Legislature(2025 - 2026)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
01/30/2025 01:30 PM Senate SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ARCTIC AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation(s): Touring the Electric North Alaska Center for Energy and Power University of Alaska Fairbanks | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ARCTIC AFFAIRS
January 30, 2025
1:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Cathy Giessel, Co-Chair
Senator Gary Stevens, Vice Chair
Senator Scott Kawasaki
Senator Bill Wielechowski
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Donald Olson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION(S): TOURING THE ELECTRIC NORTH, ALASKA CENTER FOR
ENERGY AND POWER, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
GWEN HOLDMANN, Chief Scientist
Research, Innovation, and Industry Partnerships
Alaska Center for Energy and Power
University of Alaska Fairbanks
POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a presentation titled "Touring the
Electric North."
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:30:30 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL called the meeting to order at [1:30 p.m.] Present
at the call to order were Senators Wielechowski, Stevens, and
Chair Giessel. Senator Kawasaki arrived thereafter.
^PRESENTATION(S): TOURING THE ELECTRIC NORTH ALASKA CENTER FOR
ENERGY AND POWER UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS
PRESENTATION(S): TOURING THE ELECTRIC NORTH
ALASKA CENTER FOR ENERGY AND POWER
UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS
1:31:18 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced a presentation from the Alaska Center
for Energy and Power titled "Touring the Electric North." She
introduced Ms. Holdmann and invited her to begin the
presentation.
1:32:06 PM
GWEN HOLDMANN, Chief Scientist, Research, Innovation and
Industry Partnerships, Alaska Center for Energy and Power,
University of Alaska Fairbanks, advanced to slide 2 and gave a
brief overview of the Electric North:
[Original punctuation provided.]
The "Electric North"
The Electric North refers to regions north of the
interconnected continental grids of North America and
Eurasia.
These areas are electrically served by a combination
of regional grids, small distribution grids, or
isolated microgrids.
MS. HOLDMANN said that energy type and cost vary greatly among
the different grid types within the Electric North, as do
utility management and subsidization among the various nations.
She opined that there is potential for Alaska to learn from -
and share knowledge with - other countries in the Electric
North.
1:34:17 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 3, containing a map of the
Electric North showing settlements by connection type. She
described the various grids and noted similarities and
differences. She noted the various energy resources, including
hydroelectric and geothermal. She commented on the use of
renewable energy resources in remote Alaskan communities. She
briefly discussed the use of imported fuels across the Arctic.
She noted that all areas of the Arctic utilize subsidies to
provide power to remote locations; however, the management of
those subsidies differs greatly across the region.
1:36:19 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how Alaska's prices compare to other
countries - particularly in rural Alaska - and what the State of
Alaska can do to lower costs. He also asked Ms. Holdmann to
discuss Iceland's electric grid.
MS. HOLDMANN replied that she would be happy to touch on Iceland
during the presentation. In terms of energy, she explained that
Alaska's delivered cost of energy is higher than most places in
the Arctic. She surmised that it is the highest, as Alaska has
the lowest subsidy rate. She referenced the Power Cost
Equalization (PCE) program and pointed out that this is
significantly less and is structured differently than other
areas in the Arctic. She noted that the cost for generating
power from diesel fuel in Alaska is comparable to other arctic
locations. She briefly discussed Alaska's generation efficiency
compared to other arctic locations and the potential for
improvements to diesel-based power generation. She said that an
upcoming slide would address the benefit of adding renewable
energy sources.
1:37:46 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI joined the meeting.
1:38:19 PM
SENATOR STEVENS commented that the geography of the Arctic is
fascinating. He described Russia's large geographical connection
to the Arctic and contrasted this to Alaska's smaller
connection. He briefly discussed the difficulty of traveling the
Northwest Passage and opined that viewing the map would help
others to understand the challenges Alaska faces.
MS. HOLDMANN agreed and said she could provide printed map
posters to those who would like one.
1:39:05 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 4, containing a map of
electricity generation by source. She explained that if the
Arctic was defined as an energy region by the International
Energy Agency, it would be the global leader in the use of
renewable energy for power generation (in terms of proportion):
[Original punctuation provided.]
