Connect with us

Alaska

Alaska lawmaker’s bid to revive stalled green energy policy defines coal as ‘clean’

Published

on

Alaska lawmaker’s bid to revive stalled green energy policy defines coal as ‘clean’


Burning coal to make electricity generates significantly more carbon pollution than using natural gas for the same purpose.

But a new bill drafted by Sutton Republican Rep. George Rauscher still seeks to define coal-generated electricity as “clean energy” — putting it on the same footing as wind, solar, tidal and hydroelectric power.

The proposed legislation, House Bill 368, is Rauscher’s bid to advance an energy policy debate that has otherwise stalled at the Alaska Capitol.

Advertisement

“There’s a reality to keeping the lights on and keeping everybody warm today,” Rauscher said. “As opposed to the vision of what we’re going to have in the future.”

Conservation and other advocacy groups have been pressing lawmakers to require Alaska’s urban utilities — which serve residents and businesses between Fairbanks, Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula — to generate more of their electricity from sources like wind and solar. Such a policy is known as a renewable portfolio standard, or RPS.

The utilities currently generate some 80% of their power from fossil fuels — namely natural gas, and some coal. But amid tightening gas supplies, advocates are pushing lawmakers to pass an RPS that requires the utilities to generate 80% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2040.

[Developers say proposed wind farm project could help power Anchorage, reducing strain on gas]

Two legislators — Anchorage Democratic Sen. Löki Tobin and Wasilla Republican Rep. Jesse Sumner — have each proposed bills with those targets. A preliminary analysis by federal energy researchers found that meeting them would not meaningfully raise prices for consumers because the costs of renewable power projects are already competitive with natural gas plants.

Advertisement

But both bills have stalled amid skepticism from some utility leaders, and concerns from legislative Republicans about moving away from fossil fuel-based power sources. Even as advocates have hired lobbyists to push the legislation forward, no hearings on the two bills have taken place since this year’s legislative session began in January.

Sumner’s bill is languishing in the House Energy Committee chaired by Rauscher, while Nikiski GOP Sen. Jesse Bjorkman, the chairman of the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee where Tobin’s bill is stuck, has vowed to block RPS legislation.

Rauscher said his new bill aims to break that gridlock. Included in its expansive definition of “clean energy” are other sources of electricity that have drawn industry interest, like nuclear power; it also sets a less aggressive target of 60% clean energy by 2051, and gives utilities even more time unless the state makes expensive upgrades to Alaska’s electrical grid.

The RPS legislation “was not going to work,” Rauscher said. “It was dead.” He said he drafted several versions of his bill and discussed his ideas with stakeholders, including utilities, members of a state energy task force, regulators and green power advocates.

“This was, ‘OK, let’s look at this from a different angle,’” he said. “What we want to do is incentivize the utility companies to try alternative measures. But yet we don’t want to rule out the fact that there are existing things we are utilizing right now — like coal, up in the Fairbanks area, there’s power plants — we don’t want to say, ‘You’ve got to dismantle those.’ We’re not saying that we’re going to move completely off of hydrocarbons so fast it’ll make your head spin.”

Advertisement

Rauscher’s proposal, and particularly its treatment of coal, are already drawing derision from boosters of renewable energy, however. Erin McKittrick, a Seldovia-based writer and analyst, described the bill as a “jumbled mess” in a blog post that first reported the bill’s definition of coal as a clean energy source.

McKittrick said it was “nonsensical” to call coal clean while excluding natural gas, which emits less carbon per unit of electricity generated, from the same treatment. She also poked holes in other elements of the legislation, like how it would only give utilities credit for renewable power projects that they own — rather than projects built by private developers that sell electricity back to them.

Rauscher described that omission as an oversight that will be fixed.

[Could a new Alaska coal power plant be climate friendly? An $11 million study aims to find out]

Other supporters of more aggressive renewable energy targets were more charitable, saying they object to the coal provisions of Rauscher’s bill but are eager to see negotiations advance at the Capitol.

Advertisement

“For me, the general interest is in how we’re going to get to yes. And I’m excited to see other folks putting their ideas and concepts on the table,” said Tobin, the sponsor of the Senate RPS bill. “I personally think that we need to be putting our resources toward diversification and moving toward a future that reduces our carbon footprint, our carbon impacts. However, I think the strength of the Legislature in Alaska is that we’re willing to have these difficult conversations and negotiate.”

