Tag Archive for: alaska

Remembering Forward: The Just Transition Summit Recap

/in , ,

This past weekend the Alaska Just Transition Community held the second statewide summit – Nughelnik: Remembering Forward – coming together on Dena’ina Land to reflect on the past two years, heal, look ahead, and center the knowledge and lessons held here for generations. The three days were an invigorating experience, showcasing inspiring work already being led in local Alaskan communities. It was a nonstop sharing of ideas, connection, optimism, and plans for how to build the world we want to see. The summit was juxtaposed with national tragedies, instances of violence that only highlighted the need for the event’s message and movement of a Just Transition to be held at a national and global level.

The Alaska Center team was grateful to join partners Native Movement, Fairbanks Climate Action Coalition, Native Peoples Action, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, Alaska Public Interest Research Group, Alaska Poor People’s Campaign in supporting and co-hosting this year’s summit, joined by so many other incredible individuals and groups.

This summit illustrated the importance of direct action, community care, and the intersectional approach we must use to solve our communities’ collective problems.

Vivian Mork shared a powerful message on healing, a message that resonates through this week-that “destination healing” is a myth. It’s a process, an approach, a practice, and yet not something to be done alone: “Indigenous healing is not just being responsible for my own healing, but going back and healing with the community.”

We drew lessons from the stories and perspectives of speakers within the labor movement. Particularly those who spoke about their personal history of organizing and the labor movement’s long history here in creating and grounding the fight for workers’ rights.

Two panels facilitated by Interior Organizer Alyssa Quintyne on the Relationship of Reciprocity, and Black Leadership in Alaska, centered the perspectives of first-generation Americans and immigrant families; and what a Just Transition looks like within the Black community in Alaska.

Alaska Youth for Environmental Action (AYEA) staff Shanelle Afcan and Marlowe Scully, guided a youth contingent through their Summit experience. AYEA alum Lauryn spoke on a panel reflection for day 2, garnering an incredibly enthusiastic response on her call for Alaskan youth–the leaders of tomorrow–to get involved today.

We must also remember that our approach matters as we work towards a more thriving, just, and sustainable Alaska for future generations.

“If all we do is fight against what we don’t want, we will learn to love the fight… We must actually organize ourselves in a different way; not to simply make demands of existing structures of power, not to simply decry what we don’t like, but to actually, together, in community, organize ourselves to directly meet our needs.”
Gopal Dayaneni, Alaska Just Transition Keynote, May 21

We’ll leave you with this intriguing question from Dayaneni’s keynote, “What if we’re winning, and we don’t know it?” As we shift back into our day-to-day routines, let’s carry that optimism with us and let it fortify our collective efforts to shape the Alaska and the world we envision.

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]

Just Transition is growing the future of sustainable practices

/in

Folks may have heard about Just Transition in the news, but what is it exactly? In short, Just Transition is a movement to shift from our current extractive and violent systems and economies, to more regenerative and restorative ones, across the board. Shifting away from sole dependence and subsidies on oil, gas and coal, to investing in community and commercial solar, wind, hydrothermal. From corporation crop and land ownership, to localized agricultural ownership and food allocation. Walkable cities, consistent and stable funding to education, affordable health care, and other public services. The good news, these transitions to other industries, work forces, energy and food sources are already here.

Farmer’s markets and locally-owned grocery stores like Southside Market, Calypso Farm and Roaming Root are thriving and providing a respite from food deserts in our communities. Community energy initiatives like Alaska Native Renewable Industries’ solar workforce training with Tanana Chiefs push this work forward. And our communities are redefining what works best for their members in crisis with programs like the Crisis Response Center. These are real, tangible and localized solutions led by our neighbors, building toward a healthier, restorative and sustainable Fairbanks.

However, we must guarantee that justice, equity and intersectionality are at the core of this transition. For any Just Transition to happen, it must center and amplify the very people our current system marginalizes: Black, Brown and Indigenous communities, queer people, disabled people, poor people, first-generation Americans and immigrant families. Otherwise, we foster the same obstacles we already face, and our solutions fall short.

We already see the consequences of not working with and for the communities when building toward this Just Transition. The Borough Assembly pushed the transition to Natural Gas, and we quickly saw that transition move. However, homeowners were not adequately consulted beforehand to see if that transition was even affordable and if the implementation would work with contractor season in the first place. Homeowners have to figure out if they need to switch out and potentially pay for new boilers or wood stoves, wait and pay an inspector to see if a line can even be installed, then wait to be connected. That takes time, research and money that homeowners already don’t have. GVEA was jazzed about the new electric car charging station installed right in Fairbanks. But when their member-owners are already struggling to pay their electric bill because of the price of energy sources, who’s got money for an electric car, let alone to charge it? For communities marginalized and experiencing discrimination through homeownership and a lack both of quality housing and affordable means for utilities and transportation, those solutions become salt in the wound from a system that isn’t working.

