This article was republished with permission from dermotcole.com.
Five months ago Gov. Mike Dunleavy said that carbon storage was the next big thing, a painless solution to Alaska’s financial problems that would soon generate billions.
“The reason we landed on this is it doesn’t gore any ox,” Dunleavy said at a December press conference when asked why he chose carbon sequestration as his only option for raising new revenue for the state.
Investors the world over would soon be clamoring to give money to Alaskans because we have forests, bogs, seaweed, and depleted oil and gas wells.
It was the fiscal fantasy of the ungored oxen.
“Experts in this emerging industry have informed us that we can realize revenue to the tune of billions of dollars. That’s billions of dollars per year by creating a carbon management system here in Alaska. We’ve been told by some that we can generate as much as $30 billion or more over 20 years, just from our forest lands alone,” he said in his State of the State speech in January. “If possible, that’s a game changer.”
He said he wanted to “end the tired thinking of the past” that new revenue means new taxes. He claimed carbon storage would be the way to pay for state services “without taxing each other or eliminating the PFD.”
Asked at a press conference in January how much of the new revenue in his 10-year forecast would come from carbon sequestration, Dunleavy deflected.
“Over the last several years the question seems to always come to me what am I going to suggest for revenues, what I am going to suggest to bring income to Alaska. Well, this is another one of my suggestions and it has incredible potential so this administration right now is focused on this particular issue to try and get it past the finish line.”
“This creates new wealth and it creates wealth that comes in from the Outside, which I think is exactly what we want for the monetization of carbon with our resources. And so it’s consistent with what I think Alaskans want.”
A consultant hired by the Department of Natural Resources produced a report a year ago proposing three pilot forestry projects that would net the state $8 million a year. That’s significant, but it’s not $30 billion in 20 years.
Dunleavy signed the bill Tuesday, a revised version of SB 48 that won the support of nearly every legislator. There’s no clear path to billions or tens of billions under the new law.
The governor and lawmakers keep saying it will not lock up land because the new law says that to the extent practical, land set aside for carbon storage will remain open for hunting, fishing, living, mining, producing oil and gas, etc.
The over-aggressive sales pitch continues, but at least he’s no longer repeating the $30 billion claim.
“With over 43 million acres of trees within state possession, state lands, as well as countless bogs, peat, lakes, you name it, that also can be monetized, this is a tremendous opportunity to not only provide revenue, but also use some of that revenue to help our state reduce its energy costs and employ a lot of new technologies,” Dunleavy said at the bill-signing ceremony.
“Some folks say we’re, we’re taking a risk. Alaska’s always been about risk, but I think it’s a great risk. I think it’s gonna bode well for Alaska and it’s gonna do what we hope it does. And that is once again monetize a brand new commodity that Alaska can lead the world in.”
John Boyle, commissioner of natural resources and a former oil company employee, is also making extravagant promises about the law, flavored with Chamber of Commerce cheerleading.
The claims that strike me as the most far-fetched are that the state will be able to reduce wildfires, find a better way to deal with beetle-killed timber and increase all kinds of Alaska development because of this law. I’m somewhat surprised he didn’t mention that the law will allow the state to control lightning strikes.
“The boreal forest that exists in Alaska and across the Northern hemisphere represent the world’s largest global warehouse for carbon,” Boyle said.
“SB 48 gives us the tools and the incentives to start to manage our forests in a way that will minimize the amount of carbon that’s released in the atmosphere through wildfires, through natural events like beetle kill, other types of things, because it really helps incentivize, and focus our attention on providing active forest management that enables our forests to be healthy, that enables our marketable timber stands to increase in value over time. And I think for me, SB 48 really sends a signal to the world that Alaskans really care about our environment.”
“And we also care about developing our resources,” he said.
The new law “sets a standard for the world that shows that we can have an all-of-the-above approach when it comes to our energy mix and when it comes to the other raw materials that are so important to everyday life,” he said.
The law says nothing of the kind. And “all-of-the-above” is Republican code for keeping oil and gas above all else.
While this topic is certainly worth pursuing and holds potential for some increase in state revenue, it won’t lead to the financial windfall Dunleavy talked about five months ago and it doesn’t justify the victory lap about our stewardship of Alaska resources that the head of DNR thinks we have earned.
Your contributions help support independent analysis and political commentary by Alaska reporter and author Dermot Cole. Thank you for reading and for your support. Either click here to use PayPal or send checks to: Dermot Cole, Box 10673, Fairbanks, AK 99710-0673.
Dermot Cole has worked as a newspaper reporter, columnist and author in Alaska for more than 40 years. Support his work here.
