Report: Fairbanks’ emissions higher than national average
Published Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!FAIRBANKS — Add up the heating fuel burned, electricity used, car trips taken and other sources of power, and Fairbanks released 64 percent more greenhouse gases per resident last year than the national average, according to new estimates from an energy center.
Cold temperatures and long, dark winters, which increase home-heating needs, drive lighting and electricity costs, have much to do with the high figures, according to energy specialists who compiled the estimates.
The report, an energy-and-emissions audit, ordered by the Fairbanks North Star Borough, will serve as a baseline document for Fairbanks, where business and government leaders have responded to skyrocketing energy costs the same way many homeowners have — by looking for ways to calculate, and if possible, curb, energy use.
Amy Shatzkin, a Seattle-based program manager for the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, added that the report is “a first step” toward addressing the level of emissions coming from Fairbanks.
“It basically tells you in a very broad sense, where you go when looking (at) saving money and saving energy and, thus, saving emissions,” she said.
Three-fifths of the greenhouse gas emissions from homes in Fairbanks last year came from the roughly 49 million gallons of heating fuel burned by renters and homeowners, according to the report. Businesses and industrial firms, on the other hand, emitted more from the use of electricity than from heating fuel.
The figures are included in the “Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory” released Tuesday by the Fairbanks-based Alaska Center for Energy and Power. The center worked with other agencies this summer to estimate and catalogue the level of emissions coming from different sources — homes, business, industry, agriculture, transportation and the military — and nail down how much electricity, diesel-based heating fuel, coal, wood or natural gas each sector depends upon through the year.
Those and other sectors of Fairbanks, the assessment’s report states, combined last year to emit the equivalent of 3.8 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in greenhouse gases from within the borough’s boundaries.
That pencils out to an average of around 39 tons for each of the estimated 97,484 people who lived here, a number that increases when including emissions coming from planes that take on fuel in Fairbanks.
A new focus on emissions
The energy center conducted the study using a $20,000 grant from the borough following the Borough Assembly’s approval earlier this year of an Emergency Energy Program. The program looked in part to advance a coal-and-biomass-to-energy plant, and borough officials have said Tuesday’s greenhouse gas report is needed to responsibly advance the proposed project.
Public officials had previously voted to join the environmental council, an international group that looks to help communities develop sustainably. That vote committed the administration to work with the council to address emissions of carbon dioxide — linked by scientists to increasing global temperatures — and other greenhouse compounds coming from fuel combustion, waste management and other sources.
Gwen Holdmann, the energy center’s organizational director, said her team wrestled with the question of whether to include in its calculations emissions from planes that fuel in Fairbanks. The team eventually relied partly on guidance from outside groups — the center relied on methods publicized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — and left airplane fuel use out of its primary estimates while still including it in backup figures in the larger report.
“A lot of that fuel is burned over the Pacific” and along flight lanes well outside the community, Holdmann said.
Shatzkin said a number of her organization’s member-communities have taken steps similar to Fairbanks’ energy-and-emissions audit since the early 1990s to inventory the emission sources. But she said the Fairbanks inventory project is somewhat broader than others’ and could wind up serving as a template for other local governments.
“They’re one of the first governments we’ve worked with that is looking to move ahead with both adaptation and mitigation” related to climate change, Shatzkin said. The proposed coal-and-biomass-fed energy project is being courted by the Air Force, and Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, recently placed $10 million in a draft defense-spending bill in a Senate subcommittee, saying it would help the military meet its goal of reducing dependence on foreign oil. Steve Wackowski, a spokesman for Stevens, said Tuesday that the money currently remains in the bill, one that, including the coal-to-liquids provision, is part of larger budget negotiation process ongoing in Congress.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Just how many ways can we find to flush money down the toilet? I think we need a study to see if the study is in need of a study. Remember the bumper sticker, Let'm Freeze in the dark,? good advice.
...and the borough is stopping emissions testing on vehicles because....
They are just now figuring this out? If you notice, it stated Fairbanks has joined an international group to reduce emissions. Does it mean that the few planes that do land in Fairbanks will be re routed to Anchorage and Fairbanks will stop having international flights. So much for airport development, Anchorage wins again. Can only imagine the restrictions this will place on any future development in this community. Fairbank's economy is already going down the drain, this just will help speed up the process. Won't count on anything from Uncle Ted if he is found guilty.
As I have said before, if the Feds are so worried about our emissions, the Feds should get us cheap natural gas and get all of the interior plumbed to homes and businesses so we can help clean the air.
You want know how to save 49 million gallons of fuel oil?
You want to reduce the to carbon dioxide emissions, 39 tons for each of the estimated 97,484 people who lived here?
Heat our homes with cheap, clean, efficient, electricity generated from hydro-electric dams.
We have already spent $150 million on the Susitna Dam. We already have much of the infrastructure built to get the power to our homes in Fairbanks. Many of us already own the appliances that run on electricity.
What are we waiting for ?