Both of those solutions have the necessary intentions. We need clean, affordable energy to heat our homes. Natural gas lines aren’t the direct solution. We need more reliable and cleaner transportation. Electric cars aren’t either. Neither solves the actual root of the problem — dependence on oil, gas and coal, poor city planning and zoning, and prioritizing car ownership instead of quality public transit. When you expect engagement rather than directly consulting with the communities facing the brunt of those issues, your solutions will always fall short.

Communities marginalized have already been transitioning for decades; we’ve had to since these systems were not made for us in the first place. When you live in the throes of oppressive systems, you find creative ways to navigate. Our communities take care of each other. We feed each other, invest financially and spiritually, and work and create with each other. We are creating firms and businesses and collectives and projects an initiative together that addresses the issues and crises we are experiencing. Villages are in an energy crisis; Edwin Bifelt said, “alright, bet.” Communities needed better access to locally-grown foods, Calypso said, “alright, bet.” Black residents were tired of not having a place to buy quality products for our health. Epic Hair & Beauty said “Babe, I gotchu.” It takes that kind of energy to make these transitions just, which is exactly why we need to lead them. People suffering will have the very solutions to address it directly. We need the room, decision-making authority, the investment, and the collaboration to make this. Nothing for us can truly be done without us.
Alyssa Quintyne is a Fairbanks resident and a community organizer with The Alaska Center.

By Alyssa Quintyne
Originally posted by Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
May 7, 2022

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

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.

OPINION: When will Alaska’s youth finally be heard on the climate crisis?

/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]Young people across Alaska are bewildered. We are scared, exhausted and furious. We have watched with frustration and deep anxiety as our state government continues to put fossil fuels above our futures, actively making the climate crisis worse and inducing devastating harms like melting permafrost, worsening wildfires, coastal erosion, and loss of sea and river ice.
For more than two decades, we, alongside many other young people in Alaska, have been fighting for the health, safety and sustainable ways of life of our villages and cities in the halls of our government. Through the Alaska Youth for Environmental Action (AYEA) program, young Alaskans like us have been working tirelessly for climate justice.
Since AYEA’s founding in 1998, thousands of Alaska youths have engaged in efforts urging Alaska’s political branches to stop actively contributing to the growing climate crisis through policies, protections of our sacred lands and waters, and more. In 2005, youths collected 5,000 signatures in support of climate action from teenagers in 150 Alaska villages and cities. In 2017, teens petitioned the state to reduce Alaska’s fossil fuel emissions. In 2019 and 2020, young Alaskans held climate strikes across the state, joining more than four million other young people around the globe and demanding a transition to 100% renewable clean energy. In 2021, we met with Alaska’s leadership, asking for legislation to transition off of fossil fuels. Again and again, Alaska youth have urged our government to change course and treat the climate crisis like the emergency that it is. Despite these efforts over the years, the government of Alaska continues to put fossil fuels above our right to a liveable climate.
We are in a critical moment to protect our rights as young people to a safe climate in Alaska, and we cannot afford to wait any longer.
On Feb. 25, the Alaska Supreme Court denied a petition for a rehearing of the youth-led constitutional climate case, Sagoonick v. State of Alaska. Brought by 16 young Alaskans, the youth plaintiffs’ case challenged the state’s policies that promote fossil fuels for causing Alaska’s climate crisis and endangering our health, safety, communities, cultures and overall futures as Alaskans.
On Jan. 28, in a split decision, the Alaska Supreme Court shut the courthouse doors on these young Alaskans with three of the five justices ruling that the courts could not even hear evidence of how they have been harmed by the actions of their own government.
The majority also said that Alaska’s government had already considered the youths’ concerns when they met with AYEA in 2017 and encouraged us to continue advocating our cause to the executive and legislative branches. But today, the question still remains of what that meeting achieved and what actions were taken to demonstrate that the state of Alaska cares about what its young people have to say. Did our government reverse course and stop contributing to the climate crisis that threatens our very futures? Did they end their policies that actively cause us harm? No, instead it was all decidedly shallow lip service. It is clearer now more than ever that the legislative and executive branches will continue putting fossil fuels over our lives if the third branch of government — our courts — won’t even allow youths through the courthouse doors. It is the duty of our courts to protect our rights, but first they have to hear our claims.
But there is still hope. Two of the justices in the case dissented, and had even just one other justice joined them, the court would have established a constitutional right to a livable climate.
The dissent shows that the tide of climate justice in Alaska’s courts is turning, but first we need Alaska’s courts to open their doors to us now. With the Legislature and the executive branch continuing to make the climate crisis worse every day, we have no choice but to keep fighting in the courts to secure constitutional protection. Only the judicial branch can protect our rights. Our legal fight for climate justice is not over, but the question remains: when will Alaska’s courts allow our voices to be heard?
Shanelle Afcan is an AYEA graduate from Nunam Iqua
Cassidy Austin-Merlino is an AYEA graduate from McCarthy
AYEA is a program of The Alaska Center Education Fund.
Originally published 3/8/2022 in the Anchorage Daily News\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][/cs_content]

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!