02/02/2004 03:30 PM Senate RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 2, 2004
3:30 p.m.
TAPE(S) 04-5
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Scott Ogan, Chair
Senator Thomas Wagoner, Vice Chair
Senator Fred Dyson
Senator Ralph Seekins
Senator Kim Elton
Senator Georgianna Lincoln
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Ben Stevens
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 10
Relating to restoration of riparian habitat that is vital to the
fisheries resources of the state.
HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 98
"An Act relating to sport fishing seasons and areas for persons
under 16 years of age."
MOVED HB 98 OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 196(RES)
"An Act relating to carbon sequestration; and providing for an
effective date."
HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HCR 10
SHORT TITLE: RESTORATION OF RIPARIAN HABITAT
REPRESENTATIVE(s): WOLF
02/28/03 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/28/03 (H) FSH, RES
04/04/03 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM CAPITOL 124
04/04/03 (H) Moved Out of Committee
04/04/03 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
04/07/03 (H) FSH RPT 4DP 1NR
04/07/03 (H) DP: OGG, WILSON, SAMUELS, SEATON;
04/07/03 (H) NR: GUTTENBERG
04/25/03 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
04/25/03 (H) -- Meeting Postponed to Mon. April 28 -
-
04/30/03 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
04/30/03 (H) MINING:INFRASTRUCTURE FUND/WATER
STANDARD
05/02/03 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
05/02/03 (H) -- Meeting Canceled --
05/05/03 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
05/05/03 (H) Moved Out of Committee
05/05/03 (H) MINUTE(RES)
05/06/03 (H) RES RPT 6DP 1NR
05/06/03 (H) DP: LYNN, GATTO, MORGAN, MASEK,
05/06/03 (H) HEINZE, FATE; NR: WOLF
05/08/03 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
05/08/03 (H) VERSION: HCR 10
05/09/03 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
05/09/03 (S) RES
05/14/03 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
05/14/03 (S) -- Meeting Canceled --
05/16/03 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
05/16/03 (S) Heard & Held
05/16/03 (S) MINUTE(RES)
01/21/04 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
01/21/04 (S) <Bill Hearing Postponed>
02/02/04 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HB 98
SHORT TITLE: SPORT FISHING SEASONS FOR YOUTH
REPRESENTATIVE(s): SAMUELS
02/14/03 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/14/03 (H) FSH, RES
03/28/03 (H) FSH RPT 6DP
03/28/03 (H) DP: OGG, HEINZE, WILSON, SAMUELS,
03/28/03 (H) GUTTENBERG, SEATON
03/28/03 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM CAPITOL 124
03/28/03 (H) Moved Out of Committee
03/28/03 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
04/09/03 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
04/09/03 (H) Moved Out of Committee
04/09/03 (H) MINUTE(RES)
04/10/03 (H) RES RPT 8DP
04/10/03 (H) DP: LYNN, GATTO, MORGAN, MASEK, WOLF,
04/10/03 (H) KERTTULA, GUTTENBERG, FATE
04/14/03 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/14/03 (H) VERSION: HB 98
04/15/03 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/15/03 (S) RES
02/02/04 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HB 196
SHORT TITLE: CARBON SEQUESTRATION
REPRESENTATIVE(s): BERKOWITZ
03/14/03 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/14/03 (H) RES, FIN
05/09/03 (H) RES AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
05/09/03 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
05/12/03 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
05/12/03 (H) Heard & Held
05/12/03 (H) MINUTE(RES)
05/14/03 (H) RES AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
05/14/03 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
05/16/03 (H) RES RPT CS(RES)FORTHCOMING 4DP 1DNP 2NR
05/16/03 (H) DP: HEINZE, GUTTENBERG, CISSNA, FATE;
05/16/03 (H) DNP: WOLF; NR: MORGAN, GATTO
05/16/03 (H) FIN REFERRAL WAIVED
05/16/03 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
05/16/03 (H) Moved CSHB 196(RES) Out of Committee
05/16/03 (H) MINUTE(RES)
05/16/03 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
05/16/03 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
05/17/03 (H) CS(RES) RECEIVED
05/17/03 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
05/17/03 (H) VERSION: CSHB 196(RES)
05/17/03 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
05/17/03 (S) RES
02/02/04 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
Representative Kelly Wolf
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HCR 10.
Representative Ralph Samuels
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 98.
Mr. Bob Bentz, Deputy Director
Division of Sport Fish
Department of Fish & Game
PO Box 25526
Juneau, AK 99802-5226
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports HB 98.
