Legislature(2011 - 2012)BARNES 124
04/05/2011 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB183 | |
| Overview: Update on the Energy Efficiency Policy & Recommendations by the Cold Climate Housing Research Center | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 183 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 5, 2011
8:08 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz, Chair
Representative Neal Foster, Vice Chair
Representative Alan Austerman
Representative Alan Dick
Representative Dan Saddler
Representative Sharon Cissna (via teleconference)
Representative Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 183
"An Act relating to the Village Safe Water Act."
- MOVED CSHB 183(CRA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
OVERVIEW: UPDATE ON THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY POLICY &
RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE COLD CLIMATE HOUSING RESEARCH CENTER
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 183
SHORT TITLE: APPLICATION OF VILLAGE SAFE WATER ACT
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) DICK
03/09/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/09/11 (H) CRA, FIN
04/05/11 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
SHELIA PETERSON, Staff
Representative Dick
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 183 on behalf of the sponsor,
Representative Dick.
BILL GRIFFITH, Program Manager
Facility Programs
Division of Water
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 183, answered
questions.
KATHIE WASSERMAN, Executive Director
Alaska Municipal League
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 183.
JASON MAYRAND, Mayor
City of Nenana
Nenana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Urged passage of HB 183 this session.
SCOTT RUBY, Director
Division of Community & Regional Affairs
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 183, answered
questions.
DR. JOHN DAVIES, Senior Researcher - Energy Policy
Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC)
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an update on the energy efficiency
policy and recommendations by CCHRC.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:08:35 AM
CHAIR CATHY ENGSTROM MUNOZ called the House Community and
Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting to order at 8:08
a.m. Representatives Foster, Austerman, Dick, Saddler, Cissna
(via teleconference), Gardner, and Munoz were present at the
call to order.
HB 183-APPLICATION OF VILLAGE SAFE WATER ACT
8:08:47 AM
CHAIR MUNOZ announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 183, "An Act relating to the Village Safe Water
Act."
8:09:12 AM
SHELIA PETERSON, Staff, Representative Dick, Alaska State
Legislature, paraphrased from the following sponsor statement:
House Bill 183 amends the definition of "village"
under the Village Safe Water Act. Currently an
unincorporated community, a second class city, or a
first class city with not more than 600 residents is
eligible to receive a grant under the Village Safe
Water Program. House Bill 183 amends the definition to
include a home rule city with less than 600 residents.
A home rule city has the same government powers as a
first class city. The difference rests in how the two
cities are organized. A first class city is
established under AS 29.35.50-260 while a home rule
city adopts a charter as the framework for the city.
Four years ago the City of Nenana as awarded a Village
Safe Water grant to upgrade an aging water and sewer
system. The city worked diligently with state
officials for several years to plan and finalize the
project. Unfortunately, right before construction was
to begin, the Department of Environmental Conservation
notified Nenana that the city was not eligible to
receive a Village Safe Water grant; the city was not a
first class city, but a home rule city.
The change in HB 183 allows the City of Nenana to
proceed with the needed upgrade to its water and sewer
system using Village Safe Water funds. Passage of HB
183 this year ensures that a construction season is
not lost.
8:10:46 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired as to who establishes the terms
for the grants.
MS. PETERSON deferred to Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC) staff.
8:11:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER questioned whether it would be possible
to merely change the definitions of the grant such that the
language specified that home rule cities are eligible for grants
rather than changing the definition of a home rule city.
MS. PETERSON clarified that the definition of "village" is in
statute and is explicit in terms of what type of organized
community qualifies. Therefore, to add a different type [of
organized community] the statute would have to be changed, which
is what HB 183 does. Ms. Peterson added that there is companion
legislation in the Senate Finance Committee. The Senate
Community and Regional Affairs Standing Committee adopted a
committee substitute (CS) for that companion legislation and a
blank CS mirroring the Senate CS has been provided to the
committee.
8:12:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN asked if there has been any discussion
regarding an effective date.
MS. PETERSON related that she and the sponsor have noticed that
HB 183 doesn't have an effective date, and therefore they might
ask the committee to consider an effective date.
8:13:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER said that he fully supports expanding the
definition if it results in more communities being eligible. He
then inquired as to the consequences of removing the existing
statutory language referring to the two-mile radius.
MS. PETERSON confirmed that Version M does delete the existing
statutory language referring to a two-mile radius.