The Arctic region is the global leader in renewable
energy development
Primary energy source for electric power generation:
• Finland 39 percent (biomass)
• Sweden 48 percent (hydropower, biomass)
• Norway 99 percent (hydropower)
• Iceland 100 percent (geothermal, hydropower)
• Greenland 70 percent (hydropower)
1:40:39 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked what percentage of Alaska's energy
comes from hydropower and how other Arctic countries fund
hydropower.
MS. HOLDMANN replied that hydropower makes up 20 percent of
Alaska's statewide energy portfolio. She noted that this is
inequitably distributed. She explained that hydropower projects
are expensive and offered an example of a large dam in Iceland
to illustrate how a large hydropower project might be funded
using contracts with heavy industries (e.g. aluminum smelters).
1:42:34 PM
SENATOR STEVENS said that he had seen the smelters in Iceland
and shared his understanding that the aluminum is imported. He
surmised that the smelters operate in Iceland because of
Iceland's low energy cost.
MS. HOLDMANN briefly discussed the low energy cost in Iceland.
She explained that Iceland has been able to build out renewables
at-scale. In addition, Iceland sells significantly more energy
per capita than Alaska's Railbelt, which lowers the cost for all
users. She explained the role of long-term industry contracts in
lowering costs and pointed out that once the industry contracts
expire, they will be renegotiated at a higher price.
1:43:52 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 5 and discussed renewable energy
production in Norway:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Arctic countries are clean technology leaders (example
H2/Ammonia in Berlevag, Norway)
Berlevag hydrogen production from wind; planned 100 MW
green ammonia facility in using renewable power from
Varanger Kraft's adjacent wind farm on Raggovidda.
MS. HOLDMANN provided a brief overview of Norway's energy
production and challenges. She noted that Norway is weakly
connected into the continental grid and therefore has issues
with stranded resources. She emphasized the importance of a
strong transmission network to transport renewable energy. She
explained that Norway is utilizing stranded wind resources to
power green ammonia production. She noted this is one example of
how renewable energy might be used to meet needs that are not
traditionally covered by electric power. She shared a personal
anecdote to illustrate how Norway has disallowed diesel near its
fjords and how industry is responding to - and is supportive of
- that approach.
1:46:07 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 6 and discussed renewable energy
in Greenland:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Arctic countries are clean technology leaders Waste to
Energy (Nuuk and Sisimiut, Greenland)
Incinerate municipal waste generated locally and
imported from surrounding communities and use it for
space heating.
1:47:09 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL surmised that Nuuk must be a consolidated
community and asked how the heating reaches the community.
MS. HOLDMANN explained that European cities often utilize
district heating systems. She briefly explained that Nuuk is
geographically spread out and briefly described the heating
system, noting that it is upgraded with additional energy
sources over time. She shared an anecdote to illustrate how
countries (e.g. Denmark) feed geothermal energy directly into
the district heating system.
1:49:40 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL asked a clarifying question. She noted that
Utqiagvik has a utilidor system and asked how the heat is
transmitted to the homes in Nuuk.
MS. HOLDMANN replied that it is typically hot water heat. She
briefly described the process of calculating energy usage in a
particular home.
1:50:16 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL wondered about the mechanics of the systems and
asked if the pipes are buried or above ground.
MS. HOLDMANN replied that there are many designs for district
heating systems. Some are fully above grown, some are below
ground, and some are partially above ground. She noted that the
utilidor systems in Fairbanks are below ground. She commented
that the coal plants in Fairbanks are often thought of as "heat
plants" with electricity as a byproduct. She explained that in
Russia, the utilidor systems are often above ground due to
permafrost issues. She shared her understanding that other areas
also utilize above ground utilidor systems.
1:51:28 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 7 and explained that remote
communities are largely diesel dependent. Slide 7 contains an
image of a diesel power module (foreground) and a shuttered coal
plant (background) in Longyearbyen, Svalbard (Norway). Slide 7
highlights that this is the furthest north permanently inhabited
settlement in the world. She explained that Svalbard has
transitioned from locally sourced coal to imported diesel fuel.
She highlighted the flexibility of diesel fuel with respect to
integration with renewable energy sources (e.g. solar and wind).
