Tag Archive for: akleg

The Governor’s Election Ahead – Our Endorsement

/in ,

After an in-depth process, The Alaska Center Board of Directors has unanimously voted to endorse the Les Gara and Jessica Cook Gubernatorial ticket and encourages voters to rank the Bill Walker and Heidi Drygas ticket second.

The Gara/Cook campaign stands by The Alaska Center values 100%. Les Gara has a strong track record of being a clean air and water champion, healthy communities, and a strong democracy. This campaign has a vision for Alaska we want to be in and the leadership skills to get the job done. This endorsement decision was not a difficult one.

In a ranked-choice voting environment, voters must rank multiple candidates to give us the best chance to defeat Governor Dunleavy in this election.

More On Our Endorsement

While Governor Walker may not share every policy goal of ours, we know that he would do right by Alaskans in restoring civil leadership to the administration that recognizes the urgency of the climate crisis. We encourage voters to rank the Walker/Drygas ticket second.

The stakes in this election are incredibly high: we need to oust Governor Dunleavy. Dunleavy has orchestrated a budget crisis that threatens our communities. He has been a puppet for Pebble Mine and supported conspiracy theories that sow doubts in our election system. He has even attempted to gut our Automatic Voter Registration and waste millions of dollars of our dwindling state resources in supporting countless frivolous lawsuits, sweetheart contracts, and more. It is time for Dunleavy to go.

Alaskans deserve leadership that has a vision for a thriving, just, and sustainable future. These candidates can bring our state back on track and can pave a new path forward to a sustainable, renewable, and viable Alaska that works for All Alaskans.

I hope you join me in ranking Les Gara and Jessica Cook first, and Governor Walker and Heidi Drygas second!

Hot Takes In A Cold Place: The Legislative Session Rides Off

/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]Thank you, thank you, thank you to everyone who advocated on bills and budget items this past legislative session. Through your phenomenal effort, we stopped numerous bad bills, settled on a budget that promotes public education and put the brakes on Dunleavy’s move to take over development permitting in sensitive wetland habitats from the EPA.
To recap. Due to your advocacy via letter writing, emails, phone calls, social media pressure, and direct grassroots citizen lobbying, the following bills passed the Legislature and are headed to the Governor’s desk:

Tribal Recognition! HB 123 by Rep. Tiffany Zulkosky passed and will require the State of Alaska to recognize Alaska’s federally recognized tribes. The federal government has a special and unique relationship with tribes that the State formally acknowledges. HB 123 will codify in Alaska law that federally recognized tribes are sovereign governments. It does not change any legal relationship. State recognition of Tribes will honor the first peoples of this land and the historical, economic, and cultural value they bring to the State.
Update to Alaska Sexual Consent Law: HB 325 by Rep. Sara Rasmussen was amended to include HB 5 by Rep. Geran Tarr and changes Alaska’s 40-year-old sexual consent statutes to change how sexual assault can be prosecuted by modernizing the definition of consent.
CPACE expansion: HB 227 legislation by Rep. Calvin Schrage to expand the Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy statute to include upgrades that improve the climate resiliency of commercial properties.
Broadband Expansion: HB 363 by Rep. Bryce Edgmon establishes the Office of Broadband to prioritize the expansion of high-quality, affordable broadband access to unserved and underserved communities and positions Alaska to receive unprecedented amounts of federal funding for broadband expansion statewide.

On the other side of the coin, you helped stop a slew of bad bills:

SB 39 worked to undermine local control of elections, suppress voting in Alaska, and take away the legal mechanism that adds thousands of new voters annually through Alaska’s Permanent Fund dividend – the automatic voter registration statute.
HB 398 would have made it impossible for Alaskans to protect waters of high ecological value as Tier III waters under the Clean Water Act.
SB 97 sought to give the Department of Natural Resources the power to authorize commercial development on any state land regardless of its status in an area land use plan and to repeal the Recreational River statutes that protect six popular and anadromous Mat-Su rivers: The Little Susitna River, The Deshka River, The Talkeetna River, Lake Creek, Alexander Creek, and The Talachulitna River.
HB 82, a bill to authorize subsurface natural gas drilling and development in Kachemak Bay, which is currently off-limits to oil and gas development.
HB 98 was legislation to decrease citizen participation in the Forest Land Use Plan process for timber sales.

There is a lot to unpack as a legislative session ends. This Memorial Day Weekend, we urge you to take the time to reflect on the positive outcomes of this past session and take heart in the true power of citizen advocacy in our beloved Democracy.\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]

Entering the Rapids

/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 32nd Alaska State Legislature is careening toward its grand finale, which will likely be on or around May 18th, the constitutional 120-day limit to session. On or around May 18th, the House and Senate will reconcile their versions of the operating and capital budget, pass any remaining bills, and drop the gavel, ending the second regular session Sine-Die.
The high price of oil, healthy returns on Permanent Fund investments, and the federal infrastructure spending package have lawmakers swooning, many of them revved up to spend vast amounts on the Governor’s holy grail: The ultimate, humongous, gigantic, supersized, great, grand, king-daddy, monumental, amazing and astonishing full statutory Permanent Fund Dividend ($4,200 per Alaskan) in addition to a payment to offset high fuel prices ($1,300) for a total of $5,500. It is a lot of money, it is a great campaign gambit, it is universal basic income wrapped up in a different package, it follows the statute, and it will plunge the state into a deficit. Most notably, it will come at the direct expense of education and other state services. As the final days of the session churn forward, expect this direct cash payment to take up most of the air in the room.
That is not to say that other hugely important issues are chopped liver. Legislation continues to move through committees, and the pace will increase rapidly should the House and Senate fail to agree on the budget and appoint a conference committee to work through the differences. Once a conference committee is announced, the schedule goes from a 7-day notice requirement to a 24-hour notice requirement for committee hearings, so bills can move quickly.
HB 123 to establish a policy for State recognition of Alaska Tribes has finally moved from the Senate State Affairs Committee and was passed quickly by the full Senate. HB 120, legislation by the Governor to increase the sale of state land for commercial purposes (circumventing state land management plans), advanced from House Resources and awaits a hearing in House Finance. HB 98, another Governor’s bill to weaken public engagement in the timber harvest process, sits in the House Finance Committee, and its companion bill – SB 85 – is in Senate Finance. These bills could move quickly to passage if the votes are there. Alaska’s railbelt utilities whittled down legislation to create a Renewable Portfolio Standard to something they are calling a “Clean Energy Standard Bill.” It aims to get utilities off coal, natural gas, and diesel generation. HB 301, in its current form, allows Nuclear and fossil fuel waste heat recovery as means to achieve benchmark goals. This bill is in House Finance and likely will not pass this session, but you never know. The Senate wisely removed a budget increment authorizing the State of Alaska to take over development permitting in wetlands from the federal government.
In a stinging vote, the House voted 23-17 to strip language from SB 174 that would have protected natural hairstyles from employer discrimination. The intent of SB 174 is to prohibit a school governing body or an employer from prohibiting a student or an employee from wearing a hairstyle historically associated with race. Natural hairstyle is defined to include braids, locks, twists, and tight coils. The language prohibiting workplace discrimination was struck while the prohibition on school discrimination passed. This bill was sent to the Governor.
Many other bills remain in play. At this point, aligning votes for or against the budget is priority #1 of House and Senate Leadership and the Governor. If a bill suddenly lurches out of committee, you can bet that they struck a deal on a budget vote. The end of the session can be like the swiftening of a river as it enters a turbulent gorge. We all must remain vigilant. Obstacles approach fast.
We are ready, buoyant and alert,
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]More Bills This Session\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][/cs_content]

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]

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]