8:15:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked if this change would impact
communities other than Nenana.
8:15:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 183, Version 27-LS0601\M, Bullard,
3/30/11, as the working document. There being no objection,
Version M was before the committee.
8:15:40 AM
BILL GRIFFITH, Program Manager, Facility Programs, Division of
Water, Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), said that
under Version M several communities would be impacted. The home
rule municipality change would allow Nenana and Yakutat to
qualify for village safe water funding. Increasing the
population allowed under the statute for first class cities and
home rule municipalities from 600 residents to 1,000 residents
would result in several more communities being included.
Several of the communities that would now be included have just
recently surpassed a population of 600, such as Akiachuk and
Kipnuk. He noted that several other communities have been at a
population of more than 600 residents, but haven't been eligible
for some time. Those communities include King Cove, Hoonah, and
Sand Point. There are also communities, such as Kake and
Kasigluk, with a population of over 550 that would soon be
ineligible if the population doesn't increase. Mr. Griffith
pointed out that Version M also includes a change that specifies
which unincorporated communities would be included. That change
requires that the community has an established local government,
either a city or tribal government. Therefore, some currently
eligible communities without a city or tribal government would
become ineligible. However, these communities could become
eligible again by forming a second class city. In response to
Representative Saddler, Mr. Griffith guessed that there are
probably dozens of unincorporated cities or cities without a
tribal government. He noted that although most of those
communities haven't requested village safe water funds, a
handful of communities have.
8:18:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER expressed interest in which communities
would be impacted, particularly if any are in his district.
Representative Foster then related a situation in which the
village of Sheldon Point recently changed its name to Nunam
Iqua, and asked if that would be a problem.
MR. GRIFFITH replied no.
8:19:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER related her understanding that Version M
makes changes to move from an unincorporated community to a
village listed in 43. U.S.C. 1610 or 1615.
MR. GRIFFITH agreed with her understanding and offered to
provide a copy of that list.
8:20:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER surmised that the aforementioned is a bit
different than the sponsor's intent.
REPRESENTATIVE DICK, in response to Representative Foster's
earlier question, estimated that there may be eight villages in
Representative Foster's district that might benefit from this
proposed change. He then directed attention to a document in
the committee packet that specifies the villages that will be
eligible [for village safe water funding under Version M].
MR. GRIFFITH, referring to the list, pointed out that the second
class cities would remain eligible because the statute will
continue to have no population limit for second class cities.
8:21:41 AM
KATHIE WASSERMAN, Executive Director, Alaska Municipal League,
testified in favor of HB 183 as it addresses an issue that has
been in play for many years. Municipalities and communities
with all the attributes of "smaller ones" have been left out of
[the ability to qualify for village safe water funds] because of
their populations or differing status. With regard to
Representative Foster's earlier question, the village of Nunam
Iqua would be fine as it's still a municipality. Those
communities that have difficulties with elections likely have a
tribal government or a municipal government and would likely
[remain eligible for village safe water funds]. One of the
issues with programs that provide services or pockets of funds
to unincorporated communities with no tribal or municipal
government, is regarding to whom the check is given and held
responsible in terms of ensuring the project is completed.
Therefore, the language defining ["village" as the specified
organized communities] is appropriate since it requires the
residents in the community to assign someone as the head of the
community to at least receive the funds and be responsible to
the state in terms of the use of the funds.
8:23:32 AM
CHAIR MUNOZ requested that Ms. Wasserman explain the different
types of community organization.
MS. WASSERMAN explained that a home rule city is guided by a
charter, although it has ordinances. First class cities are
responsible for their education, have a planning and zoning
commission, and can levy a property tax. Second class cities
are usually much smaller and aren't required to provide as much
paperwork or responsibility in order to operate the city, save
one exception. She agreed with Ms. Peterson that it would be
difficult to change the status through regulations. In further
response to Chair Munoz, Ms. Wasserman said a second class city
has sales tax authority. Although a second class city may have
property tax authority, she didn't believe any levy it. A home
rule city may levy a property tax.
8:25:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER, referring to the document specifying new
communities eligible under Version M, inquired as to why St.
Mary's, a first class city with a population of 507, would be a
newly eligible community rather than a community that is already
qualified. He further inquired as to why St Mary's wasn't
already eligible.
MS. WASSERMAN responded that she would've also assumed St.
Mary's would've been eligible all along and wouldn't know why
they aren't.
