{"id":380870,"date":"2025-05-30T11:14:57","date_gmt":"2025-05-30T09:14:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=380870"},"modified":"2025-05-30T11:14:59","modified_gmt":"2025-05-30T09:14:59","slug":"exposing-alaskas-green-new-deal-part-ii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=380870","title":{"rendered":"Exposing Alaska\u2019s Green New Deal (Part II)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"
ChatGPT<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Master Resource<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0<\/em>Kassie Andrews<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Editor\u2019s Note<\/strong>: Trump Administration beware! This two-part backgrounder warns DOE Secretary Chris Wright, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin that their June 3, 2025, participation at Governor Mike Dunleavy\u2019s fourth annual Sustainable Energy Conference<\/a> is a set-up for Alaska\u2019s Green New Deal. A course reversal for this state\u2019s energy policy is in order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Part II walks through my own testimony (Part I<\/a>) against Alaska\u2019s proposed Renewable Portfolio Standard; the hoops I had to jump through just to get my written remarks added to the public record; and the telling exchange I had with one of the main activists pushing this nonsense.  Spoiler<\/em>: there\u2019s been no official response or acknowledgement to the damning context they asked for\u2014just the usual dodge-and-disappear routine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After checking the Alaska Legislature website under the bill documents, I discovered my testimony was not posted.  This is not the first time I had witnessed this on testimony opposing legislation this session.  I followed up to house.energy@akleg.gov, cc\u2019ing Rep. Ky Holland<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

May 7th, 2025: Subject: FW Opposition to HB 153<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I am writing to respectfully note that my opposition letter does not appear to have been included in the public documents for HB 153. I submitted it on April 12th and would appreciate confirmation that it was received and properly entered into the record.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Kassie Andrews<\/p>\n\n\n\n

5\/7\/2025 \u2013 Representative Ky Holland responded very quickly, appearing irritated that his legislation was stalling due to economic realities and a lack of immediate support from the co-ops:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019ve asked the committee aides (Shaina and Ariel) to check to see if this is in the record. As I assume you know we suspended consideration of amendments for HB153 to see if we could get the utilities to go on record with their input on the bills. They are not ready, though a couple have since had some meetings to advance their consideration and feedback. As a result we are going to hold some hearings this summer when the utilities are ready; and I hope when the uncertainty around tariffs on equipment for energy projects, and federal pauses on funding programs and energy credits are sorted out.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I had no idea when we introduced the bill the world would get turned so upside down or that the gasline would get the support of tariff based bargaining and federal mandates for support. Sort of strikes me as another version of federal mandates to incentivize desired outcome, but in this case it\u2019s being used for an alternative outcome. It think it\u2019s just ironic to see folks opposed to government actions to incentive renewables; and then to see the response to be new government actions to force non-renewables\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Are you following the Senate version of the bill? Its the same as our original bill at this point and had its first hearing today. They will also be holding future hearings and advancing their bill to something closer to our current house version that has the changes we\u2019ve developed with the utility advice. Here is a link to today Senate hearing \u2013 Alaska State Legislature<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

5\/8\/2025 \u2013 The Energy Committee Aide, Shaina Kilcoyne\u2014seemingly the brains behind this bill (she presented it to the committee and fielded questions)\u2014responds about the missing testimony:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

May 8th, 2025: Subject: RE Opposition to HB 153<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. I actually was looking through them just yesterday and saw that it was missing but didn\u2019t see it in our energy folder either. I will make sure this gets fixed today. I apologize for this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shaina Kilcoyne Energy Committee Aide [Office of Rep. Holland, House District 9, Office 418]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

5\/8\/2025 \u2013 Shaina responds again to let me know that my testimony has been uploaded onto the state website and will be printed for the committee members.  I didn\u2019t know they did that!  Learn something new every day. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

May 8th, 2025: Subject: RE Opposition to HB 153<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your letter is now uploaded in Basis and I will have printed copies for the committee members today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

