Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, rolled out an energy report she said has been a year in the making in a speech to the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners in Washington, D.C., Monday.
Murkowski’s report, entitled “Energy 20/20: A Vision for American’s Energy Future,” calls for federal action to partially open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, invest in research and development for clean energy technologies, and speed up the permitting process for certain types of development, among other actions she said will improve the United States’ energy picture.
“The very simple premise in this report is that energy is good,” Murkowski said during a conference call with reporters after the speech. “It’s as simple as that.”
Murkowski, who is the ranking member of the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said she wants energy in the U.S. to be “abundant, affordable, clean, diverse and secure.”
“I am not one who falls into the category that what we need to do is simply increase the price of energy, and therefore it will decrease consumption, and that is how we will deal with emissions that lead to climate change,” said Murkowski. She noted already-high energy prices in Alaskan communities like Aniak, adding, “Alaska cannot afford to see increased energy prices as an answer to an energy proposal. It’s just not reasonable.”
For Alaskans, one of the most prominent elements of the report is an old hobbyhorse of Murkowski’s: opening up part of the “1002 area” of ANWR, a 1.5-million-acre coastal plain suspected to be rich in oil and gas deposits.
“Energy 20/20” calls for just 2,000 acres of the 1002 area to be opened up for oil and gas exploration and production.
“We’re not looking to open up the entire ANWR area,” Murkowski said. “We’re looking to a reduced footprint of about 2,000 acres within ANWR. In addition, I have continually called for a fencing-off of revenues from the proceeds from the leases and the royalties and the rents off of ANWR to be put into a renewable energy deployment fund.”
The 1002 area is also home to an Arctic ecosystem, which opponents of ANWR drilling have argued is both sensitive and valuable.
Murkowski said she sees no conflict between environmental concerns and limited ANWR oil production, noting of environmental standards that “in this day and age, you can’t get around them.”
“There is no escaping the environmental safeguards,” Murkowski said. “Nor would I want us to escape the environmental safeguards. We are the leader in environmental standards in so many different ways.”
Murkowski also said that she wants biomass energy and hydroelectric power, among others, to be included in a “technology-neutral” definition of renewable energy.
“Hydropower is one that I care deeply about. It’s a major source of energy for us in the state,” said Murkowski. “We need to move forward in recognizing hydropower as a renewable resource.”
The report also calls for Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve to be made fully available for oil and gas leasing, as well as “thoughtully developed with roads, bridges, and pipeline facilities.” It also suggests that research should be done into determining whether methane hydrate and other “unconventional” gas resources can serve as a practical fuel supply.
The U.S. Geological Survey has estimated that Alaska may contain as much as 600 trillion cubic feet of methane hydrate, a figure cited in Murkowski’s report.
“How we move forward to unlock this incredible resource could be a game-changer, truly,” Murkowski said.
“Energy 20/20” is a 115-page document, not including its endnotes.
Murkowski said during her speech that the report “is intended to be a source of ideas for discrete legislation that can attract, after vigorous debate, a strong base of support from a politically and geographically diverse group of members.”
In her post-speech conference call, Murkowski expanded on that.
“What I want to do is … generate a level of discussion. There’s going to be some points in this where members say, ‘Whoa, this is a non-starter for me. But I like this idea over here. What can we do?’” Murkowski said, adding, “I’m not looking to cobble together the Energy Act of 2013 based on this. I’m hopeful that we’ll be able to move pieces of this forward.”
A spokesman for Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said Monday that Wyden has not had a chance to review the full report yet.
“Senator Wyden’s goal is to draft legislation that can pass the Senate with bipartisan support, and to focus early this year on finding common ground on critical energy questions, rather than highlighting areas of disagreement,” the spokesman, Keith Chu, added via email. “He is looking forward to working with Senator Murkowski on that legislation when the time comes and to take her plan’s recommendations into account where it’s possible.”
• Contact reporter Mark D. Miller at 586-1821 or at mark.d.miller@juneauempire.com.





Comments (22)
Add commentThe country needs an energy plan
Perhaps this bill can get bipartisan support. Alaskan villages already pay the highest energy rates in America. Ironically, Alaska is contains 1/3 of the nations fossil fuels and renewable energy resources.
Her bill will go no where. So
Her bill will go no where. So long as the Senate, & White House is controlled by the haters of economic liberty, the American consumer will be held hostage to the foolishness of the hard-left.
Too bad...
Lisa doesn't seem to inspire..................
Interesting
The ADN reporting on this plan covered an entirely different aspect of it.
In their reporting, they covered Murkowski's offshore drilling proposal that the states where offshore energy production was occurring should be allowed a share of the royalties - she targeted 37.5%.
