What we are fighting for

/in , , ,

[cs_content][cs_element_section _id=”1″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”2″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”3″ ][cs_element_text _id=”4″ ][cs_content_seo]The leaked U.S. Supreme Court opinion on Roe v. Wade rightly kicked off a firestorm of outrage across the United States and Alaska. In Alaska, where the courts have consistently upheld the state’s constitutional right to privacy as a bulwark against laws seeking to overturn reproductive rights, the constitution is in the crosshairs of national and state-level conservatives. The question of whether the state should open up its constitution to a convention and likely significant revisions has been rejected by the voters every ten years it has come up since statehood. For a good reason: too much polarization and too much money are at play for anything to emerge from a constitutional convention exercise except for a partisan, lobbyist-influenced document that is home to the priorities of national groups like the Koch Brothers. A convention-written document would deprive Alaskans of fundamental rights (like the right to privacy) and dismantle tools of societal cohesion such as public education.
In the Alaska State Legislature, bills seeking to reimpose campaign contribution limits face long odds after the Alaska Public Offices Commission voted to strike down rules implementing a $1500 limit per individual. Currently, the money-spend potential is unlimited, which could lead to a campaign season like nothing we have ever seen.  
Bills to both increase and decrease access to voting are crashing against one another as the session nears its terminus in Mid May. Whether S.B. 39 and H.B. 66 are reconciled into a grand bargain package of voting law changes has yet to be seen. We know that voter fraud’s “Big Lie” persists and is at the heart of election restriction proposals. The belief that more Alaskans should have access to the voting franchise is at the heart of arguments to make it easier to register, to vote by mail, and to have your vote count if a simple mistake is made on a by-mail ballot.
The Alaska Center has fought to empower Alaskans for over fifty years. We believe that all Alaskans deserve clean air and water, healthy salmon, personal respect, dignity, safety, and their voices heard in the political process. We have worked this past year to increase access to the tools of a thriving democracy by supporting legislation at the state and federal levels to expand voting access. These are the tools that will help prevent outside corporate interests from taking over the levers of our constitutional system of laws. These are the tools that will protect Alaska’s women’s privacy and medical freedom. These tools will prevent our politics and campaigns from being overrun by millionaires and billionaires.
Join us this Saturday from 5-7 p.m. at the Alaska Native Heritage Center for a COVID-Safe outdoor spring auction where we will celebrate the fight to grow Democracy. This year’s event, Democracy for All, will highlight our work to protect and enhance our Democracy. We believe a true democracy is one in which everyone feels safe, respected, and able to participate in the decisions impacting our communities. 
In solidarity,
Louie Flora
Government Affairs Director
The Alaska Center
Tickets are still available at the door and the silent auction is live now.
This is a COVID-conscious event so please be prepared to present proof of vaccination for yourself and your children.\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][cs_element_section _id=”5″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”6″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”7″ ][cs_element_button _id=”8″ ][cs_content_seo]More Bills This Session\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][/cs_content]

Earth Day and the Electric Cooperative

/in , , ,

Tomorrow is Earth Day, a day to reflect on and celebrate our home and our future. Now more than ever, we need to support policies designed to protect our planet and the systems that enable life, including the climate system.

The headlines are full of dire warnings about climate change, and it can feel like an insurmountable problem and that we are well behind the eight ball. Yet, as we face steep challenges, we must also realize that there is hope:

The children and teens of today are perhaps the most engaged and galvanized generation the world has ever seen on the need for climate justice.

The conservation movement is beginning to recognize the value of Indigenous knowledge and work to decolonize their practices while amplifying Indigenous leadership.

The Biden Administration is the most climate-oriented administration we have ever elected, and with enough pressure, we could see him make some dramatic and effective climate commitments.

More and more, the economic argument for renewable energy is now almost irrefutable.

