Benefits and Costs to Rural Alaska Households from a Carbon Fee and Dividend Program - Final Report

This paper analyzes the benefits and costs of a carbon fee‐and‐dividend (CFD) policy to individual rural Alaska households. The three study area regions are the Bethel Census Area, the Kusilvak Census Area, and the Northwest Arctic Borough. These three regions have the state’s highest fuel prices and very cold climates. The CFD policy consists of two elements.  The first is a fee of $15 per metric ton of CO2 beginning in 2016 and increasing by$10 per ton in each subsequent year. The second is the complete return of all fees to households in the form of dividends, which are estimated to equal $300 for each adult plus$150 for each child (up to two). The annual dividends would increase in future years commensurate with the nationwide total amount of fees. Baseline conditions.  The study area has a total population of about 32,000 people, many of whom live in large households with low cash income. Fuel prices averaged $6.62 per gallon in January 2015.Citizens' Climate Education CorporationSummary / Introduction / Dividends to households / Carbon fees paid by households / Discussion / References / Appendix A. Residential electricity use per househol

Socioeconomic Impacts of Potential Wishbone Hill Coal Mining Activity

The purpose of this study is to assess some of the significant socioeconomic effects of potential coal mining activity at Wishbone Hill. The analysis scenario assumes a 16-year period of startup and mine production using two known deposits that are currently permitted by the State of Alaska for mineral exploration. “Mine Area 1” would be mined during years 2-7 and “Mine Area 2” would be mined during years 8-16. Mining would only take place at one of these areas during any given time. We considered four kinds of effects: Jobs and income, fiscal impacts, property values, and traffic.Matanuska - Susitna Borough Economic Development DepartmentIntroduction / Coal Mining Scenario / Projected Jobs and Income / Fiscal Impacts / Property Values / Traffic / References / Appendix: Notes on Methodolog

Incarceration Rates and Single Motherhood

Traditionally, the family unit consists of a mother, a father, and one or more children. There are many instances throughout the United States where this traditional family structure is not found. One of these situations, the single motherhood situation, occurs when a father figure is absent and the mother has to provide for her children on her own. Could the lack of a father figure in a child’s life cause them to be more likely to break the law and become incarcerated? Is there a causation between a state’s single motherhood rate and their incarceration rate, or are the two merely just correlated? Do a state’s urban percentage, political affiliation, and poverty rate have an impact on incarceration rates? These are the questions that this research study seeks to address

Economic Importance of Sportfishing in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough

We have estimated the economic benefits of sport fishing activity occurring within the Matanuska-Susitna (Mat-Su) Borough, using data from year 2007. Our estimates are based on the recent study entitled, Economic Impacts and Contributions of Sportfishing in Alaska, 2007. 2 It contains estimates of angler spending patterns within three regions: Southcentral, Interior, and Southeast. We also used year 2007 data from the ADFG annual Statewide Harvest Survey (SWHS).3 These data allow us to allocate economic benefits to the Mat-Su Borough.Matanuska-Susitna Borough Ecnomic Development DepartmentSummary / Introduction / Methods / Results / Reference

