Renewable Energy
Dear Editor: Securing Sitka’s renewable energy future – one scenario:
Did you know that Fairbanks proposed and voted on a local fuel tax in 2002? Did you know that Anchorage took this a step further and recently passed a 10 cents/gallon gasoline and diesel fuel tax? Neither did I. The Anchorage tax has been in effect over a year (since early 2018). And, no news of protests at gas stations, nor mass exodus’ of residents moving south because of this tax. In fact it’s hardly been in the news at all- it seems that this tax has been a ho-hum event in the lives of most Anchorageans.
Perhaps this is because, even with their gas tax, they are paying considerably less at the pump then they did in 2008 and 2012 when gas prices spiked. The Anchorage tax is expected to generate $14 million annually (Anchorage Daily News), which is being returned to its residents in the form of property tax relief.
Should Sitka consider enacting a similar tax? Assuming that Sitka’s per capita fuel consumption is about the same, a similar measure would generate more than $400,000 per year. What if, instead of a property tax rebate, Sitka returned these funds to its residents in the form of renewable energy incentives? What could be done with $4-5 million over 10 years in Sitka?
One scenario could involve providing approximately 400 “grants” per year of approximately $1,000 each to incentivize electric vehicle purchases and electrically powered home heat pumps (two of the largest energy use categories for most households). Over 10 years this could lead to 2,000 additional residential heat pumps and 2,000 additional electric vehicles in Sitka (in addition to those who would be purchasing these without a subsidy, and in addition to those who already have EVs and heat pumps).
Many nations and communities throughout the world are setting a date of 2030 to be carbon-free (or nearly so). Even today, Denmark is 100% renewable on a stormy day in the North Sea (thanks to their off-shore wind turbines). Great Britain is practically coal-free (thanks to their use of wood pellets). And the central German Government has pledged to accelerate their goal for being carbon free. Smaller communities, such as Gussing, Austria, are not only completely renewable, but are net exporters of green energy. Other cities, nations, and agencies around the world are pledging a course of action to be carbon-free (www.go100 percent.org).
A gasoline and diesel fuel tax for Sitka is not an unrealistic “pie-in-the sky” proposition. It is something that is very doable, very realistic, and could take Sitka a long way towards being an entirely renewable community (with essentially no carbon emissions). It can and should be considered.
In Sitka we are lucky – we would not need to invest in any more expensive energy infrastructure as many communities around the world are now having to do – it’s already taken care of (the once in a lifetime, $150 million Blue Lake expansion). All that would be needed are the proper incentives to use this resource (i.e. our energy legacy) wisely. Do we want to squander any available energy surpluses for big screen TVs and the like? Or do we want to use it to secure our renewable energy future, helping with the purchase of electric vehicles and heat pumps?
A modest liquid fuels tax would be a legal, painless, and perhaps almost unnoticeable measure for most Sitkans. And it would be nothing new for Alaska. If successful, Sitka could be one of the first essentially carbon-free communities of its size by 2030. It can and should be considered.
Dave Nicholls, Sitka
