Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy, a supposed Republican, is from Scranton and, just like its other famous pol, he's mostly interested in passing out political favors but this one is double-trouble.
Thanks, Thomas. I'm no geologist, but I just have kind of an instinctual feeling that gas pumped underground will find a way to escape. It seems to me that even a very small, previously undetected fracture point would allow the CO2 to slowly leak out - but what do I know? If I happen to be right, then billions and billions of dollars will be going 'down the drain', pun intended.
For some context of the types of lawmakers we are dealing with, here are some of the worthy amendments that were offered and did not pass (by a long shot):
-Amendment offered by Representative Donna Mears for a minimum floor (4%) for monetary recovery to the state – gross revenue from carbon credit sales on the lease was offered and failed to pass.
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman to find that the carbon storage lease would be profitable without 45Q tax credit failed 38-1 with only the member who offered the amendment voting in support of it. With a republican member stating that the “private sector is taking the risk based on a federal tax credit, it would constrain opportunity for development and that we are in competition with Texas and Wyoming – we’d be at a comparative disadvantage.” And another Republican member, Representative McCabe, stating “As a fiscal conservative I am not sure why I would ever vote for this amendment – it gets in the way of a free market economy.” “Why would we ever want to do that - If there is tax credits available they take them, if they are not available we don’t.” He went on to compare the carbon management tax incentive to child tax credits. He asked “Why would we ever interfere with the business of a business?” There was no mention of the fraud rate of the 45Q. When it comes to the state, it is clear by the actions of the body that they don’t care if tax payers are taken advantage of at the federal level. With the federal government being tens of trillions in debt, it was of no importance to the body to consider that perhaps the 45Q may cease to be part of the internal revenue service code.
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman to ensure that the storage reservoir has been depleted of mineral resources prior to use and that property owners were consulted and that they “obtained the consent of all persons with an ownership interest in the proposed storage reservoir” failed. The original language that the storage operator has “made a good faith effort” to consult property owners was deemed good enough to the body with a vote of 1 to 38. Maybe the body doesn’t know that property owners in South Dakota are having farmland stolen from them for CO2 pipelines?
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman to shift damages, liability from the state to fall with the operators of the storage facility and all persons who injected carbon. Amendment failed 7-32.
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman for seismic activity monitoring requiring a comparison in activity – if increase in seismic activity found, commission to halt permitting until findings determine increase in activity not attributable to carbon storage activities. Amendment was vehemently rejected 2-37 with one member stating it “defies reason.”
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman for contracts exceeding $5M require legislative approval. I am not sure I have ever witnessed legislators shoo away a chance at more power for themselves but there it was. Amendment failed 2-36.
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman for a legislative finding recognizing how carbon regulation inevitably impact and increase the cost of goods and services to the end user (the public) on the floor David Eastman stating “this is the point that is left out of the legislative PowerPoints.” This amendment struck a nerve with Republican Will Stapp who took to criticizing Rep. Eastman by saying he appreciates his “crystal ball” and took to touting the ability that we will have with this legislation for a wildly expensive coal plant with carbon capture and sequestration and said this legislation might even lower the cost to the consumer! Unbelievable. He finished by asking members to reject the amendment due to how it is “superfluous” and “not fact based.” Amendment failed 1-38.
-Amendment by Representative David Eastman to further define “reservoir” to mean “devoid of recoverable mineral resources” he expressed out of concern based on the Alaska State Constitution Article VIII Section 1 – the policy under the constitution is that our resources should be made available for maximum use consistent with the public interest – sharing concerns of many Alaskans that the tax policy is driving us in a certain direction, we may be making decisions in the short term which seem good but in the long term may be very bad. Long term permanent decisions based on current policy that will impact our ability to pursue mineral resource recovery in the future. Democrat Zach Fields with great confidence stood in opposition to say “this is a strange and arbitrary way to attempt to manipulate the market such reservoirs are going to be used for the most profitable use– companies will figure that out based on mineral content or anything else.” In wrap up, Eastman reiterated that with this bill we are not looking at something that is driven by the market. We are looking at something that is driven by government policy and the market responding to that policy. He expressed continued concern that some of the intent behind federal policy is for Alaska to have less resource development. His amendment failed 1 to 38.