Benefits of the Southcentral Rail Extension to the Municipality of Anchorage

The proposed Southcentral rail extension to Port MacKenzie is likely to generate significant economic benefits for the residents of Anchorage. These benefits are due to a combination of reduced transport costs, the ability to ship bulk commodities over shorter distances, and economical access to industrial land. We considered and analyzed these benefits under a set of assumptions about job creation, transportation costs, land use considerations and future mineral development. Our major findings include the following: Jobs • Port MacKenzie. The rail extension will generate new jobs for Anchorage workers by stimulating industrial development and jobs at Port MacKenzie. Under a base case scenario with a rail extension and ferry service, Anchorage residents would gain 730 average annual jobs and $50 million of annual income during the period of 2013 -2017 from industrial development at Port MacKenzie. Hundreds more jobs would be gained after 2017. The rail extension will play an important role in this process. For example, it will allow coal exports through the port as early as 2013, generating more than 100 jobs. • New Mines. Major new mines shipping concentrate via the rail extension would generate thousands of new jobs, and a significant fraction of these jobs would be held by Anchorage residents. Our detailed analysis of the potential employment from five specific mining projects indicates that more than 2,000 average annual jobs would be created in Anchorage or held by Anchorage residents once the mines are fully developed. Most of these jobs would be in mining and in professional sectors that pay good wages. Also, during initial mine development, many of the jobs would be in construction and fabrication. • Rail Construction. The construction of the rail extension would generate up to 3,000 total jobs, and ongoing operations would generate up to 150 total jobs. It is likely that many of these jobs would be held by Anchorage residents. • State Revenues. State mining taxes generated from new mines will boost the Anchorage economy. Estimated tax revenues and royalties would grow steadily, reaching$267 million per year by 2040. A large share of these potential tax revenues, roughly proportional to Anchorage’s share of state population, would likely flow into the Anchorage economy, sustaining hundreds of direct jobs and reducing property tax burdens that would otherwise stifle private sector job creation. Regional Competitiveness • New Economic Opportunities. Port MacKenzie and the rail extension, operating together, are a significant new strategic asset for the entire regional economy. This infrastructure will create expanded opportunities for mineral, timber, and energy resource development, and the export of bulk commodities by rail through Port MacKenzie constitutes a new economic sector for the Southcentral regional economy. As the region’s commercial and financial hub, Anchorage will gain jobs and income from all of this activity. • More Efficient Land Use. The rail extension allows for higher-valued use of land in Anchorage. The rail extension will allow for railroad-dependent industrial development to take place at Port MacKenzie. This development would allow limited existing industrialzoned land throughout Anchorage to be used for other, higher-value uses such as commercial development, while still meeting the regional economy’s need for industrial land. Fiscal Benefits • New State Revenues. As noted above, revenues to the State of Alaska from new resource development would grow steadily, reaching $267 million per year by 2040. These revenues will reduce the need for other taxes, stimulating capital formation and job creation by the private sector. • Higher Local Tax Base. Local governments will also see higher tax revenues from a higher-valued property tax base. The stimulated new development will increase the tax base and reduce the need to raise taxes on homeowners or existing businesses. Other Benefits • Port of Anchorage. The industrial and mineral development stimulated by the rail extension to Port MacKenzie will likely increase both the volume and the value of cargo going through the Port of Anchorage. For example, if large mines are developed, the goods and equipment used by the mines for development and operations will flow through Anchorage. • Rail Shipping Costs. The unit cost of shipping on the Alaska Railroad is likely to fall as fixed costs of roadbed maintenance and administration are spread over a higher volume of shipments.Matanuska - Susitna Borough Economic Development DepartmentIntroduction / Two Municipalities, One Regional Economy / Overview of Potential Benefits to Anchorage from the Rail Extension / Benefits from Construction and Operation of the Rail Extension / Benefits from Industrial Development at Port MacKenzie / Benefits from Employment of Anchorage Residents due to Railroad-Dependent Mineral Development / Appendix: Notes on Methodolog

True Cost of Electricity in Rural Alaska and True Cost of Bulk Fuel in Rural Alaska

In this analysis, we compile data from several sources to estimate the true cost of electricity in rural Alaska. The true cost includes expenses listed on the utilities’ books plus costs paid by other entities in the form of explicit and implicit subsidies. Our focus is on the nonfuel costs of power. Fuel costs are quite volatile and are tracked carefully by AEA on a monthly basis. The concept of “Fuel cost” typically includes the price paid at the point of delivery into a bulk storage tank. We do include here as contributed resources the estimated subsidies to the fuel delivery system for electricity due to provision of bulk fuel storage by, for example, the Denali Commission.Prepared for Alaska Affordable Energy Strategy Neil McMahon, Project ManagerTrue Cost of Electricity in Rural Alaska / Introduction / Data Sources / Data Issues and Caveats / Data Compilation Notes / Non-Booked Contributed Resources / Analysis / Results / Caveats on Interpretation of Results / Appendix to True Cost of Electric Service in Rural Alaska / True Cost of Bulk Fuel in Rural Alaska / Methodology / Bulk Fuel Program Cost Compilation and Cost Allocations / Results / Appendix to True Cost of Bulk Fuel in Rural Alask