8:26:38 AM
JASON MAYRAND, Mayor, City of Nenana, informed the committee
that the City of Nenana is a home rule municipality and has done
its utmost to be self-sufficient, reliable, and independent of
the state. He highlighted the common understanding of the state
that communities should keep their government as close to the
people as possible, which Nenana has done by incorporating and
having its own charter. Of all home rule municipalities
organized as home rule, Nenana is the smallest by far. This
legislation would allow replacement of 35 year old
infrastructure, the water and sewer system. He informed the
committee that the City of Nenana filed its application, the
grant documents were accepted, and the grants appropriated.
Shortly thereafter, Nenana's ineligibility was found. He
acknowledged that there is the possibility of going through the
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) project, Safe
Water and Clean Water funds for which the state provides 85
percent of the grant with a 15 percent match. The city utilized
the aforementioned back in 2000 for a short expansion project
which resulted in a debt of $520,000, the 15 percent.
Therefore, the City of Nenana is paying about $3,400 a month for
the next 20 years to repay that loan. Although that doesn't
seem like a lot, the municipality operates on about $600,000 per
year. With the increases in energy costs and health care costs
and payroll for city employees very little is left to do any
capital projects. Mayor Mayrand stressed that the City of
Nenana's water plant could fail any day. Although maintenance
for the water plant is high, the city has good operators. In
fact, the prime operator for the City of Nenana's sanitation
system was recently awarded operator of the year for the state.
He opined that the aforementioned illustrates that Nenana is
responsible and takes care of its systems. In conclusion, Mayor
Mayrand requested that HB 183 be passed this session as time is
of the essence.
8:30:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER inquired as to the project the City of
Nenana borrowed money from the state.
MAYOR MAYRAND specified that it was an extension project for
lines that provide sufficient capacity for the required
sprinkler system in the Nenana Student Living Center.
8:31:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked if the changes encompassed in
Section 1 of Version M would impact other programs or
opportunities.
8:32:22 AM
SCOTT RUBY, Director, Division of Community & Regional Affairs,
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development,
answered that he didn't believe the changes in HB 183 will
impact other programs because the definition is specific to the
eligibility of the Village Safe Water Program.
8:33:06 AM
CHAIR MUNOZ, upon determining no one else wished to testify,
closed public testimony.
8:33:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN moved that the committee adopt a
conceptual amendment to include an immediate effective date for
HB 183. There being no objection, it was adopted.
8:33:46 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired as to the statute for the
Village Safe Water grants.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER answered AS 46.07.010.
8:34:40 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 8:34 a.m. to 8:36 a.m.
8:36:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked if the adoption of the immediate
effective date to HB 183 will allow Nenana to process its grant
application and begin the project this construction season.
REPRESENTATIVE DICK replied yes.
8:37:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN moved to report the proposed CS for
HB 183, Version 27-LS0601\M, Bullard, 3/30/11, as amended, out
of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection,
CSHB 183(CRA) was reported from the House Community and Regional
Affairs Standing Committee.
The committee took a brief at-ease.
^Overview: Update on the Energy Efficiency Policy &
Recommendations by the Cold Climate Housing Research Center
Overview: Update on the Energy Efficiency Policy &
Recommendations by the Cold Climate Housing Research Center
8:39:33 AM
CHAIR MUNOZ announced that the final order of business would be
an update on the energy efficiency policy and recommendations by
the Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC).
8:39:46 AM
DR. JOHN DAVIES, Senior Researcher - Energy Policy, Cold Climate
Housing Research Center (CCHRC), began by relating that energy,
its cost and availability are crucial issues across the state,
but particularly in rural Alaska. Many communities are
struggling with the idea of whether they are even sustainable
under the current circumstances. One of the solutions is the
concerted effort to improve the efficiency with which energy is
developed. He encouraged the committee to consider energy
efficiency as a resource. Significant investments in energy
efficiency can achieve the effective provision of energy at
rates that are comparable to the provision of large power plants
or oil and gas fields. Dr. Davies reminded the committee that
CCHRC produced a report in 2008 that identified the energy
policy options for the state. Although a large amount [of the
recommendations in the report] have been adopted, much remains
to be done. A working group of energy experts met on March 2,
2011, to review and access the report. The [CCHRC] is engaged
in a long-term effort to expand the scope of the report to
include transportation and industrial uses. The plan is to
complete the report by December 2011.