Rauscher has scheduled his bill for its first hearings, in the energy committee he chairs, this week.

This piece was originally published in Northern Journal, a newsletter published by Nathaniel Herz. Subscribe here.





Source link

Advertisement

Alaska

Opinion: A new energy project, new risks and new responsibilities for Alaska

Published

on

Opinion: A new energy project, new risks and new responsibilities for Alaska


Speaker Bryce Edgmon speaks with members of the Alaska House at the Alaska State Capitol on August 2, 2025. (Marc Lester / ADN)

Alaska may soon face major decisions about the future of the Alaska LNG project and, if so, the Legislature will need to ensure that every step serves the best interests of Alaskans.

It is essential to remember that Senate Bill 138, the blueprint for state involvement in Alaska LNG, was passed in 2014 for a very different project: one led by ExxonMobil, BP and ConocoPhillips, with a key role fulfilled by TransCanada. Today’s project is led by a private-equity developer, Glenfarne, pursuing a structure that diverges dramatically from what lawmakers contemplated more than a decade ago. When a project changes this much, the underlying statutes need to be revisited.

In June, the Alaska Gasline Development Corp.’s president told his board that AGDC would be coordinating with the developer, the administration and the Legislature regarding legislation needed to support project development. He also noted that AGDC would work with the administration and Legislature on policies required to exercise the corporation’s option to invest 5% to 25% equity at Final Investment Decision, or FID. When AGDC itself signals that legislation is necessary, we should look forward to their outreach.

SB 138 also assigned important responsibilities to the departments of revenue and natural resources that may require legislative action. One key responsibility is the Legislature’s authority to approve major gas project contracts negotiated by the DNR commissioner. The law clearly states that balancing, marketing and gas sale agreements for North Slope gas cannot take effect without explicit legislative authorization. That statutory requirement was intentional and recognizes a project of this scale demands legislative oversight.

Advertisement

We also know that the pressure for speed on complex megaprojects often backfires, sometimes creating more problems than it solves. The Legislature must balance the legitimate need for progress with the responsibility to ensure Alaskans are not asked to assume unreasonable financial risk. As Speaker Bryce Edgmon recently observed, legislation of this magnitude “could dominate the session” and “take significant time.” Senate Finance Co-Chair Bert Stedman was even more direct: if we get this wrong, it could be “detrimental for generations.”

Last week, 4,000 miles away in Washington, D.C., Glenfarne and POSCO International announced a major strategic partnership. It is a meaningful milestone. But Alaska has seen similar announcements before, and it does not diminish the need for hard questions. If anything, it raises them.

Final Investment Decision is when investors and lenders commit billions based on the project’s economics and the state’s fiscal terms. Any legislation affecting property taxes, payments-in-lieu-of-taxes, aka PILTs, state equity, fiscal stability, or upstream royalties and production taxes must be decided before this takes place.

The Legislative Budget and Audit Committee has focused on providing lawmakers and the public with the information needed to understand the choices ahead. I revisited the Legislature’s 2014 “Alaska LNG: Key Issues” report, which helped lawmakers evaluate the original SB 138 framework. Building on that model, I directed our consultants, GaffneyCline, to prepare an updated “key issues” report; not to endorse or oppose the current project, but to provide a high-level overview of potential policy choices, which should be available to the public within the next few days.

The refreshed “key issues” report will be an important starting point. I ask Alaskans to approach it with an open mind and to read it as objectively as possible, free from assumptions shaped by past disappointments or early optimism. Keep asking tough questions of the Legislature, AGDC, Glenfarne and the administration. Don’t assume the project is a done deal or a doomed one. This is not about cheerleading or obstruction, but insisting on rigorous analysis, strong oversight and a fair deal for our children and grandchildren.

Advertisement

Some Alaskans have raised questions about a potential conflict of interest: GaffneyCline is a subsidiary of Baker Hughes, which recently announced agreements with Glenfarne to help advance the Alaska LNG project. I share those concerns, which is why I have met with the Legislature’s director of Legal Services and with GaffneyCline’s North America director. I have been assured by GaffneyCline’s leadership that no one outside the GaffneyCline project team has influenced their analysis, and that their global reputation for independence and trust remains intact. Still, we also must fully vet this issue when we convene in Juneau next month. Transparency and independence are non-negotiable.