Build the Susitna Dam. It's the perfect solution.
maybe they should fix the power plant on Fort Wainwright that spews green exhaust. AND Maybe JUST MAYBE move the three sensors they got OUT FROM DOWN TOWN! just a thought tho!! They are going to keep "hmm-ing and hawww-in" about what SHOULD be done like you said, to have a study about a study that we need a study.. heres an idea... stoke our fires with the money you are so desperatly seeking to burn Uncle Sam!
How much would it cost for a study to tell us that it is likely to snow this winter? Duh, of course Alaskans are going to use WAY more energy than lower 48 averages. The next nearest city is 350 miles away, it is dark for 22 hours during the winter and the temperature is below zero for 6 months. The borough is going in the wrong direction if they want to reduce our overall energy use. If we promote global warming we will need less heating oil to stay warm :)
I always figured it was the plethora of diesel pick up trucks rattling their way across town with one passenger and no cargo, day after day. Let's try studying that.
How much will the borough tax each home owners on their wood stoves,fire places and pellet stoves. Get ready, that will be next. Instead of auto im's it will be a firebox im on every chimney in the borough.
All the more reason for natural gas. A little less concern for Usibelli and their campaign contributions and a little more concern for the citizens of the North Star Borough. It's cleaner, cheaper and less expensive to maintain.
what a ridicilous way to waste money. why do we neeed the study? so the feds can impose more rules on the way we live. do not go after the gang members shooting at each other on our city streets, do not patch or fix the rough roads in fairbanks but with the new hotels and box stores except for big rays i do not go down town anymore so maybe we should fund the study. but if the report comes out bad for people does that mean we will have to curtail the number of tourists the local merchants are hoping to do buisness with but be aware the large tour companies own their own hotels and take the tourists out of fairbanks to see things, our downtown now looks like the new airport a generic one size fits all. yep the study is really needed to finish off fairbanks.
it's the first step in the ultimate goal of making living in alaska illegal and turning the whole state into a national park.
It seems as if there is a lot of pencil whipping going on in the lower 48s reports. 64% seems awful high..I already keep my house at 65 degrees. When my kids get cold I tell them to put a sweater and socks on, or start a fire. What else do they expect us to do?
Polarmark,
I been saying this for years, they (Environmentalists) won't be happy until they have moved all of us out. After all gotta "Save Alaska from Alaskans"
Fairbanksgas, I'm with you. I'll stop warming my car in the parking lot while I shop when it stops getting so *$%@ cold. It's not my car that needs it, it's me. Better yet, we should be build more tall buildings and pave more stuff here because concrete makes a place seem warmer too.
Surprised they didn't blame all the moose, dogs, and wolves for passing methane gas. And let's not forget the borough assembly and city council when they hold their meetings.
Why don't we switch to whale, polar bear, seal oil, and methane emissions from politicians for heat?
The more green house gas emitted the faster trees grow and the warmer the weather!..
I am thankful for global warming.
On the serious side, let's start construction of wind farms, geothermal, hydro power projects; then the price of electricity will drop to where we can afford electric heat.
Money wasted on useless studies would buy a lot of construction materials!
Hey, I know! I'll switch to solar power.... oh wait... crud... 22 hours of dark in the winter.. hmm... back to the drawing board! better yet! bicycle-powered generators in every home. they say america is over weight, so this would knock out two birds with one stone, yea??
My four step energy plan:
1.Let all body hair grow out.
2.Remove all lightbulbs, and request my children lease them from me at the cost of two dollars a day.
3.Collect all cat and dog hair and dryer lint, and weave everybody nice quilts and sweaters.
4.Stop taking hot showers.
We can alway burn our dollars for fuel, because the way things are going that's all it is going to be good for. The newsminer needs to quit printing the paper, because that uses energy too and polutes with the lead in the ink. Besides you can get the newsminer for free on the net. If you want it for reading material in the bathroom there is always laptops.
We can also quit our jobs and stay home and start bartering again. With the countries economy why should I pay more taxes for studies like this that is nothing but a way for the money to be spent.
Until they tell me how we're going to get this alternative power to my home without costing me an arm and leg or first born they can forget it.
It also makes me have mixed feelings about the election. If McCain and Palin win, the country may have a chance. Otherwise, let's get Sarah back here, separate from the US, take our oil and tell the rest where the exit is.
The EPA can stick its unfunded mandate where the sun doesn't shine,and I am NOT talking about Fairbanks in the winter!
Bugger is right. Hell, I could have told you this for $10!
Stupid idiots in the borough and the grant hungry pukes always with their hand out for more. They and the EPA pukes who work here all need to leave town and go live in Chicago.
So what ... BFD. This is the way it is and the way it is going to be forever ... so what. There is nothing that we can reasonable do about it in this environment. Fairbanks puts less pollutants in the air in a year than LA does in an hour! So get off the high horse already.
No kidding James. This is crazy, what exactly are the standards for measuring the output of our greenhouse gas emissions. Particulate matter clause, the EPA, restrictions on heating our homes? What the heck is the borough thinking giving outside study groups money we need to up keep our community???? This is just ridiculous. Its cold here!!! What type of emissions do peoples air conditioners put out in places like Arizona and New Mexico? Geez. People can not honestly think this was a justified study. Silly.
