As the Department of Interior prepares to present its Proposed Final Five-Year Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing, of critical interest to the proposal’s stakeholders are the opportunities and risks of developing Alaska’s offshore resources.
With the possibility of new lease sales brought into consideration, an important question must be raised: What are the economic, social, and environmental implications of new offshore development for the state of Alaska and the lower 48?
Hosted by Roll Call and in partnership with CQ, the policy briefing will bring together lawmakers from both sides of the conversation, native Alaskan communities, and other policy stakeholders to discuss the opportunities of and risks to the Arctic offshore.
“To forsake Arctic oil and gas would be to forsake America’s energy security in a world that is using more energy, not less. It will leave us at an economic and an environmental disadvantage. It will benefit the likes of nations like Iran and Saudi Arabia. It will result in fewer jobs created here at home, fewer dollars staying within our economy, less affordable energy for our families and businesses, and less influence for our nation on the world stage.”
“There is a clear need to allow the production of our Arctic resources to go forward.”
“The vast majority of Alaskans support OCS development.”
“To a large degree, the future of Mayor Hopson’s community and many other remote Alaskan communities depends on an offshore leasing program that’s now being prepared by the Department of the Interior.”
“For decades now, we have worked to ensure that development does not impact our subsistence traditions, the commercial fishing, and the all-important pristine allure of our state. And we are very good at the development that we do.”
“In order to support that…military operations in Alaska, you have to have private investment. You can’t do that with military alone.”
“The idea of the Permanent Fund, and the only way you can fund the government going forward, is the oil industry. The oil industry continues, to this day, to put money into the Permanent Fund so that generations downstream can still provide for the state government.”
The oil and gas industry “really puts Alaskans to work. As a mother of four, I’m really concerned about that because where are my children going to go to work? And you know I think the comments that others have received – the millions of comments from probably outside of Alaska – they’re not living our daily reality.”
“I know some communities have started to look into investing in renewable energy […]. It hasn’t progressed, obviously, to the level of the oil and gas industry. It’d be decades, I believe, before that would happen.”
“Just to reiterate, I’m not an Alaskan in case people didn’t know that. I work for Alaska Wilderness League, we are a national organization. We do have staff in Alaska. I’m not trying to say that today we are going to move beyond oil and gas development. We know that lots of people are employed by the oil and gas industry. We would like to see that happen over time. These leases, in particular, after the history that we’ve had over the last few years offshore, we don’t feel that it’s responsible to allow oil companies to continue to develop the offshore in the near term. The oil will be there in the future and we really feel that the country should look at what we’re facing with climate change, and make decisions on oil and gas development based on that.
Visit us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ArcticEnergyUS #OffshoreArctic
Wednesday, June 29, 2016 from 8:30 AM to 10:45 AM (EDT)
The Liaison Capitol Hill – 415 New Jersey Avenue Northwest, Washington, DC 20001 – View Map