The arctic has massive amounts of oil. If Alaska received slice of those revenues, that would amount to a lot of income, as well as a lot of oil filling our pipeline. Then we wouldn't need to go with Parnell's giveaway plan. Could that be why the Empire failed to report on that?
Wyden, of Oregon, is also in a coastal state so Oregon could potentially benefit from offshore production. He might support that measure.
Its about time...
Our president (community organizer) is so oblivious to our economic and energy needs we need to act fast. Gun control has consumed all our administration's time. We need to get moving fast as high energy prices and shutting down all our public lands has really placed huge financial burdens on the citizens of this state. Particulary those in the remote regions. Here too, just paid $750 for a few months of heating oil.
Words To Drive By?
"A household that cuts its usage of gasoline is certainly conserving energy, but if the members of that household are spending more time taking alternative travel, or simply taking fewer trips, then they also may be accomplishing less in their lives. Americans are and should be free to pursue happiness, after all."
from Murkowski's "Energy 20/20"
Who is going to pay for all
Who is going to pay for all the storms caused by the increased use of fossil fuels?
The public pays. The financial burden the costs for these mega storms are on the citizens of the United States. All the while the oil and gas industry will make billions more in profits.
Increased production does not lower the price at the pump. Price of oil and gas is controled by world market speculation. You don't see Lisa trying to put a cramp on that do ya.
Pretty picture on the cover but no deal Lisa.
....
Your doing a great job lisa.
And when are they going to
And when are they going to look at the arid regions of America? Yes we burn fossil fuels to heat our homes, but Az is using massive energy to cool their homes. Why don't they have solar panels on every home? Germany, a very tiny country campared to the US, or even some states, out generates us via roof top solar many times over. AZ, TX, NM, ...There are many locations that they could offset a huge amount of their electrical needs with rooftop solar. Give them real, noticeable tax credits for it. We havent even touched on wind and geothermal yet...
an old hobbyhorse?
an old hobbyhorse? No its more like you are a trojan horse Lisa.
KP
Not disagreeing with you, but a key difference is that Germany lacks cheap cheap cheap natural gas and huge coal deposits, not to mention our hydro. If they had our natural resources, I don't think they'd be behaving all that differently.
Just one hurricane "Hurricane
Just one hurricane "Hurricane Sandy" cost tax payers over $60.4 billion
There are no reductions to greenhouse gases in Lisa's plan
ramp up fossil fuel production and forgo action on climate change is a terrible idea
Drill baby drill. where have
Drill baby drill. where have I heard that before? zzzzzzz.......
seriously
legislation proposed by the conservatives who contently hate every regulation is as trustworthy as a sieve for bailing out your skiff.
I doubt the "drill baby drill" attitude care about more than higher profits and not lower energy cost. We have had pretty significant increase in oil and gas production across the country. Production is up, profits are up and energy prices have not gone down.
profits privatized and
profits privatized and costs of damage socialized = capitalism
Lat - why?
Why do you think Germany would spend any cash at all on other energy resources when solar is free, after purchasing the panels? I know I wouldn't. Cheap, cheap, cheap is still more than free.
same old
Lisa is coming out with the same old crap, rehashed, repackaged with a fancy new graphics cover. This is not moving this country or Alaska forward, just setting up the same old industries for more profits with the well being of the citizens no where to be found. Alaska has an opportunity to surpass all the rest of this country in alternative energy technologies. We have more geothermal, more hydro potential and more wind potential than the rest of the U.S. combined...not on solar mind you, but a push toward becoming the leader in this country in the alternative energy field while weaning ourselves off oil is thinking on a statesmanship level, not on a shill for corporations level.
We can still sell our oil to those other idiots out in the world.
Guess we should read the plan.
OR, we could just read the Empire and ADN.
The complete plan
Perhaps some posters might be interested to read portions of the 121 page plan. It appears balanced on renewable and fossil fuels development with its focus on energy independence and security
http://thehill.com/images/stories/news/2013/02_february/energy-2020.pdf
The Empire might consider posting a link on bills and resolutions when writing articles on federal and state legislation as a service for their readers?
One of the biggest threats to
One of the biggest threats to our national security is climate change we don't have the time to take a walk in the park balanced approach.
What we need is plan to reduce CO2 emissions - today, this summer not tomorrow.
Methane (CH4) is the second most prevalent greenhouse gas emitted in the United States from human activities
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/co2.html
the complete plan
just got done reading the complete plan...while it does touch on other forms of energy the main focus is fossil fuels, more than 70% (my estimation) refers to oil, gas or coal, with nothing about how reducing subsidies for the same and moving them to other energy forms might foster faster and more innovative technologies.
kara
Back atcha.
Why do you buy power from AELP when you could make a one-time purchase of solar panels and then all of your electricity would be free? After all, we're on about the same latitude as Stuttgart, and it's pretty dreary in the winter there, so if it works for them, certainly it'll work for us.