1:52:56 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 8 and discussed the high energy
costs that diesel-based communities face. Slide 8 contains a bar
chart contrasting the estimated electricity expenditures by
Power Cost Equalization Program (PCE) eligibility with those
expenditures that are not PCE eligible. Slide 8 also contains a
chart comparing the residential electricity prices for
Fairbanks, Anchorage, Juneau, and PCE-eligible communities. She
stated that one-third of kilowatt hours are covered by PCE;
however, this does not mean that one-third of the cost is
covered in each community. She explained that PCE covers roughly
15 percent of the cost for generating power in those
communities. She pointed out that Alaska has the lowest level of
energy price support of all arctic regions.
1:54:53 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 9 and, highlighting Greenland,
noted the different strategies and policies used to address the
high costs of electric power in the Arctic North:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Varied Price Support for Rural Residents example
from Greenland:
• 70 percent hydro from 5 projects
• "unified rate" is 24 cents/kWh for residents
• Fisheries get a 58.5 percent discount on the
local electricity generation costs; equates to
rates of 10-24 cents/kWh
• Alaska and Greenland have inverse structures for
subsidies Greenland prioritizes critical
industries, Alaska prioritizes residential
consumers.
1:56:45 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 10 and highlighted the strategies
and policies used to address the high cost of electric power in
Canada. She noted the high level of subsidies and how this
impacts costs:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Varied Price Support for Rural Residents example
from Canada:
• Canada's utilities are mostly "Crown
Corporations." Most use postage stamp rates of
some sort.
• Subsidies vary by territory; in Nunavut, for
example, low-income residents - who make up
approximately 35 percent of the populationpay
only $0.06 per kilowatt-hour (kWh) for
electricity.
MS. HOLDMANN noted that Canada's high subsidies mean there is
less incentive to develop renewables at both the utility and
consumer level. To illustrate this, she briefly contrasted wind
energy projects in Alaska and with wind-energy projects in
Canada.
1:58:20 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL noted that Ontario, Canada has nuclear power and
wondered about the cost. She asked whether nuclear power is also
subsidized in Canada.
MS. HOLDMANN replied that any nuclear power in Canada is
associated with the Canadian connected grid. She provided a
brief overview of Canada's nuclear power and noted that Canada's
nuclear power resources have been paid off and therefore
represent some of the lowest costs on the grid. She clarified
that there is no nuclear energy in the remote parts of Northern
Canada.
1:59:16 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 11, containing a chart of the PCE
base rate and its components. She explained that the PCE base is
the average between Fairbanks, Anchorage, and Juneau. She
pointed out that Fairbanks rates greatly exceed the PCE base.
Slide 11 states that the PCE base rate is "not the effective
rate paid by customers, but the two should be close if eligible
costs are close to the residential rate."
2:00:11 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL asked whether achieving postage stamp rates on the
Railbelt transmission system would lower the cost of energy in
Fairbanks.
MS. HOLDMANN replied that the postage stamp rate only applies to
the transmission portion of the cost, which is a small piece of
the overall cost. She opined that Fairbanks is more reliant on
moving power across an interconnected grid and suggested that a
unified transmission rate could result in an increased cost of
energy for Fairbanks. She surmised that Fairbanks would benefit
from the ability to move cheaper power to Fairbanks. She
emphasized the importance of continued construction and Railbelt
infrastructure modernization.
2:01:41 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI opined that the Railbelt needs a large
scale (e.g. 500 megawatt or more) hydropower plant. He noted
that one opposing argument is that this exceeds the current
Railbelt energy usage. He asked whether other countries have
seen an increase in industry after building similar large-scale
renewable projects - or if it results in excess electricity that
is wasted.
MS. HOLDMANN replied that the Pacific Northwest PNW is an
excellent example of large hydroelectric projects bringing
industry to the region. She noted that those projects guaranteed
a postage stamp rate for transmission, to ensure that industry
was spread out across the region. She offered Iceland as an
additional example of successfully building projects at scale,
with industry.
2:03:47 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 12 and discussed Alaska's
statewide energy burden. Slide 12 contains a map of Alaska color
coded to illustrate the ratio of average energy costs to median
income (household level). She explained that, according to the
federal government, energy costs of over six percent of the
household income are considered a "high energy burden." She
stated that the average household percentage in Fairbanks is ten
percent. She noted a few glitches in the infographic and
indicated planned updates for the data presented on slide 12.
She pointed out that, in some remote areas, average energy costs
are 16 percent of the household income. She emphasized that this
is high for the country and for the Arctic region.