The movement that started Earth Day resounds in all of those who are taking action to protect our climate and our planet: The Alaska Youth for Environmental Action leading climate strikes, the youth plaintiffs in the Sagoonik v. State of Alaska youth climate action lawsuit, advocates for climate policy action at the state and federal level, even those who serve on our electric utility boards and those who advocate with our utility boards to increase the share of renewable energy that utilities produce or purchase. There is hope, and there is action, and both are going to help us as we confront the challenges of climate change head-on.

That is why tomorrow, on Earth Day, The Alaska Center is hosting a Climate, Care, and Community event to highlight the importance of getting involved with your local electric utility entitled “You are your utility.”

Do you pay an electric bill to Matanuska Electric Association, Golden Valley Electric Association, Chugach Electric Association, or Homer Electric Association? If so, that makes you a member-owner of your electric utility! Want to know more about your rights as a member-owner and ways to get involved with local energy democracy? Join us TOMORROW, April 22, at noon to hear from member-owners across the railbelt who stepped up to create change in their utilities!

JOIN THE ZOOM SESSION

More people getting involved with their electric utility leads to a greater diversity of thought and increased transparency and accountability for our electricity providers. We will be relying on these cooperatives increasingly to unlock carbon emission reductions in the transportation and industrial sectors of our economy, so ultimately, our electric cooperatives will have a significant role in decreasing carbon emissions.

It may not be the sexiest way to celebrate Earth Day. Still, we believe that even actions like increased participation in utilities can lead to significant changes in our ongoing fight to protect our beautiful planet.

See you tomorrow,
The Alaska Center

An Agency Boondoggle

/in , , ,

Tucked into the operating budget passed by the State House is an appropriation that would authorize the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation to take over the federal wetlands permitting program under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

There would be a significant cost to the state of assuming the program, and this is not a one-year program; this is a forever program. The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has requested a nearly five-million-dollar appropriation to staff 28 employees. It is not clear how DEC came up with this estimate. As of many years ago, the Corps’ regulatory program in Alaska had 49 full-time positions and an annual budget of $7.9 million.

We know that the assumption of the permitting program will likely also require additional staff from other resources agencies, the Department of Law, and additional third-party contractors. In Florida (one of only three states nationwide that has assumed responsibility for wetland permitting functions), they underestimated the staff they would need to run the program and recently requested an additional 17 positions to administer its program. States administering the Section 404 permit program receive no federal funds specifically dedicated to supporting the operation of the permit program.

The legislature investigated taking over primacy in 2013 and subsequently abandoned the effort when the state ran into lean fiscal times. As DEC testified to the House Resources Committee in 2013, a primary purpose of the bill authorizing 404 assumptions was to determine the full costs of primacy. DEC testified this year that it has no additional information about the program’s costs. DEC also made clear in 2013 that “the unknowns about this effort are significant. Until the state performs the detailed evaluation of assumption of the program as provided for in SB 27, it is impossible to forecast the cost or size of a State program.” There is no indication that the state has actually done any further due diligence since 2013, making this current budget rather reckless.

We know this much: Tribes would lose the right to consultation that occurs with federal permits, and state policies regarding consultation do not ensure the same rights. Notably, DEC and other state agencies have declined requests for consultation with Alaska tribes. Tribes will have a harder time making their voices heard. Plus, the state’s assumption of the program would eliminate the protections of the National Historic Preservation Act. Mitigation measures to protect cultural and historic resources will be more challenging.

Should the State of Alaska assume the 404 permitting program, it is unclear how consultation with FWS and NMFS would work for threatened or endangered species. In Florida, which adopted the 404 permitting process most recently, no ESA consultations occur at the permit level. Permits may therefore bring more significant harm to endangered and threatened species. No environmental impact statement would be required for a state-issued 404 permit. The public would lose the opportunity to participate in the NEPA process.
Budget items can be sneaky and difficult to track. The Senate is still working on its version of the operating budget, and the House and Senate will ultimately reconcile their versions in a conference committee. Now is an excellent time to weigh in with your Senator. Let them know that this budget item will create unnecessary bureaucracy at the expense of our state government. Wetland permitting in Alaska is already being done by the federal government at no cost to the state government. Tell them to remove the $5 million budgeted to start a program that is not necessary.