The bill was placed into 3rd reading and will come before the floor again on 4/17 for final passage.
Thanks, Thomas. I'm no geologist, but I just have kind of an instinctual feeling that gas pumped underground will find a way to escape. It seems to me that even a very small, previously undetected fracture point would allow the CO2 to slowly leak out - but what do I know? If I happen to be right, then billions and billions of dollars will be going 'down the drain', pun intended.
For some context of the types of lawmakers we are dealing with, here are some of the worthy amendments that were offered and did not pass (by a long shot):
-Amendment offered by Representative Donna Mears for a minimum floor (4%) for monetary recovery to the state – gross revenue from carbon credit sales on the lease was offered and failed to pass.
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman to find that the carbon storage lease would be profitable without 45Q tax credit failed 38-1 with only the member who offered the amendment voting in support of it. With a republican member stating that the “private sector is taking the risk based on a federal tax credit, it would constrain opportunity for development and that we are in competition with Texas and Wyoming – we’d be at a comparative disadvantage.” And another Republican member, Representative McCabe, stating “As a fiscal conservative I am not sure why I would ever vote for this amendment – it gets in the way of a free market economy.” “Why would we ever want to do that - If there is tax credits available they take them, if they are not available we don’t.” He went on to compare the carbon management tax incentive to child tax credits. He asked “Why would we ever interfere with the business of a business?” There was no mention of the fraud rate of the 45Q. When it comes to the state, it is clear by the actions of the body that they don’t care if tax payers are taken advantage of at the federal level. With the federal government being tens of trillions in debt, it was of no importance to the body to consider that perhaps the 45Q may cease to be part of the internal revenue service code.
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman to ensure that the storage reservoir has been depleted of mineral resources prior to use and that property owners were consulted and that they “obtained the consent of all persons with an ownership interest in the proposed storage reservoir” failed. The original language that the storage operator has “made a good faith effort” to consult property owners was deemed good enough to the body with a vote of 1 to 38. Maybe the body doesn’t know that property owners in South Dakota are having farmland stolen from them for CO2 pipelines?
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman to shift damages, liability from the state to fall with the operators of the storage facility and all persons who injected carbon. Amendment failed 7-32.
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman for seismic activity monitoring requiring a comparison in activity – if increase in seismic activity found, commission to halt permitting until findings determine increase in activity not attributable to carbon storage activities. Amendment was vehemently rejected 2-37 with one member stating it “defies reason.”
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman for contracts exceeding $5M require legislative approval. I am not sure I have ever witnessed legislators shoo away a chance at more power for themselves but there it was. Amendment failed 2-36.
-Amendment offered by Representative David Eastman for a legislative finding recognizing how carbon regulation inevitably impact and increase the cost of goods and services to the end user (the public) on the floor David Eastman stating “this is the point that is left out of the legislative PowerPoints.” This amendment struck a nerve with Republican Will Stapp who took to criticizing Rep. Eastman by saying he appreciates his “crystal ball” and took to touting the ability that we will have with this legislation for a wildly expensive coal plant with carbon capture and sequestration and said this legislation might even lower the cost to the consumer! Unbelievable. He finished by asking members to reject the amendment due to how it is “superfluous” and “not fact based.” Amendment failed 1-38.
-Amendment by Representative David Eastman to further define “reservoir” to mean “devoid of recoverable mineral resources” he expressed out of concern based on the Alaska State Constitution Article VIII Section 1 – the policy under the constitution is that our resources should be made available for maximum use consistent with the public interest – sharing concerns of many Alaskans that the tax policy is driving us in a certain direction, we may be making decisions in the short term which seem good but in the long term may be very bad. Long term permanent decisions based on current policy that will impact our ability to pursue mineral resource recovery in the future. Democrat Zach Fields with great confidence stood in opposition to say “this is a strange and arbitrary way to attempt to manipulate the market such reservoirs are going to be used for the most profitable use– companies will figure that out based on mineral content or anything else.” In wrap up, Eastman reiterated that with this bill we are not looking at something that is driven by the market. We are looking at something that is driven by government policy and the market responding to that policy. He expressed continued concern that some of the intent behind federal policy is for Alaska to have less resource development. His amendment failed 1 to 38.
The bill was placed into 3rd reading and will come before the floor again on 4/17 for final passage.