8:43:06 AM
DR. DAVIES began his slide presentation entitled "Alaska Energy
Efficiency Policy Update of 2008 Report by CCHRC." He informed
the committee that the 2008 report was managed by CCHRC, but
funded by the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) and the Alaska
Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) and was staffed by
Information Insights. Referring to the slide entitled "Energy
Efficiency Edge," Dr. Davies related that energy efficiency is
colloquially referred to as "the low hanging fruit." Energy
efficiency is something that can be done now and it doesn't
require further study. Energy efficiency is receiving the same
output for less input and it largely relies on advancing
technologies. Furthermore, energy efficiency reduces dependency
on fossil fuels and often costs less than any alternative.
Moreover, a reduction in energy use reduces pollution and carbon
dioxide emissions. The 2008 report had 23 policy
recommendations in 9 categories, which are listed on slide 5.
The main drivers of the improvements were Senate Bill 297/330 in
2008. Those pieces of legislation expanded the weatherization
program and created the energy efficiency rebate program. A
significant amount of funds were appropriated for that effort.
In 2010 House Bill 306 established a state energy policy and
pointed out that supply and demand for fossil fuels and the
concern over climate change will impact the price of fossil
fuels, which is occurring now as the price of fuel has topped
$100 per barrel. The state's energy policy had several pieces
to it, including pieces focusing on energy efficiency, economic
development, research, education, workforce development, and
coordination of government functions. The other major piece of
legislation in 2010 was Senate Bill 220, which established the
following programs and funds: Alaska Energy Efficiency
Revolving Loan Fund, The Southeast Energy Fund, Emerging Energy
Technology Fund, Alternative Energy Conservation Revolving Loan
Fund, and Alaska Affordable Heating Program. The legislation
also addressed public facilities and building an energy use
database, public vehicles, and nuclear power. Moreover, Senate
Bill 220 discussed the need for outreach with public education
and provided tools for municipalities and agencies to help
deliver the services.
DR. DAVIES informed the committee that the present effort is
funded by AEA with a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy.
He reiterated that he wanted to review what has been done since
2008 and then expand that in the final scopes to include
transportation and industrial uses of energy. The 2008 report
was largely focused on the Railbelt because there was an
assumption that there had been a study addressing rural Alaska
just prior [to the 2008 report]. However, there was much in
that report addressing rural Alaska. Therefore, the current
desire is to expand it to be statewide and determine the real
issues and how to improve those in every area of the state. He
then moved on to slides 16-18 entitled "Score Sheet for 2008
Report," which assesses each recommendation. He reviewed the
various recommendations and percent complete of each. The
recommendations include state leadership, funding energy
efficiency, public education and outreach, baseline data,
existing residential buildings, new residential buildings,
existing commercial buildings, new commercial buildings, and
public buildings. With regard to the need for baseline data, he
remarked that it's surprising how little is known about how much
energy is used in the various types of buildings throughout the
state. Currently, there is a large effort coordinated by AEA
and AHFC to obtain the baseline data. Still, there's a need to
provide funding to keep the effort going. Dr. Davies pointed
out that even with the fairly significant funds put forth to
address the recommendations for existing residential buildings,
only 3 percent of the households in the state have been
addressed. As the unencumbered funds are expended, the
expectation is to reach 10 percent of the households in the
state. Therefore, 90 percent of the homes in Alaska are left.
With regard to new residential buildings, Dr. Davies opined that
residential buildings continue to be built to a standard that's
too low. The working group felt that the top priority is to
establish a statewide energy code. The same issues apply to
commercial buildings. Under Senate Bill 210 in 2010, there was
a significant effort to make the revolving loan fund available
for many public buildings. The goal was to address 25 percent
of the public buildings larger than 10,000 square feet. He
opined that the public buildings program is on the right track.
Dr. Davies said that although about 60 percent of the things set
out in 2008 have been accomplished, much remains to be done.
8:54:43 AM
DR. DAVIES, in response to Representative Saddler, reviewed the
key for the codes used in the spreadsheets on slides 16-18. He
related that "FFF" means that a funding program has been
established and "f" means funding is available with no specific
program.
8:57:43 AM
DR. DAVIES, referring to slide 19, reviewed the top five
recommendations from the 2011 working group, as follows:
1. Statewide Energy Efficiency Code
2. Sustainably fund Weatherization and Rebate Programs
3. Education - outreach, training, K-U courses
4. Utilities-based End-Use Electrical Efficiency
Programs, consider decoupling mechanisms
5. Legislate efficiency as a priority
DR. DAVIES noted that although the 2008 funding was remarkable
and substantial, it would only reach 10 percent of the houses
statewide. Therefore, he expressed the need for sustainable
funding to be available.