The Alaska Center

A Problem of PFAS

/in , , ,

[cs_content][cs_element_section _id=”1″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”2″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”3″ ][cs_element_text _id=”4″ ][cs_content_seo]Like much of the nation, and the world, Alaska faces the problem of Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances, commonly known as PFAS.
PFAS are used to make products stain, grease, and water-resistant; including food packaging, carpet, upholstery, outdoor apparel, and cookware, for stick resistance. They are used in firefighting foam, industrial processes, and specialty products like ski wax. PFAS can easily transfer from their origin, resulting in contamination of our food, air, and water.
Water supplies adjacent to military bases and airports are often contaminated with PFAS from firefighting foams for Class B petroleum and chemical fires. In Alaska, the dispersive use of AFFF (aqueous film-forming foam) containing PFAS on military bases and airports has contaminated the drinking water of many Alaskans. At least 10 communities throughout Alaska have levels of PFAS in their drinking water that are deemed unsafe by the EPA. The use of PFAS also harms the health of firefighters, studies show that firefighters have a higher burden of cancers and other diseases associated with toxic exposures. There are safe alternatives that are effective, without the harmful impacts to the health of firefighters and communities.
State and Federal governments are increasingly asked to come up with a plan to deal with this hidden pollutant. Exposure to PFAS has been associated with adverse health outcomes: including cancers (such as kidney and testicular cancers), liver damage, increased risk of thyroid disease, harm to the immune system, decreased antibody response to vaccines, increased risk of asthma, decreased fertility, decreased birth weight, pregnancy-induced hypertension/pre-eclampsia, and increased cholesterol. Congress recently allocated $10 billion to start working on the problem nationwide and you can be sure this is just the tip of the iceberg as far as tax dollars are concerned. (In a just and reasonable world, those manufacturing companies that made money selling products containing PFAS would pay to clean it up.)
Bills dealing with PFAS in Alaska are working their way through the Legislature this year. Senator Jesse Kiehl’s SB 121 will be heard in the Senate Finance committee on Tuesday, April 12 at 9:00 a.m. According to the sponsor statement, Senate Bill 121 sets health-protective limits on the amount of PFAS in drinking water. The bill guarantees Alaskans in areas with known PFAS contamination will get clean drinking water and their blood levels checked. To prevent future pollution, SB 121 bans PFAS foams when the Federal Aviation Administration stops forcing airports to use them (unless some other federal law preempts).
PFAS, now incredibly prevalent, are called “forever chemicals” because they persist for thousands of years, and do not break down in the human body. Dealing with them will be a long process, but not a forever process. It will require curtailing and eliminating PFAS production and the sale of products in which they are used. It will require science and government working in tandem, community action, and educated consumers. We can do it. SB 121 is a great start.
 Plan to testify in support of SB 121 on Tuesday.
The Alaska Center\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][cs_element_section _id=”5″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”6″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”7″ ][cs_element_button _id=”8″ ][cs_content_seo]Bills to Watch This Week\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][cs_element_layout_column _id=”9″ ][cs_element_button _id=”10″ ][cs_content_seo]More Bills This Session\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][/cs_content]

Fair Maps and Power Grabs

/in , , ,

New legislative district boundaries are drawn every ten years based on the most recent census data. In 2021 the Alaska Redistricting Board adopted a final redistricting plan for Alaska, which delineates the districts legislators will represent. The politics of redistricting are rife with power grabs, and the maps are almost always litigated.

The balance of power in the Legislature is closely divided between Republicans and the Tri-Partisan coalition of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. The Redistricting Board is composed of a majority of Republicans, and the outcome was a map that was challenged in court on numerous fronts. The central point was that the state Senate district pairing part of east Anchorage and Eagle River constituted an “unconstitutional political gerrymander.” The court agreed and gave the Redistricting Board until April 15 to revise its maps.