2:06:04 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 13 and explained that the number
of Alaskans for whom energy costs are unaffordable is
increasing. Slide 13 contains a bar chart illustrating the
results of an Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP) Alaska
affordability survey done between 2023 and 2024. She briefly
described the survey, which helps illuminate areas of confusion.
She then described a series of town hall meetings that provide
additional information to the public about those issues. She
highlighted a striking increase in the number of respondents in
Fairbanks who feel their energy costs are unaffordable. She
noted the relationship between the data on slides 12 and 13,
which illustrate both the users' perception (slide 13) and the
actual energy burden (slide 12).
2:08:14 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI shared his understanding that, according to
slide 12, Matsu has the lowest cost energy burden and asked if
this is correct.
MS. HOLDMANN replied that the cost energy burden is lowest for
Anchorage area, Matsu, and Southeast. She noted that Southeast
is complicated, as there are areas that have a higher cost
energy burden. She pointed out that the North Slope also has a
relatively low energy burden due to North Slope Borough
subsidies.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI observed that, according to slide 13, Mat-
Su residents feel they have the highest cost energy burden. He
contrasted this with the data on Slide 12 and asked Ms. Holdmann
to comment on the difference between the perception that Mat-Su
residents have high energy costs versus the actual energy
burden.
MS. HOLDMANN said that she was somewhat surprised to see the
perception of Mat-Su residents and welcomed Senator
Wielechowski's thoughts on the issue. She added that, with the
exception of Icelanders, people tend to complain about energy
prices. She suggested that the perception of Mat-Su residents
could be related to a concern about gas shortages, which means
users are paying closer attention to their energy costs. She
noted that Southeast (data not included on slide 13) was also
trending higher.
2:10:13 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 14 and briefly discussed the
Arctic Remote Energy Networks Academy (ARENA):
[Original punctuation provided.]
Alaska leadership in renewables
• Alaska has by far the most renewably powered
microgrids of any country in the Arctic.
• Alaska utilities and communities are sharing
their expertise in this area (example: Arctic
Remote Energy Networks Academy).
2:11:37 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 15 and highlighted the reasons
why Alaska utilizes renewables. She briefly commented on
Alaska's disaggregated utility structure, which leads utilities
to experiment with and develop renewable energy sources. She
contrasted this with other Arctic locations which often have a
single utility per region. She explained that the Renewable
Energy Fund (REF) was a key catalyst for renewables in the
state. She offered a brief history of REF. She explained that
this program provides funding for projects that do not qualify
for federal funding due to the uncommon nature of those projects
and the associated risk assessment.
MS. HOLDMAN continued to discuss slide 15. She emphasized that
REF funding enabled utilities to demonstrate that renewable
energy projects can be done effectively and managed long-term.
She highlighted the impact REF has had on projects in rural
Alaska. She referenced a chart on slide 15 showing the total
operational non-hydro renewable energy projects in PCE-eligible
communities alongside annual REF appropriations. She noted that,
while REF funding has decreased, the number of installed
projects has remained the same. She explained that the number of
installed projects in rural Alaska is no longer solely depended
on REF funding, as the projects have proven successful.
2:14:05 PM
MS. HOLDMANN advanced to slide 16 and explained that renewables
are resulting in lower cost power for users. Slide 16 contains a
bar graph depicting cumulative savings from AVEC wind power
communities (excluding Bethel and Selawik) (2006-2023). She
emphasized that the data on the slide is limited. She explained
that wind energy has resulted in significant savings for non-PCE
eligible customer classes, along with a significant savings to
the PCE endowment. She briefly described the process for savings
related to PCE customer classes.
2:15:38 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL asked about geothermal energy. She recalled Ms.
Holdmann's work on the geothermal project at Chena Hot Springs.
She asked why there is not more geothermal development in
Alaska.
MS. HOLDMANN replied that geothermal development and drilling
for oil face some of the same challenges. She explained that the
upfront exploration costs and associated risk are high. She used
Iceland's geothermal drilling fund as an example to illustrate
potential risk reduction. She contrasted geothermal risk with
wind and solar, which can be measured at the earth's surface.
2:17:36 PM
SENATOR STEVENS asked about the project at Naknek and King
Salmon. He recalled a large investment but noted that the
project stalled.