8:59:34 AM
CHAIR MUNOZ inquired as to how a statewide energy code would
work in communities without planning and zoning or local codes.
DR. DAVIES answered that a statewide energy code is most
effective through the financing of the buildings. In fact, de
facto in many places the banks control the standards. Still,
it's variable across the state. Therefore, CCHRC advocates the
state adopting a standard that anyone who seeks a loan would
have to use. However, at this point he didn't believe there is
a need to create a large inspection system, but rather allow the
existing mechanisms used by banks and other financing agencies.
9:01:10 AM
DR. DAVIES, with regard to recommendation 4, said that not much
has been done to address electrical use. Although there are a
variety of programs to address electrical efficiency, they are
usually delivered through utilities. For example, Golden Valley
Electric Association has a program in which an auditor comes out
to the consumer's house and makes specific suggestions as to how
to save energy. Dr. Davies opined that the Regulatory
Commission of Alaska (RCA) should be empowered to review these
programs. Currently, the RCA is beginning with an information
docket, which is a formal process to start assembling
information that relates to this topic. The RCA is careful not
to extend its authority beyond what the legislature has granted,
and therefore it'll be important for the legislature to provide
the RCA guidance. Dr. Davies then turned to the fifth
recommendation, which is to legislate efficiency as a priority.
For example, if a large amount of funds are being provided for a
power plant of some sort, the state, as a condition of receiving
the grant, should require the agency and the community involved
to consider what can be done to reduce the need. Therefore,
achieving a reduction in demand through efficiencies at the same
time additional energy is being provided. The aforementioned
would incentivize the efficiency effort and may mean that the
size of the project may not need to be as large. Many
communities find that achieving efficiencies can result in
reduced demand, and thus lengthen the life span of energy
facilities. He then encouraged the committee to review slides
22-26 and the recommendations it believe will save an enormous
amount of energy.
9:05:12 AM
DR. DAVIES, directing attention to slide 27 entitled "Energy
Efficiency as a Resource," explained that the graph uses the
Home Energy Rebate Program as an example. Approximately $300
million has been provided to the weatherization and rebate
programs. To date, about 10,000 homes have completed the
program and achieved an average energy savings of 30 percent.
The graph supposes that the [energy savings] achieved by the
aforementioned 10,000 homes is extended to all 280,000
households in the state. Since that couldn't be achieved all at
once, one must determine how fast it could be achieved. With
the existing programs, about $125 million per year is being
expended. If expenditures continue at that rate on residential
programs, in about five years there would be a savings of about
7 trillion British thermal units (Btus) annually. Therefore,
every year there would be 7 trillion Btus that were provided
that don't need to be provided. He likened it to building a
power plant to provide that energy, but it operates for free.
After 10 years, the residential energy savings amounts to about
15 trillion Btus. He opined that if the state put aside $4.5
billion and spent the earnings on residential energy efficiency,
after about 7 years the energy savings would be equivalent to
Anchorage's peak electrical load, about 380 megawatts a year.
Therefore, it would be equivalent to building a power plant that
provides all of Anchorage's electrical needs forever. After 12
years [of residential energy efficiency], the savings would be
equivalent to the entire natural gas consumption in Alaska,
about 18 trillion Btus. Dr. Davies emphasized that considering
energy efficiency as a resource is potentially a very large
resource.
9:09:43 AM
DR. DAVIES concluded by paraphrasing from slide 28 entitled
"Conclusions":
It is imperative that we use our present wealth to
develop an economy that is much less reliant on fossil
fuels to assure a healthy and sustainable future.
One of the most cost-effective resources we have is
energy efficiency and conservation.
The sustained energy and cost savings to businesses
and homeowners from EE [energy efficiency] will result
in reinvestment in Alaska's economy and stimulation of
substantial economic growth.
Bottom Line - Sustained investment in EE will foster a
more sustainable and vibrant economy.
DR. DAVIES pointed out that [sustained investment in energy
efficiency] will mean that some of Alaska's communities will
survive. Therefore, energy efficiency is crucial. He reminded
the committee that it will be provided with CCHRC's full report
once it has been finalized. He then expressed hope that a
variety of the recommendations in the report will be considered
and brought forth in legislation in the next few years.