Each Senate District contains two House districts. In the case of the Eagle River/East Anchorage gerrymander, the Redistricting Board adopted a Senate District that, instead of combining the two staunchly conservative Eagle River House districts, merged one of the conservative Eagle River districts with a more moderate Muldoon district. Notably, that district in question has a much greater BIPOC population than Eagle River. Should the courts have left the Senate district in place, the effect would have been a district that watered down the voting impact of Muldoon residents. There was intense disagreement from Melanie Bahnke and Nicole Borromeo, the only two redistricting board members not appointed by staunch Republicans–and the only two Alaska Native women on the Board. Ms. Bahnke and Borromeo stood up to the rest of the Board when this plan was adopted on a majority line vote, and their fight for fair representation ultimately prevailed.

The Alaska Redistricting Board has been required by the courts to revise their maps so that Alaskan voices are more equitably represented. The Redistricting Board will take public testimony tomorrow (Saturday, April 2) at 2:00 p.m. To participate in:
Anchorage, call 907-563-9085
Juneau: 907-586-9085
Other: 844-586-9085.

This Saturday is a critical opportunity to submit comments to the Redistricting Board. If you cannot be at Saturday’s meeting, you can also submit written comments in advance at https://www.akredistrict.org/map-comment/

The main talking points are:

The Board should act immediately to comply with the court’s requirements and minimize confusion if this process is dragged out. It is in the public interest to swiftly adopt a map with final senate pairings so that voters can familiarize themselves with their new districts, precincts, and voting locations, on top of a new election system (RCV) and an unprecedented special election. The redistricting Board has an obligation to the public to resolve this quickly to avoid voter confusion and disenfranchisement.

In Anchorage, the Board should adopt the Senate pairings proposed by Redistricting Board member Melanie Bahnke instead of coming up with new pairings. These pairings, proposed by Melanie Bahnke, have been presented and considered on the record and were informed by public input and testimony. These pairings do not change districts’ underlying deviation and uphold the one person, one vote principle. In addition, they are the common-sense geographic and socioeconomic pairings (keeping Muldoon w/ Muldoon, West Anc. w/ West Anc, Eagle River w/ Eagle River, etc.).

Plan to participate and help secure Alaska’s more just and equitable redistricting map.

Thank you!
The Alaska Center

A DEC Budget Trap

/in , , , , ,

[cs_content][cs_element_section _id=”1″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”2″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”3″ ][cs_element_text _id=”4″ ][cs_content_seo]So far, only three states in the United States have assumed primacy for dredge and fill permitting in wetlands. One of those states – Florida – assumed permit primacy in the waning days of the Trump administration. Like Governor Sean Parnell before him, Governor Dunleavy wants Alaska to pay for wetland permitting that is now being paid for by the federal government. The rationale for this proposed forever budget increase paid for by our schools and universities and roads in lean years is that there is an expectation that there will be a return on investment. Through far more relaxed permitting requirements, zero Tribal consultation, and minimal enforcement, Alaska will see a massive influx of Mines.
Governor Dunleavy convinced the state House Finance Committee to add $5 million to the operating budget so that the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation could hire 32 full-time staff. This means 32 new full-time salaries, benefits, travel budgets, etc., to create a state wetland dredge and fill program that is equivalent to the program already paid for by the federal EPA. Perhaps the Dunleavy administration is going to pay these new workers peanuts. $5 million is a far cry from the cost estimate in 2013 when Governor Parnell foisted primacy on the Legislature. At that time – EPA had 49 positions administering its permitting program at a cost of $7.9 million in 2013 dollars. You don’t have to read a crystal ball to see how this will play out for Alaska should the Senate adopt the House numbers and we start a wetland permitting program. You can bet that if the Legislature agrees to this initial $5 million allocation, we should more realistically expect to pay at least a 10 million dollar figure, subject to inflation, moving forward in countless budget years.
It will require more money than was described initially by a less than trustable Dunleavy Administration and the former Pebble spokesperson running DEC now – you can bank on that as a fact. It will lead to costly litigation for the state – bank on that. It will be a messy and costly tug of war between the state and federal government–look at what happened in Florida.
In Florida, with a Governor who is predictably combative with the federal government, there is significant disagreement on the scope of what are to be considered wetlands. Florida continues to apply the Trump EPA version, a predictably and significantly restrictive definition. This definition (Waters Of The United States – WOTUS) was invalidated by a district court opinion, and the Biden EPA is applying a pre-2015 version of WOTUS to which Florida disagrees. Alaska has 65% of the nation’s wetlands and a Governor who loves nothing more than to spend state money fighting the Feds, so the Legislature should anticipate this allocation to DEC will also kick off endless increases in “Statehood Defense” spending. 
The return on investment for paying to take over wetland permitting is likely to be this: 1. Good grandstanding politics for Governors. 2. Mine development plans that factor in lax state permitting and no Tribal consultation, so Mines are freer to destroy salmon habitat, and 3. Jobs–mainly for State attorneys paid out of the General Fund to fight with the EPA. That sounds like a great deal!
The State Senate should say No to this allocation of our money.
Sincerely,
The Alaska Center\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][cs_element_section _id=”5″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”6″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”7″ ][cs_element_button _id=”8″ ][cs_content_seo]Bills to Watch This Week\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][cs_element_layout_column _id=”9″ ][cs_element_button _id=”10″ ][cs_content_seo]More Bills This Session\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][/cs_content]