Benefits and Costs to Rural Alaska Households from a Carbon Fee and Dividend Program

This paper analyzes the benefits and costs of a carbon fee‐and‐dividend (CFD) policy to individual rural Alaska households. The three study area regions are the Bethel Census Area, the Wade Hampton Census Area, and the Northwest Arctic Borough. These three regions have the state’s highest fuel prices and very cold climates. The CFD policy consists of two elements.  The first is a fee of $15 per metric ton of CO2 beginning in 2016 and increasing by$10 per ton in each subsequent year. The second is the complete return of all fees to households in the form of dividends, which are estimated to equal $300 for each adult plus$150 for each child (up to two). The annual dividends would increase in future years commensurate with the total amount of fees.Citizens' Climate Education CorporationSummary / Introduction / Dividends to households / Carbon fees paid by households / Discussion / Reference

Fuel Costs, Migration, and Community Viability

ISER researchers compiled and reviewed existing studies and data sources relating to the economic and social viability of remote rural Alaska communities. We particularly looked for possible linkages between high fuel costs and migration. Our review indicates the following: (1) migration from smaller places toward larger places is an ongoing phenomenon that is more noticeable when birth rates drop; (2) there is no systematic empirical evidence that fuel prices, by themselves, have been a definitive cause of migration; (3) the pursuit of economic and educational opportunities appears to be a predominant cause of migration; (4) however, currently available survey data are not sufficient to definitively determine other reasons for migration, which could include concerns about public safety and/or alcohol abuse; 5) most of the survey data pre-date the latest rapid increase (2006-2008) in fuel prices. We suggest several ways that better data could be collected on community viability and the reasons for migration.First Alaskans Institute. Alaska Native Policy Center.Introduction / Methods / Findings / Significant data collection opportunities / Conclusions / References / Data Sources Use

UAA Inventory: Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Transportation

As a signatory of the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment, UAA has agreed to conduct an inventory of its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This inventory serves as a baseline against which to measure the effectiveness of GHG emissions reduction projects. To fulfill the Commitment UAA agreed to conduct an inventory of its Scope 1 and 2 emissions, as well as some Scope 3 emissions. In addition to signing the Presidents Climate Commitment, UAA signed the Talloires Declaration in April 2004. The Talloires Declaration is a statement of principles and practices for using higher education to promote sustainability. Scope 1 emissions are defined as direct GHG emissions occurring from sources that are owned or controlled by the institution. Scope 2 emissions are indirect emissions generated in the production of energy purchased by the institution. Scope 3 emissions are indirect emissions that are the consequence of the activities of the institution, but occur from sources not owned or controlled by the institution. Pursuant to the Commitment, this study estimates the levels of two types of Scope 3 GHG emissions – commuting by students and employees, and university-funded air travel. Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions are being estimated in a separate study. Two models were developed and used: a UAA commuter model and a UAA air travel model.Office of Sustainability, University of Alaska Anchorag

Potential Improvements to National Park Service Visitor Surveys and Money Generation Modeling in Alaska

This study presents options for improving the use of the Money Generation Model in National Park Service (NPS) land units in Alaska. The Money Generation Model (MGM) is used nationwide to model economic impacts of visitation to public lands, including National Park Units. This analysis identifies potential improvements to the application of the MGM model and visitor survey processes for use in Alaska. Improvements include changes to visitor intercept methods to improve statistical reliability of the sampling process and a more representative sample, changes in the survey instrument to more accurately reflect Alaska visitor travel and expenditure patterns, and better identification of the economic sphere of influence of Alaska national park units.National Park Service, Alaska Director's Office. National Park Conservation Association, Alaska Office.Abstract / Introduction / Purpose of Analysis / Potential Improvements to Visitor Survey and Economic Impact Model / National MGM Economic Impact Estimates / Summary / References / Appendix A. Katmai National Park and Preserve 2006 VSP Survey Instrument / Appendix B. Survey Questions Suggested Re-Write / Appendix C. Maps Showing Access to Alaska National Parks / Appendix D. Alaska Visitor Statistics Survey Instrumen