The recent ceremony in Washington, D.C., with Glenfarne and POSCO International underscores the project’s potential; however, the authority to determine how and when Alaska monetizes its resources rests here, not with dignitaries celebrating overseas commitments. Our future will be determined in Alaska, by Alaskans, based on the fullest and most honest understanding of the choices before us.

Sen. Elvi Gray-Jackson, D-Anchorage, represents Senate District G, which includes Midtown, Spenard and Taku Campbell in Anchorage. Sen. Gray-Jackson serves as the chair of the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee.

• • •

The Anchorage Daily News welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Alaska

Trump Repeals Biden Land Protections in Alaska, Other States

Published

on

Trump Repeals Biden Land Protections in Alaska, Other States


President Donald Trump on Thursday signed several congressional measures designed to undo Biden administration land conservation policies restricting energy development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and federal lands in three Western states.



Source link

Continue Reading

Alaska

Alaska Hosts US Bomber Exercise Against ‘Threats to the Homeland’

Published

on

Alaska Hosts US Bomber Exercise Against ‘Threats to the Homeland’


The United States deployed two bombers to simulate strikes against “maritime threats” to the homeland in response to a growing Russian and Chinese presence near Alaska.

Newsweek has contacted China’s Foreign Ministry for comment by email. Russia’s defense and foreign ministries did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Why It Matters

Russia and China have closely cooperated in military matters under their “partnership without limits,” including a joint naval maneuver in the north Pacific near Alaska’s Aleutian Islands involving 11 Russian and Chinese vessels in summer 2023.

Facing a growing Moscow-Beijing military partnership, along with increased Chinese activities in the Arctic, the U.S. has been reinforcing its military presence in Alaska by deploying warships and conducting war games with its northern neighbor, Canada.

Advertisement

Bombers, capable of flying long distances and carrying large amounts of armaments, are a key instrument for the U.S. military to signal its strength. The American bomber force has recently conducted operations as a show of force aimed at Russia and China.

What To Know

According to a news release, the Alaskan Command executed simulated joint maritime strikes with Air Force B-52H bombers and the Coast Guard national security cutter USCGC Kimball in the Gulf of Alaska on Tuesday as part of Operation Tundra Merlin.

The bombers are assigned to the 2nd Bomb Wing out of Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, while the Kimball is homeported in Honolulu. The 354th Fighter Wing at Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska also deployed four F-35A stealth fighters.

Other supporting units included two KC-135 aerial refueling aircraft and an HC-130 aircraft on standby to conduct personnel recovery missions, the news release said.

During the operation, the bombers received target information from the Kimball for standoff target acquisition and simulated weapons use, while the F-35A jets—tasked with escorting the bombers—enhanced mission security and operational effectiveness.

Advertisement

According to an Air Force fact sheet, each B-52H bomber has a maximum payload of 70,000 pounds and is capable of carrying up to 20 standoff weapons—designed to be fired from outside enemy defenses—such as the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile.

The simulated strikes “demonstrated the capability of the [U.S. Northern Command] and its mission partners to deter maritime threats to the homeland,” the news release said.

Homeland defense is the Alaskan Command’s top priority, said its commander, U.S. Air Force Lieutenant General Robert Davis, adding that the ability to integrate with other commands and partners is key to safeguarding the U.S. northern approaches.

What People Are Saying

U.S. Air Force Lieutenant General Robert Davis, the commander of the Alaskan Command, said: “Operations in the Alaskan Theater of Operations are critically important to North American Homeland Defense. Operation Tundra Merlin demonstrates the Joint Force’s ability to seamlessly integrate capabilities from multiple combatant commands and mission partners to deter and defeat potential threats in the region.”

The Alaskan Command said: “Operation Tundra Merlin is a Homeland Defense focused joint operation designed to ensure the defense of U.S. territory and waters within the Alaskan Theater of Operations (AKTO). The operation includes integration with partners in the region with the shared goal of North American defense in the Western Arctic.”

What Happens Next

It remains to be seen whether Russia and China will conduct another joint air patrol near Alaska following a similar operation over the western Pacific earlier this week.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending