make a statement, by development, that we are working toward being less dependant of foreign energy, ... the statement alone would effect oil futures and trading, ... thereby equalize, or balancing out portions of the over-inflated oil market.
...Or, maybe I'm wrong. LFreeman wins. I'll do as LFreeman suggests and more bike lanes on the road and make sure more public transit exists, ...... hmmmmmmmmmmm
One question on that though, .... how exactly do you paint bike lanes on dirt roads, either in remote communities or urban, ... your choice. And how do we make bus service available in Kotzebue, Tok, ...St. Petersburg, etc.? I say again, your short list of bulleted energy points is narrow and only addresses tired conservation talking points that work in urban environments.
We need a rational Alaska Energy Policy. Without it, we engage in knee-jerk reactions and get nowhere. Since this is supposed to be one state, why don't we have a state-wide energy grid?
Then all would get getting the shaft equally. All the money in the state treasury is ours, not the administration's or legislature's private slush fund to do with as they will.
Thousands of people across Alaska have said they want relief now. We are the masters and the administration and legislators are SUPPOSED to be the servants. Somehow that fact of who is in charge has been reversed.
We also need an Energy Czar and a Department of Energy so that we have a person with cabinet level status working 24/7 on developing a rational energy policy and plan that will help all Alaskans no matter where they live. We can't have the Railbelt getting low-cost energy without helping Rural and Remote Alaska at the same time.
So, we need an Energy Policy and Plan, a State-Wide Energy Grid, and a cabinet level Energy Czar with a Department of Energy to work on getting low cost energy to all of us and get us to energy self-sufficiency by 2025.
This article just proves point blank the politicians are greedy scum! They dont want to give our money from our resources to us because then they are not sitting on it and spending it themselves. I just love the statement from van de berg saying if the state gives us a hundred dollars that would give us less incintive to buy a more fuel efficient car what a stupid comment on top of what you pay for heat gas electric and dont forget food now you got a car payment. Just what i want is another car payment no thanks mine is paid for. Yeah dont try to reduce the price of electricity we might want to use more what a stupid statement. Yeah god forbid we get electricty for a fair price so we can turn an extra light on no dont do that. Let the state and legislature spend our money to try and figure out long term solutions by the time them spend happy idiots find the solution the money will be gone but hey they will be happy cause they got to spend it and not us and thats what they want all for them none for the people that the money belongs too. I have said it before and will say it again they need to give people the option of being given a one time buy out of the pfd i will take mine in a heartbeat and before everyone starts in on the you just want a handout its our money so it aint a handout. So stop throwing that up. Cause the next thing those greed mongers will go after is the pfd and some way they will get it.
I love it when ruby red conservatives rationalize direct gov't payments as being their $$ in the first place. The same folks complain about welfare mothers. It's a disconnect. The govt profits are ours, the govt debts are somebody elses. At least people like Hugo Chavez are consistent...and by the way gas in Venezuela is 12 cents a gallon. Maybe you'd like to live there?
This program is welfare you can't spin it any other way. Personally I have no problem w/govt subsidies (welfare) to the truly needy. This program should be reworked to focus assistance on people and communities who are suffering.
I'm assuming that folks see "ruby red conservatives" in many places here??
I'm also assuming those folks haven't read Article VIII, Sections I & II of the State of Alaska Constitution, well enough to digest it thoroughly.
It's scantly more a matter of welfare than the salaries collected by white-collar State employees, who, at best, shuffle papers for a living, and at worst, spend the day blogging, or gossiping around the coffee pot.. Unless, as with jail, folks get credit merely for 'time served.' As in, simply showing up..
Article VIII Sections I & II references ALL ALASKANS; it says nothing of Marx's "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs," with the exception of the personaluse preference as it applies to some resources. Aside from the co-ownership attribute, the socialistic nature of those sections end there.
Does this mean that Los Anchorage residents might get to buy more btu's under this plan than those in Kotzebue, or even Fbks, or possibly get some unintended discretionary cash?? Yep.
Are there ways to equalize this? Like perhaps with a btu alotment, rather than a dollar figure?? You betcha'!! Are we there yet?? Nope.
But to imply that Article VIII, Sections I & II apply only to the needy, is well beyond the factual nature of that portion of the constitution.
Skinfish is right. If Tony08 got his share of the PFD he'd be gone to the States the next day. This is a crisis and short term help is needed but the surplus must also address long term issues. Remember the resources are ours as a group.
Like it or not the government will not be able to help us to fuel our gas hogs and fuel our 2000 - 3000 square foot homes. And quit crying about property tax if you bought a $200,000+ house. Simple math average mil rate is 20, times number of thousands equals tax. Stop living beyond your means.
On the positive side there are many things that can be done to reduce energy use. The costs will still be higher than we are used to but most of us can make it. The rest will need more assistance or will leave.
Don't Panic.
Why not put an additional 50% of the surplus into the PDF and let it impact today and future checks. It seems a better investment then handing out a hundred dollars a month for a year. You might actually see some benefit in the short and long term. The PDF was the means by which Alaskans were to share the oil wealth.
CMON PEOPLE, ITS THIS SIMPLE:
The govenor declares a state-wide emergency. No one in government or on these energy forums disagrees with that.
The cost of crude oil used in the state is fixed at an equitable price allowing reasonable profit to producers and refiners, and dropping consumer prices to a tolerable level. That would be around $1.00/gallon.
For those that think this is somehow a crime or breaking a lease; think back to 1989 when the Exxon Valdez hit the reef and big oil had no mandated preparations for the event. That itself was and still is evidence enough to break any contracts; all we need now is to renegotiate those contracts. The ammount of oil used in Alaska is so minimal it hardly constitutes a loss to those now investing in (manipulating) the world market.
The original Palin plan works like this: Oil investors rape the entire US population for all they can get until government capitulates and they are allowed to get their hands on that money as well.
I'm pretty sure everyone now understands the need for energy conservation very well, however, I have a hard time believing anyone is seriously considering bicycles an alternative outside the city limits of Fairbanks.
By the way, this whole price crisis was brought on by the shady number crunching of greedy bankers. They gave out possibly illegal sub-prime loans for housing until that market crashed, causing investors to turn to a still profitable market; commodities such as oil and food.
You Mike are completely wrong!! I am saying the pfd is my money supposedly so give me the option of taking a buy out before the politicians get to it. I dont live beyond my means either like your statement claims i know your saying or i assume your saying people in general living beyond thier means how do you know they are living beyond thier means? When i stand at the local drug store to get meds and an senior citizen in front of me has to leave one of his meds behind because they didnt have the extra money because his food and gas bill were more than he thought that is unaceptlable. Maybe that extra hundred bucks would have helped. But hey maybe he was living beyond his means.
Dirk,
Stick to talking about things you have knowledge about. As an ex state of Alaska employee, I can state that you don't know what you're talking about. The grass is always greener isn't it? And it is so easy to insult dedicated public servants. I quit my job because the work kept piling up far beyond what my job description stated, the stress level was high, and the salary stayed flat and was well below what I should have been paid for the requirements necessary to do the job. Everyone around me busted their butts trying to keep up, and a whole lot of hours were donated to the state by dedicated people doing their jobs.
Everyday for the past 30years there's more propane that gets smuggled thru TAPS than the average Alaskan needs to provide heat&light for 2rooms in a cabin, basic hotwater needs, and fuel a propane powered sno-go or ATV for basic grocery getting...
...with good quality propane equipment these needs could be met using on average 7gallons daily of propane over 365days.
[maybe even 5gallons if you made a game out of it]
Just Tap TAPS for the smuggled RoyaltyGas, it's really simple.
Energy doesn't come out of a cash register..
..just en-graven images of dead presidents.
Alaskans should take a good hard look at where and how the BigOilygarchy uses every little BTU of our exported hydrocarbons in the lowest48.
While we're chipping ice off the toiletseat 100miles from the biggest oil&gas fields in NorthAmerica rich BigOilygarchs are driving their useless racing boats in mindless circles in the Gulf of Mexico...
...with the same reckless abandon as teenagers driving cars in circles at the mall.
If government expects us to globalize oil prices, then patterns of oil consumption should be enforced by law too.
Pistons and crankshafts should have been abandoned as outdated junk before 1990..
..talk about Stuck on Stupid.
With the end of the hydrocarbon dark-ages comes the beginning of a new[old] energy source that will chuck your weird theories of political-economics out the window.
http://pesn.com/2008/05/29/9500481_Black...
=========
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&n...
=========
It's not an energy problem..