Anyone remember EPA and Oxyfuel? Last time EPA got envolved with our emissions they almost killed us.
And let's not forget all the moose that emit CO2 and fart CH4, they should cut back too. Let's study that, shall we?
Whatever, I'm going to contribute as much CO2 as I can this winter. I embrace the warming trend because it is NOT CAUSED BY CO2!!! Greenhouse gases are NOT pollutants if WE emit them - DUH!
Shut up EPA.
"Otherwise, let's get Sarah back here, separate from the US, take our oil and tell the rest where the exit is."
Ah yes, because history teaches us that the federal government looks very kindly on attempts to secede from the Union, right? 600,000 vs. 300 million? I'm not sure I like those odds.
The Confederacy survived as long as it did because it had a large enough population to be reasonably militarily competitive with the North, and it had the industrial/agricultural base to be self-sufficient, for most things anyway.
Alaska has neither of those advantages, plus the distinct disadvantage of relying on 2,000-mile supply lines for its food and durable goods.
One week's worth of an air/naval blockade, and "self-sufficient" Alaskans will be begging for a UN humanitarian aid mission.
Makes a nice fantasy, or maybe a movie script, but little more.
Two points -
1) The State of Alaska has NOT decided to ban emissions testing on vehicles - the program is under review. And I find it interesting that some beancounter down in Washington is wanting to examine how life in Alaska is conducted concerning energy output.
2) If I was paid the money that was flushed down the proverbial commode in order to conduct this study, I would have invited all my friends and family over to my home for a huge bean and chili dinner so that I could have eliminated my need for fuel and done my part to promote global warming with the co2 gasses floating about.
NolaUrels Said: My four step energy plan:
1.Let all body hair grow out.
2. Remove all light bulbs, and request my children lease them from me at the cost of two dollars a day.
3. Collect all cat and dog hair and dryer lint, and weave everybody nice quilts and sweaters.
4. Stop taking hot showers.
MY Reply: We have a Family that lives near me that has done all you said. I’m not sure what there whole name is, they only put part of there Name on the mail-Box. It says Democrats.
If I read one more article about "Carbon Emissions causing so called Global Warming" I think I'll throw up. What an absolute waste of money. Fact: It is very cold in Fairbanks. Fact two: It takes a lot of fuel to keep warm in the Fairbanks cold. Get over it.
What I want to know is has ANYONE done a study to find the relative contributions of the Air Force and International Airport as compared to the regular citizens of Fairbanks?
It seems to me that between those two entities, they MUST be producing more pollution than we private citizens are...
Does anyone know how much fuel is burned during the take-off of a commercial jet? And, how many of those do we have a day at the airport? How about how many a day at the AFB?
Until we have concrete proof that it is home emissions and private auto usage causing the "problem", we are being told to operate on incomplete (and most likely false) information.
Dang, stole my idea.....
According to the Alaska Greenhouse Gas Inventory prepared by the Center of climate Strategies and released last year, there were following emissions in 2005 (expressed in million metric tons of CO2e):
Electricity Production: 3.2
Residential/Commercial: 3.9
Industrial (Non-Fossil Prod.): 21.6
Transportation: 19.4
Fossil-Fuel Industry: 3.0
Industrial Processes: 0.3
Waste Management: 1.0
Agriculture: 0.05
These data result in a total gross emission for Alaska of 52.45 MMtCO2e. The big numbers are related to industrial non-fossil production and transportation. Obviously, the Fairbanks-based Alaska Center for Energy and Power is far behind the Moon.
I wonder if Al Gore has any carbon credits for Fairbanks......Drill Baby Drill
Putting on my nerd hat here, I gotta say that these statistics are...well, I wouldn't say wrong, but they are misleading. So are lots of these "per capita" statistics we hear thrown around about Alaska. Like the one about how Alaskans consume more ice cream per capita than any other state. Alaska has something like 675,000 residents. That's really tiny compared to California, which has 36 million. Each summer, more than 1.5 million tourists visit Alaska. Let's pretend that each one buys an ice cream cone, and let's also pretend that not a single Alaskan buys any ice cream whatsoever. Break that down on a per capita basis, and you can say that 2 ice cream cones were purchased for every man, woman, and child in Alaska. California would have to sell 72 million ice cream cones to match that.
Anyhow.
Same goes for emissions in Fairbanks. The entire FNSB has something like 80,000 residents. And where are the emissions coming from? Sure, some are coming from woodstoves and Ford F-350s, but as newsreader pointed out, a bunch comes from FTWW and Eielson. A bunch comes from those Princess/Holland America buses that hardly any of us set foot on, but are there for the tourists (who don't get factored into that per capita equation at all). Even more comes from RVers.
You also have all these fixed costs factoring in to the equation. It costs the same to keep the lights and heat on in a hospital, or a fire station, or a Wal Mart, whether it serves 500 or 50,000. So, at least on a per capita basis, a Wal-Mart in Fairbanks is going to use a lot more energy than the if the exact same Wal-Mart was using exactly the same amount of energy in Portland.
Like the saying goes, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics...
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.