MS. HOLDMANN expressed uncertainty about the project. She
recalled that experts questioned the decision to drill the well
without taking prior, cost-effective steps to determine whether
the location held any resource. The utility made an investment
of roughly $30 million to drill a well in a location that
ultimately did not contain the resource. She commented that that
this is a good example of a utility making innovative choices.
She explained that utilities in rural Alaska are not rate
regulated, which makes these types of innovative decisions
possible. She emphasized that the lack of rate regulation can
also result in positive innovation and offered a project in
Cordova as one example. She briefly described how those projects
are approved by the utility board without requiring approval
from the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA). She surmised
that RCA would not have approve the aforementioned project
expenditures at Naknek without a guaranteed benefit. She
emphasized that, while this lack of rate regulation sometimes
results in failed projects, there are many successful examples.
2:20:18 PM
SENATOR STEVENS commented that the experimental project was
highly expensive and has had a lasting impact on the community.
He opined that the project's failure holds a lesson about the
need for caution and the importance of completing the smaller,
investigatory steps prior to drilling a well.
MS. HOLDMANN agreed. She expressed pride in the fact that REF
did not fund that project. She pointed out that REF funding
requires expert approval, which results in successful projects.
2:21:23 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI observed that there have been many examples
of successful renewable energy projects around the state. He
offered Kodiak as one example of wind energy, along with
hydroelectric projects in Southeast. He opined that renewable
energy in Alaska has not yet reached the tipping point. He asked
for ideas and policy suggestions that would help spur renewable
energy use in the state. He opined that other countries have
benefitted tremendously from renewable energy. He noted that
some oil dependent countries are also switching to renewables
and offered examples. He surmised that more policy may be needed
for Alaska to step further into this field and repeated his
request for suggestions.
MS. HOLDMANN replied that, to reach that point, renewables must
be at scale. She said Alaska's hydro projects are one example of
this. She emphasized that Alaska's disaggregated system makes it
difficult to create projects at scale. She highlighted the
benefits of innovation and experimentation, which rural
communities are doing. She noted discussions to potentially
uncouple heating from electric power on the Railbelt grid and
opined that the better choice would be to begin heating with
electric power. She explained that this would be a long-term
goal that requires moving through complex middle ground. She
then discussed the difficulties related to cooperation amongst
the utilities on the Railbelt, where it is possible to scale
projects. She argued that this issue needs to be addressed.
2:24:00 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI opined that the utilities generally want to
find the best solution for their users; however, he agreed that
the disaggregation of utilities is a challenge. He wondered if a
state policy such as renewable portfolio standards be helpful.
He acknowledged that the utilities would likely resist a policy
of this type. He asked for other recommendations if this type of
policy would not be helpful.
MS. HOLDMANN shared her perspective that the Railbelt utilities
are not opposed to adding renewables, especially if that change
is cost-effective for utility members. She explained that the
issue lies with the transmission backbone, which needs to be
strong enough to move the energy at scale. She offered examples
to illustrate this. Currently, smaller projects are piecemealed
out to individual utilities and the utilities are not
cooperating with projects at scale. She opined that the first
step would be to put in the physical infrastructure that would
enable the at-scale movement of power between locations. She
further opined that a structure that creates a reward rather
than a punishment is possible and would be more effective.
2:26:11 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI noted that funding is limited and asked where
Alaska should invest its money for the highest return on
investment.
MS. HOLDMANN acknowledged that funding from the State of Alaska
is limited and costs are ultimately paid by Alaskans. She
emphasized the importance of seeing a return on investment that
is related to structural progress and results in a long-term
benefit. She agreed with Senator Wielechowski's comment that the
utilities are looking after their members' best interest and
opined that this is what they should be doing. However, she
pointed out that the system is not set up to force utilities to
collaborate. She stated that infrastructure improvements are
needed to support Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships
(GRIP) transmission projects. She wondered about the types of
requests that would be possible with legislative support for
those projects.
2:28:22 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI recalled recent debate about the small modular
reactor at Eielson Airforce Base. He asked Ms. Holdmann to
comment on small modular reactors across the state.
