By ROBERT SEITZ
Reading the news and commentaries as we close out 2024 is interesting, especially when one reads the comments from readers.
My column, “What’s known about gas levels in Cook Inlet warrants immediate action,” of Nov 25, 2024 resulted in a lot of comments from people who were engrossed in taking shots at the other commenters. Very few seemed to have much interest in actually solving the problem of ensuring sufficient Cook Inlet gas availability until long into the future. I was hoping for some increase in positive thinking about the availability of natural gas in Cook Inlet.
It seems everyone has forgotten that the federal administration has provided negative support for oil and gas activity in Alaska, including for Cook Inlet gas. In addition to that, the ESG (Environmental, Social and Government) pressure on financial institutions and oil and gas companies strongly discourages oil and gas development because of the greenhouse gas craze. As a result there has been negative support for anyone trying to develop additional resource in Cook Inlet.
Reading other articles, I find the commenters dislike Hilcorp more than they dislike the anti-Alaska development forces that have been discouraging investment in Cook Inlet and other Alaska projects. Hilcorp is a reputable and reliable oil and gas producer that is faced with all the same negative support for oil and gas production that others face and are up against all the same environmental encumbrances the rest of us must battle, and they are still producing energy Alaskans need.
The Must Read Alaska column by Luke Saugier of Hilcorp, Hilcorp Alaska: Powering Southcentral Alaska’s past, present and future, was more convincing of Hilcorp’s commitment to Alaska energy than one commentor’s suggestion that Alaskans should support of a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) would be preferable to Hilcorp’s threats and empty promises.
Hilcorp has been drilling new wells and producing gas, so they are meeting their commitment and promise.
Apparently one reader did not understand that the gas demand is fairly well fixed, with Hilcorp supplying most of that demand so that other producers cannot readily flow natural gas into the supply line without Hilcorp adjusting to allow more flow from an alternate source.
Arthur Miller, CEO of Chugach Electric and Mark Wiggin, Chair of the Chugach Electric board of directors co-authored a commentary on Monday in which they stated that CEA has co-invested with Hilcorp for new gas wells, and indicated they were looking forward to energy that will be available from renewables, imported LNG, possible North Slope gas and new gas from Cook Inlet.
For a correction to my article, I was advised that all the oil and gas tax incentives had been paid to Furie, so that wasn’t really part of the problems that Furie had to overcome, but there were various issues with financial support of oil and gas activities in Cook Inlet in recent decades that did have impact.
The summer 2024 edition of the Alaska Alliance LINK noted that one factor that slowed the royalty bill in the Alaska Senate was a delay in hiring a consultant who would model the effects of royalty reduction. The consultant and the State Division of Oil and Gas were both reported to have reached the decision that reducing the royalty was the quickest way to production of new gas. The whole idea of the reduced royalty on gas is not to make things more profitable for the producer but to make the gas supplied less expensive to Alaskans, to make our energy more affordable. During this next legislative session Cook Inlet gas production will, hopefully, receive more aggressive attention.
One bright spot this week was the commentary by Pedro Gonzalez in MRAK on Sunday, Dec 15. Gonzalez seemed to be confident that there is sufficient gas available to ensure a secure energy future for Southcentral Alaska. The certainty of Cook Inlet gas is better than the speculation on imported LNG, or North Slope Gas or renewables. Once we have confidence that Cook Inlet will be available for the foreseeable future, we can take our time to development the other sources of energy and avoid the extra expensive of rapidly building new infrastructure and rapidly develop new energy sources.
For the education portion of the title of my article I will reiterate my comment in an earlier article that there should not be an increase in funding for education without some offer of performance criteria for school districts for math, reading and capitalism; a reduction or elimination of social engineering indoctrination in the schools without parental consent; and improved graduation rate for students.
Gov. Dunleavy has stated for each budget that he expects a performance criterion before he will support increased funding for schools. That should put the burden on school boards and school districts around the State. We want our students to be qualified to become properly qualified engineers and scientists to work on our energy solutions and make real scientific decisions concerning our environment.
The environment comment I have is to make here deals with the pressure on the oil and gas industry. It is time to recognize that the climate change we have experienced is only a recovery from the Little Ice Age and is not due to greenhouse gas emissions. It is time for scientists to admit that the planet had higher temperatures before the Little Ice Age than we have now. Forests that are found beneath retreating glaciers should be one very good representation that the earth has been warmer than now, in the not too distant past.
It is time to get scientists to admit that they have been subverting good science, and have been perpetrating a lie. Fossil fuels are not a cause for warmer temperatures or the atmospheric rivers. If one keeps track of the position and route of the jet stream they will see where the high pressure areas will form to cause “heat domes.” There is no basis for court cases against the oil and gas companies concerning changes in climate.
Now is the time to remove the impediments to progress in oil and gas development in Alaska so our Cook Inlet natural gas production will become popular again, and increased production of oil from the North Slope can once again be a major focus for our efforts.
That is where our economy will be built and which will ensure our ability to put forth balanced budgets in the future, while still providing full Permanent Fund dividends to our citizens.
Robert Seitz is a professional electrical engineer and lifelong concerned Alaskan.
.
.
It’s time for the author to admit that it isn’t the absolute global temperatures that are the concern. It’s the RATE at which greenhouse gasses and temperatures have increased since the Industrial Revolution.
Climatologists have repeatedly pointed this fact out and many, like the author, seem unwilling or unable to accept this.
Excellent article, sir! I have never understood how so many supposedly intelligent people have been hoodwinked by the man-made climate change scenario. It absolutely shows how propaganda and an anti-people agenda have taken over our society. Meanwhile we could be working on the few problems caused by natural cycles of weather rather than running around like a bunch of chicken littles.
I continue to believe that a foundational backstop for whatever decisions are made over the coming years for Anchorage energy consumers is to have Anchorage come under Power Cost Equalization. That would balance the $250 million state subsidy for the Interior Gas Utility, and it would tie rural and urban Alaskans together. Anchorage utilities could then maneuver from a position of strength and certainty. Anchorage is a magnet for homeless from throughout rural Alaska, and Anchorage taxpayers pay those bills. The incoming Alaska Legislature should place Anchorage in PCE early in the 2025 session, and Anchorage legislators in the House and the Senate have the stroke to easily do this. Why not?