Representative Ethan Berkowitz
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 196.
Mr. Tim King, Director
Carbon Technology Transfer Center
State of Washington
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports HB 196.
Mr. Chris Maisch, Regional Forester
Division of Forestry
Department of Natural Resources
400 Willoughby Ave.
Juneau, AK 99801-1724
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HB 196.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 04-5, SIDE A
CHAIR SCOTT OGAN called the Senate Resources Standing Committee
meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Present were Senators Wagoner,
Dyson, Seekins, Elton and Chair Ogan. The first order of
business to come before the committee was HCR 10.
HCR 10-RESTORATION OF RIPARIAN HABITAT
CHAIR SCOTT OGAN announced HCR 10 to be up for consideration.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLY WOLF, sponsor, said HCR 10 basically
supports habitat throughout the state of Alaska. He explained:
Residents of Alaska are dependent on the fisheries
resource of the state for consumptive uses and a
source of income as well as enjoyment of fishing.
Riparian habitat is a vital key to maintaining the
fisheries as a healthy resource. State and federal
agencies are charged with keeping Alaska's waters
clean, fishable and drinkable.
The state benefits by partnering with non-profit
organizations. Local community involvement helps
promote the awareness, stewardship and public
education about this riparian habitat. Support from
private organizations and corporate funding sources
for restoration projects will help the state find new
sources to restore riparian habitat.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF said that Alaska, with a nearly $28 billion
Permanent Fund that owns stock in 2,000 American and 1,000
overseas corporations, is in a unique position to encourage
corporations to work with community groups and non-profit
organizations throughout Alaska to help protect one of Alaska's
greatest resources.
SENATOR GEORGIANNA LINCOLN arrived at 3:35 p.m.
SENATOR KIM ELTON pointed out that this resolution has a
resolve clause and asked why it is not addressed to anyone, like
the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), for instance.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF replied that getting state and federal
agencies to work together has always been a contentious
enterprise. The idea he is putting forward is that organizations
and communities can take it upon themselves to encourage
cooperation.
SENATOR ELTON retorted, "The way you encourage people is to let
people know what you've said and we're not doing that. I find it
odd."
CHAIR OGAN asked Senator Elton if he wanted to offer an
amendment.
SENATOR ELTON replied that at this point, he might inadvertently
leave out someone who should be notified.
CHAIR OGAN asked Representative Wolf if he would consider an
amendment. He indicated that he would and he would start by
including all federal and state agencies that are responsible
for resource management.
SENATOR DYSON supported Senator Elton's remarks and felt that
because of the tenor of the resolution, all the advocacy groups
should be included, too.
SENATOR WAGONER inserted that the Kenai River Center might have
a complete list of relevant groups.
SENATOR SEEKINS wanted to know the scope of what is considered
to be riparian habitat.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF replied:
Riparian habitat is an area that remains wet through
the normal tidal change and the issue of habitat...is
that that is affected by [indisc.] mean high and down
below. Watershed is from the top of the mountain to
ordinary high water.
SENATOR RALPH SEEKINS said the resolution doesn't refer to the
watershed, but the streams and the marshes that feed into the
streams.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF agreed.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked him for an example of a habitat
restoration practice that would be beneficial to anadromous fish
streams.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF replied that restoration techniques have
been around for a hundred years and vary from Indonesian coconut
fiber logs to straw logs and burlap soil bags, replanting of
compatible vegetation, willow wraps, sod layers and more.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if anything in habitat restoration
conflicts with other uses of the water column, i.e. rafting,
canoeing, boating, etc.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF replied that 555,000 angler days occur on
the Russian River annually and the U.S. Forest Service has built
elevated walkways to allow access to and along the river. The
most common restoration technology for simply directing traffic
is just planting willows along the walkways.
SENATOR SEEKINS said the City of Fairbanks just had a hearing on
a proposed Department of Natural Resources (DNR) management plan
for the Upper Chena River, which limited the number of boats and
restricted certain historical accesses to the river and other
recreational activities. He asked since the Upper Chena is an
anadromous fish stream, would his proposal interfere with
historical uses.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF replied no and explained that habitat
restoration is a method of restoring what has been damaged.
State agencies are very attuned to the fact that people live
there, too.
SENATOR SEEKINS noted that the meeting on the Upper Chena was
probably one of the most contentious and well-attended meetings
he had seen in years.
CHAIR OGAN said that HCR 10 would be held for further work.
3:55 - 3:58 - at ease
HB 98-SPORT FISHING SEASONS FOR YOUTH
CHAIR SCOTT OGAN announced HB 98 to be up for consideration.
REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SAMUELS, sponsor, said HB 98 would allow
the Board of Fisheries to open a fishery for youth [16 years and
under] only. Presently, the only way participation in a fishery
can be limited is to designate it for "seniors only." Last
session, a "take your son or daughter hunting day" was
established and this measure is similar to that. He noted that
Campbell Creek [an urban area in his Anchorage district] has a
very small run of King salmon that could be used for this
purpose. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) does not
want to open it up to just everyone. He had not heard of any
opposition to this bill and stated that ADF&G, the Board of
Fisheries, and the Alaska Outdoor Council support it. He pointed
out that HB 98 doesn't mandate anything, but simply makes the
proposal available.
SENATOR THOMAS WAGONER said he knows of an aquaculture
association that had to destroy a lot of red salmon smolt and he
suggested in the future putting smolts into some lakes without
outlets and restricting them to fishing by young people only.
SENATOR KIM ELTON pointed out that language on page 1 limits
fishing for youth to sport fishing, which is not exactly the
same language as that used for 60 and older, which says, "to
participate in sport, personal use or subsistence fishing." He
asked what the reasoning was behind that.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS explained that 16 year olds currently
don't need a fishing license and he didn't want to complicate
the issue. Furthermore, he was just aiming at a recreational
activity rather than filling the freezer.
SENATOR GEORGIANNA LINCOLN noted that some small communities in
her district would benefit from this program even though they
are not considered urban and clarified that this measure would
apply statewide.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS responded that it is open to anyone in
the state who wants to take a proposal to the Board of
Fisheries.
CHAIR OGAN tried to come up with a way someone could scam the
proposal.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS helped by saying the only thing he came
up with is that people might cheat on their age, but added that
they might do that now, anyway.
SENATOR SEEKINS relayed that some people have traditionally
hunted along a certain Alaskan river and can't do it now because
of the heavy traffic associated with youth hunters from places
as far away as Kodiak. He wondered if a family with four kids
could have any potential conflicts with traditional users that
might "boil over" with designated youth fishing.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS replied that unlike hunting, which can be
limited by the number of moose or caribou in a district, fishing
could be limited to a number of hours. If there were conflicts
or people taking advantage of the situation, the Board could
discontinue the program. He thought the advantages of the
program outweigh any possible downside, particularly with
fishing [as opposed to hunting].
SENATOR WAGONER noted that the term "snagging fish" does not
involve good sportsmanship and emphasized, "The last thing I
want to see is setting up a snagging area..."
MR. BOB BENTZ, Deputy Director, Division of Sport Fish,
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), supported HB 98 and said it
has a zero fiscal note. Kids under 16 years currently don't have
to buy a license and this bill would set up separate fishing
times and areas for kids only. It does not allow the board to
modify methods and means or alter existing bag and possession
limits. He assured the committee that the department would stop
any abuses that could arise by closing the area and submitting a
proposal to the Board of Fisheries to repeal that regulation.
CHAIR OGAN asked him where he would recommend the board create a
special opening or area.
MR. BENTZ replied that the department would wait for the public
to come forward with proposals to the board, which they have
done almost every year. From a conservation standpoint, he would
try to funnel the times and areas to stocked waters. He did not
envision using waters with wild stocks, especially where
conservation concerns already exist.
SENATOR ELTON asked what time period the board would consider
Interior fisheries issues in case the regulations need to be
repealed.
MR. BENTZ explained that normally the board takes up any one
area of the state every three years. However, an "Agenda Change
Request" could be filed by anyone to take up a specific issue
out of cycle and biological problems are high on their list of
exceptions. An area could be closed with an emergency order by
ADF&G, as well.
SENATOR ELTON asked how the department would deal with a
proposed regulation for an under-16 youth King salmon derby
because King salmon are on a quota system and are allocated, as
well, between the sport and commercial fisheries. In Southeast
Alaska, two out of every three King salmon that are caught on
sport gear are caught by non-residents. He also asked if the
catch is further divided by a derby situation, would the
department recommend that is not a good idea.
MR. BENTZ responded under that scenario, the department would
come up with its best estimate of what participation levels
might occur and what the harvest might be and present those
figures to the Board of Fisheries. The department would also
point out allocation impacts that could occur, but the board
would make the final decision.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if he would suggest an area for youth
fishing in an already heavily used area.
MR. BENTZ replied no, but that would be a criterion that the
board would identify immediately.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked him which areas submitted proposals with
concerns about crowded fishing conditions.