It’s baaaaack!

/in , , ,

Last week, we wrote about the approximately $5 Million that the Governor is requesting for the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to hire 32 full-time staff to take over and administer wetland dredge and fill permitting currently done by the federal government EPA. Ironically, at the same time that DEC is asking for more responsibility over permitting (to benefit large scale mining development); they are also trying to dodge their responsibility to administer protections for high ecological value waters under the federal Outstanding National Resource Waters. Instead, they have introduced HB 398, which would require that the Legislature take responsibility.

HB 398 is the 2022 version of a bill that has been around for many many years, and different legislative sessions – yet has never enjoyed enough support to pass. In essence, it would require that high-value water protection be determined by the state legislature instead of through DEC regulation. HB 398 seeks to make it impossible for Alaskans to protect waters of high ecological value as Tier III waters under the Clean Water Act. Right now, federal law requires states to craft a process for citizens to nominate pristine high-value (fish spawning, culturally critical, etc.) top Tier or Tier III waters for protection from pollution. DEC is legally authorized to protect waters under a Tier III status, but they don’t want to do it.

Instead of DEC simply taking legal responsibility to protect high-value waters nominated by Alaskans, they propose HB 398, which creates more bureaucracy, expense, and red tape that strips Alaskans of our right to protect our waters. This bill is bad.

It would remove Alaskan’s right to have a voice in protecting water in Alaska by putting the power in the hands of politicians instead of the experts with Indigenous, local, and scientific knowledge.

It would allow committee chairs in the House and Senate to prevent Tier III nominations from moving through the Legislature, creating a de facto ban on water protections.

It would take power away from Alaskans and give an upper hand to outside mining companies and big businesses with no interest in protecting our fisheries and the clean water.

It would create additional bureaucracy, expense, and political paralysis that leaves our most essential and vulnerable waterways unprotected.

It would put our $2 billion salmon industry at risk.

It would silence constituents from being a part of the decision-making process around the use of waters integral to our cultures, livelihoods, and survival.

Legislative attorneys have time and again concluded that DEC can already establish and administer a process for Alaskans to seek the protection of high-value water through agency regulation. DEC has time and time again sought to shirk its responsibility, hiding behind bogus legal interpretations and philosophical objections.

Why should the Legislature approve increasing the budget to give DEC the complex responsibility of permitting mining projects in wetlands that support our salmon when, simultaneously, DEC is telling everyone with HB 398 that it does not want to be the agency to protect salmon?