5\/8\/2025 \u2013 Shaina responds for the third time in about two hours\u2014this time asking for sources on Winter Storm Uri that I referenced in my testimony. Then she offers her two cents on what she thinks <\/em>happened, likely because it looks terrible to have clear links between renewable mandates, overreliance on intermittent renewables, centralized planning failures, and the very bill they\u2019re scrambling to convince the public to accept\u2014acknowledging that reality would completely undermine the policy they\u2019re pushing.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Could you please share your source on the Texas outage that you reference? There has been substantial review of what caused the outage and I understand it was largely due to a lack of weatherization of gas plants \u2013 they were not able to deliver fuel to power the plants and some wells were unable to produce as much natural gas due to the freezing conditions. Here\u2019s an article from the Texas Tribune<\/a> about the storm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There\u2019s actually a podcast called the Disconnect: Power, Politics and the Texas Blackout \u2013 it offered a deep dive with some heart wrenching stories of people living through the storm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thanks for sharing any new resources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

5\/8\/2025 \u2013 My response addresses the ongoing issues with public testimony this session and responds to Shaina\u2019s request for sources on Winter Storm Uri.  Here, I lay out the \u201cwhy behind the why\u201d \u2013 because this isn\u2019t a cut and dry situation, and pretending it is only serves to obscure the bigger picture.  In the end, I requested that my response, along with Shaina\u2019s original question on Uri be attached to the permanent record for sake of transparency.  Will they post it?  That remains to be seen.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before I begin, I\u2019d like to point out that this is not the first time that testimony in opposition to legislation has failed to appear in the public record this session. My husband\u2019s testimony, and that of several friends, was also not entered into the system on another bill they opposed. It raises a fair question: how does this keep happening? And while no one is making accusations, it is beginning not to feel like a coincidence, especially when many Alaskans assume their input is recorded and don\u2019t have the time to constantly verify it. That kind of inconsistency erodes trust in what is supposed to be an open and accountable process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thank you for your question on Winter Storm Uri. It\u2019s a common misconception that natural gas \u201cfailed\u201d during Winter Storm Uri simply because of a lack of weatherization. The deeper and more complex issue was how gas was treated in Texas\u2019s market structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Natural gas wasn\u2019t prioritized as firm baseload power \u2013 it was treated as a backup to heavily subsidized wind and solar. When those intermittent sources collapsed, there wasn\u2019t enough reliable generation online to fill the gap. Gas plants couldn\u2019t ramp up because they weren\u2019t running- they weren\u2019t warm, pressurized or ready. As the supplied FERC\/NERC report notes: \u201cMost of the natural gas production and processing facilities surveyed were not identified as critical loads or otherwise protected from manual load shedding.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes, frozen equipment was a factor, but why was the system so compromised? It\u2019s because of how distorted the ERCOT market has become. Wind and solar, through federal production tax credits, can bid negative prices into the market and still profit. This undercuts gas, coal and nuclear, draining margins and making it unprofitable to build or maintain firm capacity. And worse: Revenues are siphoned off by unreliable generation schemes rather than invested in resilient, baseload infrastructure. The co-ops are expected to make up the difference\u2014we will be paying more, while being told that these unreliable sources are somehow \u201ccheap.\u201d That is the \u201cwhy behind the why.\u201d In Texas, resource adequacy was hollowed out long before the storm hit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Add to that the flawed assumption from climate models that Texas winters would trend warmer\u2014not colder. Relying on these forecasts, ERCOT did not mandate proper winterization or spinning reserve planning. When reality hit, the system collapsed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This wasn\u2019t a natural gas failure\u2014it was policy failure, compounded by the failure of centralized planning. A politically micromanaged grid, riddled with subsides, mandates, and misaligned incentives cannot respond to real world stress. At the core of that failure was the Renewable Portfolio Standard, which artificially accelerated the build out of wind and solar without requiring firm backup, reliability standards, or adequate storage. It distorted the market, hollowed out dispatchable capacity, and left the system vulnerable, as if it was intended sabotage. That\u2019s exactly why we must not replicate this in Alaska. Resilient energy policy starts with prioritizing reliability, not ideological agendas or top-down energy experiments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For transparency, I would appreciate it if the committee was provided with and reviewed both Shaina\u2019s original question and this full response in context and that it becomes part of the permanent public record for this bill. The back-and-and forth helps illuminate why these issues matter so deeply to Alaskans concerned about grid stability and affordability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sources:<\/p>\n\n\n\n