Todd Lindley: Alaskans vs. the carbon communists

16
693

By TODD LINDLEY

All too often, our elected leaders are democratically elected but then abandon the people either in pursuit of greater power, or–rather than resist the relentless pressure from unelected bureaucrats–they succumb to it. In Alaska, voters fortunately have a choice: we seize the opportunities we have built for ourselves and lead the world, or we bow to foreign powers.

In his book Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order, Robert Wood describes the hijacking of American’s altruistic concern for the environment by those seeking to destroy America. Stating that the modern anti-carbon movement has “little regard for nature or people”, he exposes the roots of a global agenda to wipe out American success–which is the Trilateral Commission through the United Nations. The United Nations has become, in his words, “… a proxy for this group and the universal driving force to implement its policies.” We know these policies all too well because they are written down for the world to see. The problem is, our leaders are becoming unwitting “apologists” for our wealth-creating economy, and abdicating to foreign influence. 

Governor Dunleavy, for example, is by most accounts a conservative and popular Governor, but what is he doing?  His policies are showcased in the inaugural Alaska Standard Sustainability Report. The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are front and center of his policies and lays the foundation for his energy programs in our great state. During his 2023 State of the State, he lamented the “billionaires from Davos” use Alaska as their playground. Yet, after the roll out of the Alaska Sustainability Report in May of 2023, Governor Dunleavy was invited by these same billionaires to visit Berlin, Germany. In front of a crowd of private equity investors he gave the keynote address during the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Summit describing the Alaska State Constitution as the Alaska Standard. He states “the Alaska Standard was ratified by the people of Alaska in 1959. When Alaska drew up its constitution it became a state long before the recent standard based movements we know by acronyms as ESG, SDG, and DEI came along. In ’59 we put much of what we talk about today in our constitution … we also hear a lot about sustainability and Alaska was ahead of the world when the framers of our constitution took this into account as well!” Simply put, our conservative Republican Governor is advocating for ESG in a foreign country on behalf of an oil producing US state. A political oxymoron if there ever was one!

Make no mistake, there is nothing sustainable about the United Nations SDGs. In a heavy, carbon production and utilization state, there is no such thing as net zero either. Just as we saw with the COVID pandemic, the rules can be changed, the data can be manipulated, and ambiguity in interpretation leaves too much latitude for an ‘expert’ to weigh in with no accountability. Carbon and CO2 are vital elements to the flourishing of life. To claim that reducing carbon for the sake of the climate is a lie and needs to be stopped. 

The Alaska Legislature had their chance to stop the lie in 2023 but let revenue get in the way of critical thinking. With the allure that “some experts claim we could make billions of dollars” the Alaska Legislature removed the speed bumps for Governor Dunleavy to implement the Sustainable Development Goals in Alaska initially via a Carbon Offset Program. This legislation allows an entity to lease state forest land for a period up to 55 years so a company can pollute somewhere else on the planet. Even worse, the Native Corporations were presented as a model example of the millions of dollars they make on Carbon Offsets. They now lease their land for an indeterminate period of time to companies like Meta and Google. What would the Sealaska Shareholders say about the carbon offset revenues?

Fast forward to today and this upcoming legislative session. The Department of Natural Resources will likely make one more attempt at some unfinished business to pass a version of their ‘Storage Bill’ for the purpose of Carbon Sequestration. There will be rehashed discussions on the economic benefit of capturing carbon from the air or from the natural gas production and storing it in the ground. The claim is that companies want to store their carbon here and if they cannot they will take their money elsewhere. It’s funny to listen to these titans of industry make this claim to learn that the only financial incentive a company has to pursue carbon sequestration is the 45Q Federal Tax Credit. Not a business driver to increase oil production but a federal tax credit that is paid on a per ton basis of carbon dioxide injected. 

An important reminder to the citizen, the carbon offset legislation included a provision to advance the application for Class VI well primacy from the EPA, an amendment snuck in at the last minute. Legislators and lobbyists argued that Alaska needs primacy for Class VI wells, which are for geologic storage only by the way, to store CO2. However, if a company wanted to inject CO2 today, they can apply to the EPA on their own for geologic storage. More importantly, they can also take advantage of the primacy Alaska has for Class II wells which are customarily used for enhanced oil recovery. These companies know and as was presented during the last session, the 45Q is due to run out January 1, 2033. Time is of the essence if a company is to pursue carbon sequestration for the gold rush of tax credits. The obvious questions should be, why are we not doing enhanced oil recovery with our CO2 today? Are federal tax credits for sequestration more profitable than producing oil using enhanced oil recovery? 