Keep an eye on this bad bill.

Wetland Permitting

/in , ,

The Dunleavy Administration is making a push in their budget proposal this year to take over wetland development permitting from the federal government. The proposed allocation of 4.9 million dollars in the Governor’s budget before the legislature would initiate a process where the state Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) would assume “primacy” from the federal Environmental Protection Agency over permitting development activities that impact wetlands protected under section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

Well-functioning and intact wetlands are critical to the protection of salmon, especially in their early stages of life. Wetlands and peatlands also serve a climate-protecting function, a major force in earthly carbon sequestration. The Biden Administration will likely be expanding the protection of wetlands which was decreased under the Trump Administration.

There are downsides with the state primacy of wetland permitting. The cost and complexity of a wetland permitting program is the main factor why only three states out of fifty have assumed primacy. This year, Alaska’s fiscal situation, buoyed up by high oil prices and federal dollars, is not in the long-term position to attract and retain the 28 new full-time employees requested to administer the wetland permitting function or even ensure these positions have funding into the future. Indeed, DEC has seen some of the most aggressive budget cuts of all state agencies over the past decade. (None of this is to point out the blatant irony of our red-pen Governor proposing a budget growth to make the state pay for something that the Federal Government provides freely.)

The cozy relationship between industry and regulatory agencies in Alaska is another cause for concern. The current Commissioner of DEC used to lobby on behalf of the Pebble Mine project when he was a government relations staff for the Anglo-American mining company. Wetland permits are critical to large mining and other industrial operations, so putting this authority in a shop run by a mine promoter is, well, probably a pretty bad idea.

Under federal primacy, the EPA must conduct government-to-government consultation with Alaska Native Tribes regarding wetland permit decisions to seek input and mitigate impacts to the land and water on which Tribal members rely. Should the State of Alaska take over the wetland permitting program, Tribal consultation is not a legal requirement. For this reason alone, the legislature should scrap the state primacy proposal.

Our salmon runs are in a perilous state across much of Alaska. One outlier is Bristol Bay, where the rivers flow from millions of acres of intact wetlands, the beating heart of the largest and last greatest sockeye run on earth. The Dunleavy Administration, DEC, and mine promoters want state primacy over wetland permitting to streamline the industrialization of areas like the Bristol Bay watershed. Unable to prevail in the court of public opinion or with the Federal EPA, the Dunleavy Administration is now attempting an end-run around both to permit the Pebble Mine with a budget allocation that would put an enforcement agency in place more closely tied to big industrial concerns.

On Monday, March 14th, at 9 a.m., the Senate Finance Committee will hear from DEC on its wetland permitting primacy proposal. Tune in.

Renewable Portfolio Standards drive innovation and economic development

/in , , , ,

The role of government in pushing different sectors of the economy to innovate through policy, tax incentives, and funding is well established. While some may oppose a mandatory Renewable Portfolio Standard or RPS policy to push electric utilities to generate or purchase more renewable energy, there is at least a broad historical precedent for the success of the policy.

The benefits of an RPS include economic development and construction and maintenance jobs to create the new generation facilities. For customers, increased renewable energy will put (in the parlance of utility managers) “downward pressure” on the rates we pay per kilowatt-hour. The transmission constraints and bottlenecks will have to be addressed for Alaska’s railbelt to achieve the proposed 80% renewable energy by 2040, and that is a good thing. Transmission upgrades build a bigger freeway for electrons to travel on and build important resiliency in our Alaskan system that’s subject to the weather rigors we know and love, not to mention natural disasters.

Jobs, innovative technologies, likely lower electric rates, and increased transmission system efficiency are not bad things. Considering that transportation and industry are both likely to move toward electric power soon and increase the load on the system as a whole both day and night, and considering the rapid advancement of battery storage to levelize the peaks and valleys of some renewables (as well as old and proven storage technology option of pumped hydro) the concerns of utility managers about renewable energy load variability are surmountable.