MR. BENTZ replied Ship Creek in downtown Anchorage [indisc.].
CHAIR OGAN closed discussion on HB 98.
SENATOR WAGONER moved to pass HB 98 from committee with
individual recommendations and a zero fiscal note. There were no
objections and it was so ordered.
4:20 - 4:22 - at ease
HB 196-CARBON SEQUESTRATION
CHAIR SCOTT OGAN announced HB 196 to be up for consideration.
REPRESENTATIVE ETHAN BERKOWITZ, sponsor of HB 196, said he
considers this to be a knowledge bill and explained that it
doesn't commit Alaska to do anything, but puts the state in the
position of asking questions, i.e., should we participate in a
carbon sequestration market and what resources could be brought
to bear. Carbon sequestration is an emerging market and one that
President Bush supports [incidentally]. This technology offers
great promise of significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions
- the spruce beetle kill on the Kenai Peninsula could be cut
down and replanted with productive forests, for example. BP
Alaska is already investigating the benefits of injecting carbon
dioxide deep into the earth to make production of heavy oil
easier [by creating a type of effervescence].
TAPE 04-5, SIDE B
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said that the Chicago Carbon Exchange
recently opened and is trading carbon at $1 per ton, but it can
range up to $40 per ton. At that price, Alaska could develop a
market of about $500 million.
CHAIR OGAN asked who comes up with the money.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ replied that the carbon is a commodity
and just like people purchase the oil and gas we produce, people
will pay to sequester their carbon here.
In essence, if they want to pollute somewhere else in
the world, they will pay for us to catch that carbon
here. The idea is that there be a net zero in terms of
carbon emissions.
CHAIR OGAN said that Alaska's trees already do that and asked if
Alaska is going to get money all of a sudden by having them as
assets.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ replied yes, if Alaska actively engages
in reforestation. Some trees are better at collecting carbon
than others and soil inventories are critical. Capturing carbon
and injecting it deep into the ground is another way of taking
advantage of the process. This is an emerging industry with a
lot of new technologies.
SENATOR THOMAS WAGONER said that one of his constituents was
actively reforesting spruce bark beetle kill areas on the Kenai
Peninsula, but told him that President Bush had cut the funding
for the program. He hoped that maybe carbon credits could help
replace the funding for reforestation there.
CHAIR OGAN said he still was confused and asked if U.S.
taxpayers were going to pay the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ replied that Tim King, Director, Carbon
Technology Transfer Center in Washington State, was better
qualified to answer that.
MR. TIM KING, Director, Carbon Technology Transfer Center,
Washington State, said he had been with the United States
Department of Agriculture for the past 26 years and his last
position was running a carbon technology transfer center in the
western United States. He maintains that office and has assisted
Hawaii, Alaska, Canada, to name a few, in putting together
carbon sequestration programs. He has helped power companies
that are building new electrical generation plants and [as part
of their permitting process] to find ways of offsetting
increased emissions of carbon dioxide without physically
installing equipment. Ten years ago, power companies would pay
about $2 per ton for reforestation projects and get carbon
credits for the trees that would otherwise not be planted. He
said further:
We've continued on with that and looked at forest
management, thinning, keeping healthy forests, doing
fuel load reduction projects, energy projects, turning
excess residue or biomass from the forest into energy.
All those create various types of carbon credits -
some - where you sequester the carbon start in the
trees or in the soils, some - where you prevent the
release of carbon by protecting the forest against the
forest fire or using that material to create renewable
energy sources that offset emissions from using fossil
fuels. So, that there's a whole group of carbon credit
interest out there. Currently the rest of the world is
dealing with carbon credits. Therefore, BP Amoco,
Shell, Texaco, Exxon [indisc.] the oil companies who
are international in nature have carbon credit
divisions within each one of their companies - they
are out looking and dealing in carbon credits already.
Here in the U.S. where we haven't taken an official
policy, it's kind of a hit and miss market - since we
don't have actual legislation that puts any mandates
to it.
CHAIR OGAN asked if anyone was paying anyone any money to do
this.
MR. KING replied that Washington State received $500,000 for
landowners to replant trees for $100 to $200 an acre. Seattle
City Light wants to purchase carbon offsets and the Oregon
Climate Trust was established by the legislature to purchase
carbon offsets for new fossil fuel electric production plants
and relicensing of old ones. Michael Walsh and Richard Sandor
with the Chicago Board of Trade created the Chicago Climate
Exchange which exchanges and markets carbon credits. It has
partners such as BP Amoco, a lot of the major electrical
companies and Ford. Sydney, London and Tokyo have carbon
markets. Carbon credits in Europe exchange for around $3 - $4
per credit. Credits traded through the Chicago Board, which no
one is verifying, registering or following up on are going for
about 95 cents per ton.