MS. HOLDMANN acknowledged that she is biased with respect to
nuclear power, as she has been working on nuclear energy since
2008-2009. She noted that this research began at the
legislature's request. There have been many advancements since
that time. She opined that one challenge is that society in
general tends to see the current energy source as the future
energy source. Currently, there is a focus on gas for future
energy; however, she opined that Alaska has the potential to
become a leader in nuclear energy. She further opined that this
could extend beyond microreactors to a size that could power the
Railbelt grid. She suggested considering alternatives and
options for augmenting proposed solutions. She asserted that
nuclear energy will be part of the worldwide energy future. She
said the reactors are different from what was used previously
and have improved safety features. She opined that nuclear
energy is worth considering but acknowledged that it is
difficult to find a path forward.
2:30:28 PM
SENATOR STEVENS commented that Alaska has a blend of isolated,
rural communities and those that are more centrally located and
connected to the Railbelt. He briefly discussed a project in
Kodiak that was made possible through funding from the State of
Alaska. He said that Kodiak was able to utilize both wind and
hydro power and explained how each supports the other. He
pointed out that 80 percent of the population is on the Railbelt
and opined that addressing the Railbelt is the next big project.
He asked for a definition of "disaggregated."
2:31:36 PM
MS. HOLDMANN replied that the state does not have an
interconnected grid and is therefore disaggregated in terms of
physical infrastructure. The term "disaggregation also applies
to the ways utilities are owned and operated. She commented that
this is very unusual. She said that, in Alaska, the average
number of customers per utility is 2500 and commented that this
is a very small number. She noted that some cooperatives are
pooling smaller communities together. She said she has been
researching the value gained from coordinating across multiple
communities. She shared that, in one instance, there is a
benefit of nearly $4 million per year.
MS. HOLDMANN opined that pooling resources across communities
would provide power and savings; however, Alaska has not done
this effectively. She opined that this is a strength and a
weakness of the system. She offered Kodiak as one example of an
organization that has worked over many years to create a
successful system.
2:34:02 PM
SENATOR STEVENS expressed his appreciation and pride for
Kodiak's successes. He wondered how to reach the larger
population. He pointed out that Kodiak cannot send power to the
Railbelt. He commented that island communities are isolated and
noted past mistakes. He opined that the lesson is to practice
caution when choosing projects and make good financial
decisions.
MS. HOLDMANN agreed but noted the role of risk and reward in
these processes. She also noted that delaying projects for too
long can result in diminishing returns.
2:35:09 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL turned the discussion to geothermal energy. She
recalled that Denmark injected water into soil and derived
sufficient heat to be of benefit. She asked whether Alaska could
replicate this process.
2:35:29 PM
MS. HOLDMANN shared her understanding that the Naknek project
attempted to replicate this. She explained that geology is one
major consideration. She shared her understanding about the
Denmark project and offered details to illustrate the process.
She opined that it is a brilliant strategy; however, Alaska does
not have the types of geologic formations that would make that
process successful. She pointed out that Denmark used oil and
gas discovery mapping to determine the depths for that project.
She briefly described the process as she understands it.
2:37:09 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL turned the discussion to clean hydrogen, which
Norway has produced. She noted a potential policy that would
permit a large wind project to generate hydrogen, which would be
turned into ammonia for export. She surmised that, given its
location, this project could power a small transmission grid.
She asked if Ms. Holdmann is familiar with that project and
whether she has any suggestions.
MS. HOLDMANN replied that interconnecting communities and
building projects at scale is a strategy that AVEC is pursuing.
She said AVEC is building wind at scale (e.g. 900 Kw wind
turbines) and sending the energy to multiple communities. She
opined that this is a smart strategy. However, the clean
hydrogen project is different, as it is a mega-renewables
project. She stated that she does not have the knowledge to
speak about this in depth. However, she commented that Alaska
has previously worked out long-term arrangements with a
renewables vendor that ultimately do not turn into developed
projects. She briefly discussed her work with carbon capture and
sequestration (CCS) and the structure of those agreements. She
suggested developing similar agreements that would restrict
timelines and impose penalties. She opined that this would
protect the State of Alaska. She stated that there many good
examples of large-scale projects that have successfully
connected communities.
CHAIR GIESSEL opined that those recommendations are wise. She
noted that Cordova Electric will be presenting at a future
meeting.
2:41:08 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
CHAIR GIESSEL adjourned the Senate Special Committee on Arctic
Affairs meeting at 2:41 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 1.30.25 Alaska Center for Energy, Gwen Holdmann, Arctic Affairs Presentation.pdf |
SAAF 1/30/2025 1:30:00 PM |