Judging by the discussion in the first Senate hearing on the Governors RPS legislation, there seems to be an interest expressed by some committee members in adding micro-nuclear reactors as an option for utilities to meet their RPS goals. This is a non-starter and likely would be opposed even by the Governor. Adding an unproven technology like micro-nuclear reactors into a policy that puts utilities on a time-sensitive course for achieving renewable energy goals could be a hindrance, not to mention the other negatives associated with nuclear (security threat, waste storage, etc.) There is a stand-alone bill pertaining to small nuclear generators, and in a stand-alone bill, it should remain.

Next week, the House Energy Committee will hold two hearings on the RPS bill (HB 301). The first hearing is on Tuesday, March 8 at 10:15 a.m., and the second on Thursday at 10:15 a.m. These will be excellent opportunities for the public to learn more about the RPS. In addition, The Alaska Center will be hosting a webinar on March 10 at noon with House Energy Committee Chair, Representative Calvin Schrage as well as members of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory to discuss what an RPS is, the outlook for the policy this session, and how you can be involved.

If you’re interested in attending here is the registration information!

It is an exciting week ahead for the future of Alaska. Plan to tune in!

Climate Rights

/in , , , , , ,

[cs_content][cs_element_section _id=”1″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”2″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”3″ ][cs_element_text _id=”4″ ][cs_content_seo]Do current and future generations have a constitutional right to a safe climate? Sixteen youth plaintiffs filed a constitutional climate lawsuit against their state government in 2017 to argue that we do have such a right. 
In Sagoonick v. State of Alaska, the young plaintiffs assert that Alaska’s fossil fuel energy policy and the State-authorized fossil fuel development and ensuing greenhouse gas emissions that result have caused and contributed to Alaska’s climate crisis. The policies have placed the youth plaintiffs in danger and are harming their health, safety, homes, culture, and Native villages in violation of Alaska’s Constitution.
On January 28, 2022, in a split 3-2 decision, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled against the young plaintiffs. On February 7, the youth plaintiffs filed a petition for rehearing of their case, asking the Court to reconsider its decision and allow their case to go forward. The youth were disappointed about the February 25 denial of their petition, but the fight is far from over. 
State lawmakers have taken note of how close the decision in Sagoonick was. Representative Ben Carpenter, a Republican from the fossil-fuel embracing town of Nikiski, took to the House Floor to make a note of this. Representative Carpenter stated, “this isn’t going away” and that “the implication here…is that State…oil exploration policy…our energy policies…need to be adjusted for an individual’s right to have a safe climate.”  
While some lawmakers may take the close decision as a warning that the state’s petroleum industry is under attack by the youth, Carpenter’s words offered another assessment – sobering to some – that the courts are coming around to the idea of a right to a safe climate.   
Suppose an industry or a policy effectively uses our atmosphere as a dumping place for a chemical byproduct that is enough quantity can put into question the ability of mammals to survive on the planet. In that case, you bet today’s young people should try their level best to stop any additional inputs of that chemical byproduct. The courts are taking note of the danger ahead if we cannot radically decrease the emissions of CO2 and methane into the air. Too much is at stake for this issue to just go away. Expect future lawsuits, legislation, and petitions for rulemaking from the young people of our state and nation.  
Government regulations on industry are in place to protect our health and, ultimately, our individual freedom. The brave youth plaintiffs in Sagoonick v. State of Alaska are fighting for our individual health, individual freedom, and collective health and freedom. These youth are true patriots, and their actions resonate with other youth. Change is coming.
Yours,
The Alaska Center\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][cs_element_section _id=”5″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”6″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”7″ ][cs_element_button _id=”8″ ][cs_content_seo]Voice Your Support on March 1st\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][cs_element_section _id=”9″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”10″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”11″ ][cs_element_button _id=”12″ ][cs_content_seo]Bills To Watch This Week\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][cs_element_layout_column _id=”13″ ][cs_element_button _id=”14″ ][cs_content_seo]Learn More About Bills This Session\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][/cs_content]