These are simple questions that have yet to be answered. Alaskans should also know that the legislature didn’t believe it was necessary for any of the revenues to be set aside in the Permanent Fund for the benefit of the people. Senator Jesse Kiehl of Juneau even stated that if “the CO2 is stored in trees, the trees are a replenishable resource… and we don’t put money from replenishable resources in to the Permanent Fund.” 

Now, Alaskans are left with entities, foreign to the state leasing public lands for 55 years, through a third party where the legislature has no regulatory oversight, to store a “worthless” substance in our trees and under our lands, for what? If that is not enough, the discussion of a gas shortage in the Cook Inlet should raise eyebrows. Are the experts that claim we will make billions off of low or no carbon resources the same experts evaluating the reserves in the Cook Inlet? 

Citizens may be thinking that this is all too crazy to be connected in any way but go back to the beginning of this story. Climate change will be the mechanism by which a fundamental transformation of the forms of commerce will take place, namely through ESG. If the United Nations were a proxy to implementing the policies of the Trilateral Commission, is Governor Dunleavy a proxy to implementing David Rubensteins policies on Capitalism in Transition?

Todd M Lindley, PE is an energy and engineering professional in Alaska and VP of Alaska Gold Communications, Inc. Contact him @TMLindley_AK on X (Formerly Twitter). 

16 COMMENTS

  1. Absolutely positively Gov Dunleavy has fallen to the other side of common sense.
    Dunleavy is not a friend to Alaskans or its natural rich energy, oil.
    We the people will be forced into hugh taxes for nothing but paying for wells and infrastructures that do nothing. This means
    shell games, laundrying money for the rich.

  2. An informative article, well written and illustrates how society in general not unlike lambs are being herded to the slaughter. This altruistic dogma mentioned above is chiefly held by those living in an Urban environment without connection to nature and the realities of nature. The boogeyman called CO 2 has now been joined by Nitrogen another “deadly Toxin” in Holland giving Authorities an excuse to shut down half of that nations fertile farms. The end result is, civilization, (which includes you and me) dies without food and fuel.

  3. Imagine the carbon-emitting infrastructure to build compressors and separators to grab the CO2 from the air, compress it, and shove it down a metal pipe (more mining and manufacturing for that long pipe, btw!) so it can go into a geologic structure underground. Oh, and those compressors don’t run on unicorn gas.
    It is as if no one can do the math, or will do the math.
    We are taught to worship words like “carbon footprint” and “netzero,” words that did not exist 20 years ago.

  4. Great read. Spot on. Almost like you saw into the future on this one – Our legislature will be hearing SB 49 (Carbon Sequestration) at 3:30PM today. The presentation by AOGCC and DNR indicate that an RFI will hit the street for consultant services including environmental justice activities assessments. That won’t be bad for our sovereignty or economy – AT ALL.
    ‘https://www.akleg.gov/basis/get_documents.asp?session=33&docid=27739

  5. Great article but shouldn’t be buried at the bottom of MRAK’s page especially with testimony currently going on in Juneau.

  6. Thank you Todd, this statement “Senator Jesse Kiehl of Juneau even stated that if “the CO2 is stored in trees, the trees are a replenishable resource… and we don’t put money from replenishable resources in to the Permanent Fund.” is about the most condescending statement we people of Alaska should never hear….. So rip us off from the vast resources of Alaska , to benefit who? The Corporate State & One World Order Rulers of ESG. Please Alaskans wake up to the future of they lock us out & make us pay !

  7. Great article. If we had any type of legitimate mainstream media Newspaper or TV outlets in Alaska they would be clamoring to interview you and key figures mentioned to verify or dispute. 5 minutes of watching Anchorage Chanel 2 “News” or scanning the ADN will confirm that isn’t going to happen.

    Godspeed in efforts to get this message to thinking people.

  8. I wonder how many conservatives voted “No” to the con-con vote in 2022? Outspent $8 million to $40,000, it was all SOROS MONEY that told us that to vote “Yes” would bring in OUTSIDE INFLUENCE.

    My, my.

    The state constitution was socialist from the start, as Dunleavy essentially admitted. Even Hickel called us “The Owner State”. The constitutional convention used a template crafted by the U of Chicago “Public Administration Service”, all FDR New Deal re-treads.

    We could pressure the legislature to call a con-con at any time. Why wait another 10 years?

Comments are closed.