..it's a mental health problem on a management level.
..........flash/buzz
“If electricity costs half as much as it does now, people would likely use more of it, he said Thursday. If the state pays for $100 worth of gas every month, the incentive to buy a fuel-efficient car or use a bicycle instead is reduced.”
I almost fell out of my chair laughing when I read this; classic NAEC. Can’t afford to put gas in your car? Buy a better car.
I am a life long tree hugging, leftist, greenie of the purist sort and after a more than a dozen years of living in the interior and watching NEAC operate I am amazed that anyone takes anything they have to say seriously or gives them money, much less quotes them in a “serious” news story. Arrogance only begins to describe this outfit. The NAEC is not a professional environmental lobby any more than I am an astronaut. They are a well funded, small town clique, and that’s all. This summer we will be packing up and moving south and cost of living is the number one reason why. And we have pretty nice university jobs. But isn’t that their point? Can’t afford to live like the rest of us? Then move. I love the Alaska interior. Maybe someday I will be able to afford to live in it.
AkHusky, Where did I say all state employees? I've been a State employee in the past, as well as a State contractor, and a federal contractor. I've also worked for white-collar private non-profits, and -do- have some knowledge about it.
It seems to me that you're a tad bit defensive, considering that I was referencing a group -within- the larger group of State employees.
The good ol' boy and girl network lives, whether folks are comfortable admitting it or not.
Some forms of 'work-fare' ain't a WHOLE lot different from welfare, except folks don't look under their beds for others' shoes, the bennies are a lot better, and the work-fare echelon has to commute, rather than take care of other priorities closer to home..
Next premature supposition please??
Mike, My 2500 sq. ft home, built with portions of four retirements, sale of private assets, and a substantial mortgage to boot, is a 5-star+, energy-efficient structure, heating more economically than the average local home less than half of its size.
I DID think ahead; re. bills, energy costs, etc. That doesn't mean that my costs haven't quadrupled or quintupled right along with everyone else's.
After double-walling two entry-ways this year (the only part of the house that ISN'T double-walled), I'll have my annual consumption of heating oil down to between 550 and 600 gallons per 12-month period, counting domestic hot water, with no additional heat sources. Short of going to solar or burning a multi-burner wood, coal, oil, and gas boiler system, or the old wood stove, it doesn't get much better than that.
I KNEW that energy costs mattered, and have rarely wasted the stuff, other than for a lot of travel.
I'm concerned about growing the PFD to the extent that the government here is made -more- limited than it is, and can subsist on the interest alone from the Permanent Fund, with little to no threat of further taxes, while the principal continues to grow. I estimate that the PF will need to be near to $150 to $200 Billion for that to be achieved. even with the coming emmigration from the State.
But we also need to access some of the current windfalls for immediate relief.
Furthermore, any legislator who looks to the current oil revenues in the State's coffers as some (politically motivated) opportunity for them build some local shrine of a public building in their own honor should be tossed out at the earliest convenience, and their project tossed right behind them..
If we'd had responsible, creative management of the the resources, especially the non-renewable resources, from the beginning (no thanks to the likes of Dankworth and Barnes and others who sold us out early on to the producers), we might be closer to the current circumstances found in Kuwait. Your and my kids wouldn't be sweating tuition, medical bills might be virtually non-existent, and electric bills would be something found on the face of a novelty bird that someone won as a prize at the State fair.
How does anyone think that far ahead? We here in the interior have seen heating oil literally go from $1- $1.10 a gallon to $4.50 a gallon in 5 years. Estimate that most folks use between 600-1500 gallons a year and the difference in cost is between $2040-$5100 additional money just to heat your home. Add that extra $600 to $1000 in GVEA's fuel surcharge and the numbers add up real quick. The crazy part is that its still climbing.....DAILY! I dont really even care about gas prices at the pump, they are a drop in the hat to what heating oil is costing us.I cringe everytime I pull up at the gas station and see the price of Diesel, not because I own a Diesel truck but I know heating oil prices arent far behind that Diesel pump price. So asking folks to plan ahead is a bit unrealistic.
As a frame of reference, AlaskaCub, I believe that 5 years ago, I was paying roughly .83 cents/gallon for #1 diesel, in excess of 300 gallons per purchase, delivered. The price has literally quintupled.
Well there you go, were worse off than I could remember!
As a reference of how fast it has in fact gone up, it did pretty much double in price since the beginning of this past winter alone. I paid $2.30 a gallon in Sept of 07 and its pushing $4.50 now.
I'm trying *real* hard not to have a panic attack about energy costs.
I'm not succeeding very well.
Maybe these phoney bogus fuel prices and bogus inflation is just another one of those "weapons of mass distraction" to keep the majority confused so we don't go march on the "Bastille" or WARshington District of Criminals.
The recent revelations of Scott McClellan and the rest of the boiling-pot of politics has former right-wingers donating to Obama.
The upoming winter looks like it's gonna be a tough one financially for everybody except the fatcats.
...hang in there
Well what happens when we stand up and stop the flow lower prices NOW or the pipeline will be shut down?
What makes you think all will leave either. I see people banding together fighting for and taking what they need. Or maybe we should have a name or number tattooed somewhere on us in order to get that 100.00? Just looking at the extremes here.
We need reps in goverment to find solutions not think of how best to spend our money for us.
Distant Thunder,
My guess is that the Neo-Cons are giving to Obama because they don't believe that he can win against McCain, and they want Obama to beat Hillary in the Dem primary for that reason. (Yes, I know that he currently has more delgates than Hillary, the last I checked, but the skirmish over Mich. and Fla. delegates still makes it an open game to some degree.) Cross-over voting, or cross-over funding has gone on for many years. Sometimes effectively.
Re. the 'weapon of mass distraction' comment, I can't help but think back to when Justice Scat-lia refused to recuse himself from the SCOTUS question re. Dick Cheney's not wanting to disclose the transcripts/notes from his meetings with all of those energy moguls & gurus, including that bad, bad man, "Kenny-boy" Lay, of ENRON fame, personal friend to the Shrubmeister that he was.. right up 'til that indictment stung him badly.
I'd REALLY like to see those notes right about now, as well as any private discussions that the various members of the PNAC might've had about the residual effects on oil profits that might result from an invasion of Iraq.
I'd REALLY like to see those items right about now...
Hey DT--
When are you and me and CRR goin' to have that beer?!!?
I wouldn't mind joining you guys for that beer, maybe we could start a new political party while we we're at it.
Be different, wouldn't it?
-Give the public a candidate who votes based on information and intellect for a change?
-Someone who is willing to propose ideas and solutions instead of rhetoric and complaints?
Count me in.
The administration deserves a pat on the back for offering a solution and the legislature needs to get bread and water only until they propose something viable. I got news for the legislators that think an extra $100 will not help their constituents who are trying to figure out how they are going to make it through the winter. Everything you can do right now to help offset the price of fuel will help save money for your neighbors.
The price of fuel is a crisis. Gasoline prices have doubled in the past twelve months and are still going up. Heating fuel is over $4 per gallon now. The fuel surcharge on our electric bills is one third of the total bill or one half of the bill without the surcharge. If you think that people in your district need to be cold and hungry to learn conservation, then resign now, because you are too stupid to be a state legislator.
Buying a more energy efficient anything violates economic principles but it does make the rich richer. Everyone who bought a diesel powered vehicle to save money at the pump is now trying to trade them in to save money at the pump thanks to the low sulfur mandates. What they don't realize is that they are losing what little equity they have in their vehicle and all for a low monthly payment financed for another five years. A new $6K furnace that is "more efficient" than a 90% rated one and only saves five gallons of fuel a month or a $30K car that cuts your gas bill in half but doubles your car payment and over extends your credit is not smart spending. And good luck at finding a oil fired unit in stock that gets better than a 90% efficiency rating.
You people in the legislature get a grip on reality, or you will be moved out by the people you are not helping. This crisis is real. It consumes every conversation in every neighborhood, store, and gathering of two or more people. Criminals are stealing fuel, not fuel efficient cars. Everyone I know is planning to install and use woodstoves for heat rather than fossil fuels. We may need oxygen pumped in this winter, but we will be warm.
As for me, I am planting trees to offset my carbon footprint and grow my own renewable heating fuel. I am still getting 15MPG out of my truck, and can't afford more useless insurance and taxes for a skateboard to drive on those occasions when I don't need a truck. I use a whole gallon of gas to go to and from work. Cut my rations and call me chilly, I still don't see any logic in buying a new car in the name of conservation.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.