Alaska’s abundances require access, say witnesses
The Last Frontier State could use some of the federal funds expected to flow from the Trump administration’s $1 trillion infrastructure plan, the details of which should be released by year’s end, according to U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Elaine Chao.
Chao didn’t provide particulars about funding for specific projects during a DOT event March 30, but she said that the forthcoming infrastructure package will propose the modernization of the U.S. electrical grid, as well as roads, bridges, airports and water systems, and maybe broadband and veterans’ hospitals.
Chao also said that incentives will be offered for public-private partnerships to fund the $1 trillion investment over 10 years.
That was music to the ears of several Alaskans who were in Washington, D.C., the same day about 2.5 miles away from the DOT event testifying before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources about needed infrastructure improvements in Alaska.
“I think that we have an opportunity in this new administration. I think we have good reason to be optimistic,” said U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), chairman of the committee, who invited the witnesses to help her explain to her colleagues why Alaska should receive federal funding for higher-cost infrastructure projects compared to those in the lower 48 states.
The witnesses may not have felt the same enthusiasm considering that in addition to Murkowski, the only other congressional member present during the March 30 hearing was the committee’s ranking member U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), and even she didn’t stay for the entire hearing.
Murkowski assured the panel members that although senators weren’t there to personally question each of them, their comments and written statements would go into the record “and will help with legislation.”
Start with maps
From the time the United States purchased Alaska from Russia 150 years ago, the state has been a major resource producer of minerals, renewable resources, oil, natural gas and coal, among others.
“And there’s plenty more where that came from,” said Murkowski, referring to the state’s massive amounts of still-untapped reserves.
But there’s a problem: those resources are hard to get to. In fact, inadequate, and at times non-existent, access to federal lands and waters threatens the state’s economic future, witnesses said.
Specifically, there’s a need to first invest in serious mapping upgrades to find where the potential supplies of new or under-utilized resources are located or where infrastructure is necessary in order to access those resources, said Steven Masterman, state geologist and director of the division of geological and geophysical surveys in the Alaska Department of Natural Resources.
Masterman said that the state is underexplored and existing maps are outdated and incomplete.
“Unfortunately, Alaska is incompletely mapped for any geologic dataset at a useable scale for mineral or infrastructure development. If fact, we lag the nation in almost every kind of mapping,” he said.
Comparatively, the rest of the United States is roughly 50 percent mapped, while Alaska is only 16 percent mapped. Fixing that would be particularly important to reversing the country’s reliance on the foreign import of minerals, he said.
In 2016, Masterman said the United States imported 100 percent of 20 mineral commodities and was dependent on foreign sources for over 50 percent of its usage for an additional 51 mineral commodities.
“At a time when domestic infrastructure investment is a national priority, the United States is becoming even more dependent on foreign supplies of minerals rather than producing domestic supplies. With federal infrastructure support, Alaska’s storehouse of mineral wealth could be key to reversing this trend,” he said.
Build roads
Additionally, Alaska’s limited road system impacts the cost of transportation of goods to its communities and presents challenges to the exploration and development of untapped resources, witnesses said.
“Alaska has very few roads. While the state has 17 percent of the nation’s land mass, it has less than 1 percent of the nation’s total lane-miles of road,” said Masterman, pointing to the state’s difficulties recovering not only its tremendous amounts of minerals, but also hydrocarbon resources.
It’s a problem shared by rural communities, said Bob Potrzuski, deputy mayor of City of Sitka, Alaska, and Della Trumble, business manager for the King Cove Native Corporation, who testified about needing federal support to improve access in and out of their towns, as well as to advance energy sources and reduce costs for residents.
Trumble, for instance, said the nearest health and medical services to her small town, population less than 1,000, are in Anchorage and are accessible only by plane. On a return flight one day, she watched one crash with her daughter onboard. “We need a road,” she said.
Dredge deep ports
Joy Baker, port director in Nome, Alaska, said boat, plane and dog sled are the only ways to get to Nome, which is home to about 3,800 residents and is strategically situated on the south-facing shore of the Bering Sea near the southern end of the Seward Peninsula, just south of the Arctic Circle.
Despite the overall importance of ports to the state, the 2017 American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) gave Alaska’s ports a report card grade of D for infrastructure conditions and needs, Baker testified.
“Continued investment of state and federal funds in the development and expansion of Alaska’s ports is critically necessary to allow for the development of Alaska’s energy resources. This will not only help improve our economy, but will also lead to lower energy costs across the state, especially in rural and remote areas,” said Baker, adding that the average Nome resident spends $8,500 a year to heat a home.
Of course the national significance of Nome can’t be understated. According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 90 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil, 1,670 trillion cubic feet of technically recoverable natural gas, and 44 billion barrels of technically recoverable natural gas liquids, which account for 22 percent of the undiscovered, technically recoverable resources in the world, several of the witnesses said.
Dock occupancy in Nome reached 92 percent in July 2016, largely due to more foreign fuel tankers, research vessels, domestic and foreign government vessels, gravel and cargo, Baker said.
She also noted that while the increased maritime activity brings much-needed economic opportunity to the region, it also creates risks without the infrastructure to support the needs of the larger vessels. For example, shore-based waste reception facilities are needed along the Arctic coastline in case of spills.
In its report card, the ASCE added that the lack of a deep-water Arctic port is also a barrier to “carry[ing] out national strategic goals in the region.”
Find the funds
There is an “unsettling lack of basic infrastructure in the Arctic region,” agreed Kara Moriarty, president and CEO of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, and rectifying the situation could help the country achieve energy independence.
“Put bluntly, the North Slope in Alaska is in need of basic infrastructure projects that can and will meet the most basic needs of Alaskan communities. Of course, this will lead to tangential benefits to industry, but candidly, it is the uncertainty, costs, and delays associated with the federal regulatory rubric that undermines the role that the North Slope can play in meeting our nation’s energy needs,” she said.
Moriarty suggested that efforts should be focused on identifying infrastructure projects that have multiple benefits to multiple stakeholders.
Working together with public and private stakeholders, for instance, infrastructure corridors could be identified and federal agencies could work together to not only provide funding for potential projects, but could assist projects through permitting and regulatory cooperation, she said.
Additionally, better information on infrastructure would serve to aid industry, but also local communities, and other aspects of the public and private sector. Similarly, a strategically placed road or common carrier pipeline could benefit multiple oil and gas operators while also offering benefits to local communities and people, Moriarty said.
Murkowski remained upbeat when she adjourned the hearing. Though witnesses likely wondered about the Trump administration’s budget blueprint for FY 2018.
Yes, President Donald Trump has emphasized that one of his top priorities is modernizing the country’s outdated infrastructure. However, DOT would be streamlined to focus on performing “vital federal safety oversight functions and investing in nationally and regionally significant transportation infrastructure projects,” the blueprint says.
Overall, the president’s FY 2018 budget blueprint requests $16.2 billion for DOT’s discretionary budget, a $2.4 billion or 13 percent decrease from the 2017 annualized continuing resolution (CR) level.
And regarding the blueprint’s reference to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) funding, the administration proposes that the EPA would primarily support states and tribes in their “important role protecting air, land, and water in the 21st Century.”
The FY 2018 budget blueprint requests $5.7 billion for the EPA, a decrease of $2.6 billion, or 31 percent, from the 2017 annualized CR level. The proposal would eliminate more than 50 EPA programs and lower priority and poorly performing programs and grants would not be funded, nor would duplicative functions that could be absorbed into other programs or that are state and local responsibilities.
This would include infrastructure assistance to Alaska native villages, according to the budget blueprint.