9:11:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA related her understanding that the
information today was from homes in the Railbelt.
DR. DAVIES clarified that the data is drawn from 10,000 homes
throughout the state. The data has been analyzed in terms of
each of the 40 House districts in order to understand how
[programs] are applied across the state.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA emphasized that the state invests heavily
in communities that can't sustain the projects that the state
imposes on them. Therefore, large amounts of funds are wasted.
She then asked if there has been any discussion of performing an
analysis of what projects have been done per community or
region.
DR. DAVIES characterized that as a huge issue. He emphasized
that if the state is going to provide a facility in a village,
it's important to design it to be the right size for the need in
that particular village and to be as energy efficient as
possible in order to minimize the operating costs. The
aforementioned can mean the difference as to whether a village
can maintain a facility. The village, he opined, needs to be
involved such that a facility is utilized to maximize its
potential and energy efficiency. One realm of the policy of
recommendations is community and regional planning. Currently,
AEA has an effort addressing community and regional planning,
but it's mostly on the provision of power side. He opined that
AEA's effort should be expanded, as should the scope such that
it includes energy efficiency. The CCHRC has a sustainable
northern communities program that, upon the invitation of the
community, enters a community to help identify how to improve
the efficiency of housing design. All of the aforementioned and
more needs to done to ensure that communities are developed in a
sustainable fashion. Dr. Davies said that although an average
reduction of 30 percent is great, he knew of specific examples
in which a 90 percent reduction of energy usage has been
achieved. For example, a Fairbanks apartment complex pooled its
rebate money, about $60,000, to reduce the energy consumption of
the building by 90 percent. "We need to raise the bar, here,"
he said. If more is asked of the people who design and
construct buildings in the state, the amount of energy used and
the operating costs can be reduced substantially. However, this
does require a different mindset, one that's all encompassing.
9:18:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DICK directed attention to slide 4, which
mentions pollution and carbon dioxide reduction. He related his
understanding from a constituent that .2 percent of the carbon
dioxide production on the earth is anthropogenic while the rest
is from volcanoes, oceans, and decaying plants. He further
related that those in District 6 don't regard carbon dioxide
production as a major threat to the environment.
DR. DAVIES said that although he didn't want to debate that
issue, the production of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels is
debated globally. Furthermore, the availability and cost of
fuel is impacted by the debate. Whether [carbon dioxide
production] is an issue for a particular area or not is an issue
he would prefer to set aside in this discussion. Dr. Davies
pointed out that if the state seeks energy efficiency, it saves
funds and has the advantage of not being subject to the global
debate.
9:20:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DICK expressed interest in the small villages
surviving. However, the greatest inefficiencies in the villages
are those things that were imposed by the government.
Therefore, the first place to start is in the legislature and
state departments.
DR. DAVIES agreed and opined that it's important, as a matter of
policy, to review anything provided by the state. Furthermore,
such integrated/coordinated discussions allow what people in the
villages want and will accept to be known. For example, when
CCHRC was asked to work in Anatuvak Pass, they went there and
spent three days talking with its residents. That local
knowledge was combined with the technical information to develop
a proposal to discuss with the community.
REPRESENTATIVE DICK interjected that often villagers don't
consider the long-term consequences of projects the state
offers.
DR. DAVIES agreed, but emphasized that the aforementioned type
of [integrated/coordinated] process gets information out so that
people can consider it.
9:22:58 AM
CHAIR MUNOZ thanked Dr. Davies, and related that the committee
will continue to work with him on these priorities. She then
discussed a possible interim schedule for the committee.
9:24:52 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Community and Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 9:24 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 183 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HCRA 4/5/2011 8:00:00 AM |
HB 183 |
| CSHB 183 ( ).pdf |
HCRA 4/5/2011 8:00:00 AM |
HB 183 |
| CSHB 183 ( ) Changes.pdf |
HCRA 4/5/2011 8:00:00 AM |
HB 183 |
| Nenana Letter.pdf |
HCRA 4/5/2011 8:00:00 AM |
HB 183 |
| Population 500-1000.pdf |
HCRA 4/5/2011 8:00:00 AM SFIN 4/17/2011 10:00:00 AM |
HB 183 |
| ANCSA Reference.pdf |
HCRA 4/5/2011 8:00:00 AM |
HB 183 |