Please take a moment to comment on Obama’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on the Effects of Oil and Gas Activities in the Arctic Ocean: Deadline TODAY.

  

               A "Fair Share" vs. a "Fair Shake"

                                        by

                              Dave Harbour

 

Senate Resources Committee members announced today that they will be accepting public testimony for Senate Bill 192, relating to oil and gas production tax values today and tomorrow.

In the story linked below, legislators demonstrate why Alaska has become such a hostile climate for investment.  On the one hand, they will be the first to talk about "fairness" and extracting a "fair share" from industry.  Yet, in 2007 the Legislature took a month to create and pass the tax bill that has depressed production and threatened Alaska’s economic future.  The bill was passed with retroactive effect which any historian would likely view as "unfair" if not vulturous.  At no time in the debate do we recall legislators considering what they should "give" to the taxpayers in return for what new wealth they were "taking".  Also, that 2007 ACES bill massively rejected the "fair share" equilibrium reached by republican and democrat leaders thirty years ago and whose predictability and certainty resulted in double the Prudhoe Bay development and production than was expected when the pipeline was built.  In the article below, having extracted so much, they now propose to install a socialistic control over private companies by dictating to them how they should spend any tax  savings which tax reform might create.  Yes, we hear their populist cries for a "fair share" almost daily, but never are they seen to give Alaska’s most important investors a "fair shake".


ADN by Becky Bohrer.  But Democratic Sens. Bill Wielechowski (l) and Hollis French (r) say dealing with progressivity alone isn’t the answer to getting more oil in the trans-Alaska pipeline, an issue important to the state’s economy.  Wielechowski and French say that if Alaska gives something to the oil industry, such as a tax cut, the state should get something in return.

 Empire editorial: Alaska must take control of Bristol Bay development – Juneau Empire – We think the state of Alaska’s elected representatives should have a strong say in any development that could affect the world’s best fishing grounds. That’s why we support Senate Bill 152, which gives the people we elect final say over whether a large mine – any large mine – situated only in that specific area will be safe enough to be allowed to receive permits. (Comment: The editorial writers believe they have the best chance stopping the Pebble Mine via legislative obstruction. This also means that they no longer trust the permitting and approval process (i.e. the rule of law) that has worked so well for this state for decades. The problem with short-circuiting the process for this single project is that this technique will be applied to every single future resource extraction project that comes to the attention of the environmental community. Either our regulatory process works or it does not. We believe it does work and works well. This proposal ought to be rejected outright. – AG)

 Has time finally come for a power grid in rural Alaska? – The Arctic Sounder, Carey Restino – A recent study by Commonwealth North, however, brings the issue into focus. Nearly 80 percent of rural communities in Alaska depend on diesel fuel, and some in those communities spend up to 47 percent of their income on energy — heating fuel, electricity and fuel for their vehicles. The report stated that many rural Alaska families struggle to both heat their homes and feed themselves.

 $2.50 per Gallon Gasoline, Energy Independence and Jobs – An Address by Newt Gingrich – Newt2011 – In one short decade, we went from seven years supply to over a hundred years supply because science and technology had improved so much. Furthermore, instead of us importing liquefied natural gas from the Middle East, there is now serious talk that we’re going to build facilities in Houston, and we’re going to ship liquefied natural gas to China.

 U.S., China threaten Australia’s gas hopes – Wall Street Journal Market Watch, Virginia Harrison – The world’s two largest economies are sitting on massive shale reserves. The push by North America and China to become gas exporters — or in the case of China, a domestic supplier — could upset Australia’s longer- term gas ambitions.

 

Natural gas analytics firm expects prices to dip below $2/mcf by fall – mywesttexas.com, Paul Wiseman – A natural gas storage glut, expected to peak by September or October of this year, could send prices tumbling below $2 per mcf unless there is an unexpected blast of arctic air in the northeast. This warning comes from BENTEK Energy, an Evergreen, Colorado-based energy market analytics firm.