SENATOR WAGONER asked if wetlands could be filled in under this
program by reclaiming and reestablishing an equal number of
acres of wetland somewhere else.
MR. KING replied that is right; it's a mitigation program.
Montana has a program like that for its highway construction
that went through wetlands.
SENATOR WAGONER asked how the number of credits is established.
MR. KING replied:
A credit is one ton of CO. So, whether you emit a ton
2
of CO or sequester a ton of COthe Kenai Peninsula is
22,
basically white spruce and in that area, probably with
the rainfall and the types of forest, you probably
sequester one ton of carbon per acre per year, but
that goes on for the life of the tree. As long as it's
being managed, it continues to sequester that one ton
over and over again.
CHAIR OGAN quipped, "Maybe this program would get us to cut down
dead trees and get us to plant live ones."
MR. KING responded:
That's exactly what it would do...The opportunity is
that the dead trees are going to catch fire and burn.
There's probably 100 to 200 tons per acre of dead wood
material there. If it burns up, all that COgoes into
2
the air. If you could utilize that - use any of the
wood - turn it into buildings, house logs, whatever,
or turn it into energy - and that's one of the big
projects we're working on - is to gasify cellulous and
wood waste and turn it into natural gas or other bio-
fuels and bio-chemicals. That would be a carbon credit
for utilizing that material; there would be a carbon
credit for it not going up and being burned, there
would be a carbon credit for replanting the ground and
getting it back into trees.
4:37 p.m.
SENATOR RALPH SEEKINS asked if Alaska would be rewarded for
creating new methods of carbon sequestration or we be able to
sell carbon sequestration based on the current carbon exchange
through photosynthesis the state has now.
MR. KING replied:
If you've got hundreds of millions of acres of
stagnated overstocked trees; if you go in there and
thin those out and do [indisc.] reduction and get them
back to healthy and productive, that's where you get
your credits. It's change from a current condition to
management. So, it basically encourages the management
of a healthy sustainable forest.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ added that the northern villages might
be weaned off of power cost equalization by converting from
diesel based energy generation to using some of the local woods
for energy. That would allow Alaska to sell more carbon credits
and put some people to work along with active reforestation. He
explained a credit is gained for shifting from diesel-based
energy to wood based energy and if the newly replanted forest
absorbs more carbon than the old forest, even more credits are
gained.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if a debit is incurred anywhere in the
process due to harvest.
MR. KING explained that a debit could happen depending on the
type of forest management that is undertaken. If, for instance,
the forest management is extractive, there could be a deficit.
He believed that the idea of carbon credits would promote better
forest management, but it wouldn't preclude a person from clear
cutting and putting in a parking lot.
At this point in time, nobody has been assessed a fine
for losing [agriculture] or forest-based carbon, but I
see that could be in the future.
SENATOR SEEKINS followed up by asking how many new trees he
would have to plant to come up with $450 million.
MR. KING estimated that 200 tons of new carbons could be
sequestered on one acre of replanted trees at $800 per acre
using $4 per ton over a 20-year life span.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ added that it all depends on the price
of the carbon credit. If the credit goes to $40 per ton, less
acreage would be needed. "It's a potential resource that Alaska
has and the more we know about it, the better able we are to
make good quality decisions."
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if Alaska signs up for the program, would
the commitment be continuing or binding.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ replied, "With this bill, there are no
commitments that the state will take any action."
SENATOR ELTON asked if grant funds are available for research on
carbon sequestration.
MR. KING replied that the State of Washington is doing a study
on the potential of this industry and it received $3.5 million
from the Department of Energy and several oil and energy
companies to assess the potential in the state. Washington,
Oregon, California, Arizona and Alaska jointly received $1.6
million to do a cursory review of carbon sequestration, specific
to state owned lands.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said he has an amendment that
conditions an action from the Department of Natural Resources or
the Department of Environmental Conservation upon the receipt of
a grant either from the federal government or from private
sources.
CHAIR OGAN said he wanted to hold the bill over before any
amendments were discussed.
SENATOR SEEKINS said he wouldn't object to saying that Alaska is
looking into the market in the findings section, but he felt
uneasy adopting findings that he didn't know were based on any
scientific basis.
SENATOR ELTON said he was surprised that HB 196 went through the
other body without a fiscal note and that the ones this
committee received came in late. He wanted to know why one of
the fiscal notes indicated that one department's personnel costs
would be twice as much as the other and why only general fund
dollars were identified.
MR. CHRIS MAISCH, Division of Forestry, Department of Natural
Resources (DNR), said Senator Elton was referring to a fiscal
note from the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
that he hadn't seen. The fiscal note from DNR indicated that
implementation of the bill before them would cost $91,600 for
the first year and $82,600 for the second year to fully complete
the study as charged. There are potential federal funds and
private sources of funds available.
CHAIR OGAN asked Mr. Maisch to investigate what pools of money
would be available and report back to the committee.
SENATOR WAGONER asked Mr. Maisch if he had heard that President
Bush had not funded reforestation on the Kenai Peninsula.
MR. MAISCH replied that he would have to defer that answer to
the state forester but, as far as he knew, the Kenai
reforestation program was still being funded at past levels.
CHAIR OGAN asked if he agreed with the premise that Alaska could
get private sector money for credits to do a better job of
managing its forests. He also asked if mature slow-growing old
growth trees do not sequester as much carbon as vigorous young
growth.
MR. MAISCH answered that is correct.
CHAIR OGAN asked if logging off some old growth timber in
Southeast Alaska would be good for the environment - as far as
carbon sequestration goes.
MR. MAISCH replied that the total balance would have to be
evaluated. Large trees sequester a lot of carbon in solid wood.
So, part of the equation would be how that wood is utilized and
actively growing young stands of trees sequester carbon at a
much faster rate than old growth trees.
SENATOR FRED DYSON asked how he envisioned using the oceans to
sequester carbon in the future.
MR. MAISCH replied that he hadn't investigated what
opportunities lay in that arena. His focus was on terrestrial
applications of carbon sequestration.
SENATOR ELTON asked if he felt this was a project the state
should do assuming funding was in place.
MR. MAISCH replied that he only wanted to express the technical
aspects of the project, but not support it one way or the other.
SENATOR WAGONER asked if Alaskans who are generating carbon now
could somehow participate in sequestration.
MR. KING responded that in Washington the people who wanted to
see the project move forward put up $.5 million to assess 5,000
acres. Someone wanting to purchase carbon credits would probably
be interested in funding work in Alaska.
SENATOR WAGONER asked who exactly was participating in that
program.
MR. KING replied, just to show that carbon sequestration could
be done anywhere, he had landowners from every category
participating. Funding came from the Pacific Corporation, a
conglomerate of power producers and distributors headquartered
in Portland, Oregon, and Tenaska in Omaha, Nebraska.
MR. MAISCH added that about four years ago the Alaska
Reforestation Council published a report entitled Reforestation
Needs and Opportunities for Carbon Sequestration in Alaska and
at that time, the American Electric Power Company (AEPC)
proposed to plant 1,000 acres of spruce beetle kill land on the
Kenai Peninsula. Planting the 1,000 acres was estimated to cost
$1.70 per ton ($450 per acre including $100 per acre in
certification costs for the credit).
SENATOR WAGONER asked if credits came from their power
generation plant.
MR. MAISCH replied that AEPC wanted to offset the carbons
produced by its power generation plant by planting the trees.
MR. KING reminded the committee that carbon sequestration is a
global concept. A power generation plant in Japan or China could
get offset credits in Alaska. "If Alaska has more opportunities,
then people will come to you from anywhere to utilize those
opportunities."
SENATOR DYSON suggested that Representative Berkowitz consider
deleting "greenhouse" and insert "atmospheric gases" on page 1,
line 6. He also suggested adding a section that would address
the use of oceans for carbon sequestration to the findings in
section 2.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ responded that he would actually make
both those changes. He also urged swift action because the
carbon sequestration market could become saturated soon. "If we
wait until too late, our opportunities will diminish."
SENATOR SEEKINS noticed a press release dated July 1, 2001 from
President Bush saying that NASA would invest over $120 million
in the next three years in research on the natural carbon cycle
and asked if a report on that investment had ever been
published. He was concerned about being drawn into the
"predicting dire consequences" argument rather than sticking to
the market side of the equation.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ replied that a recent article in the
[indisc.] by the Secretary of Energy talked about how the United
States is leading the way in developing carbon sequestration
technologies. It's an on-going effort.
CHAIR OGAN thanked everyone for their testimony and held HB 196.
There being no further business to come before the committee, he
adjourned the meeting at 5:04 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|