Экс-депутат Аляски призвала к диверсификации энергетики для снижения тарифов

Alaska has never truly lacked energy resources — we have natural gas and oil, and hydropower has long served communities across the state. We also have real opportunities like geothermal that deserve attention as costs continue to rise. But the harder question has always been whether we can turn those resources into affordable power on a timeline that actually works for Alaskans’ needs. That question has become urgent, and it hits hardest in rural Alaska. Southcentral Alaska faces a projected Cook Inlet natural gas shortfall by 2027, and families across the state are already paying some of the highest per capita energy costs in the nation. Statewide, residential electricity rates run roughly 40% higher than the national average. But in many rural communities, energy costs are more than twice what they are in more urban parts of Alaska — a disparity that threatens the viability of entire regions. These are not just statistics. They appear every month when families pay to heat their homes and keep the lights on. They determine whether young families can afford to stay here and whether small businesses can survive. A successful Alaska LNG project could strengthen our economy and improve long-term energy security. Natural gas should be part of Alaska’s future. But Alaska shouldn’t rely on one project as a complete solution. We’ve been through enough boom-and-bust cycles to know energy planning must be realistic, and diversifying our energy supply is the most reliable way to control costs. The best approach for Alaska is an all-of-the-above energy strategy that keeps natural gas central while using more local power where it makes sense. A diverse energy portfolio is how we bring costs down for every Alaskan. Start with Cook Inlet; Southcentral Alaska needs reliable fuel, and the state must stay committed to exploration and production. Expanded import capacity may be necessary as a temporary measure. But the priority — the real priority — is keeping energy affordable for the families and businesses that depend on it. Alaska should also continue responsible North Slope development. Alaska has some of the strictest environmental standards when it comes to developing our natural resources, and we play a role in our nation’s energy security. A booming North Slope supports direct and indirect jobs and funds the public services we value. We should build on the energy sources already working here, not as alternatives to other sources, but as complements that together reduce costs across the state. Hydropower has a strong track record in Alaska. Juneau demonstrates how steady local power keeps rates stable, Kodiak has shown how local projects reduce diesel dependence and lower costs, and Bradley Lake has delivered some of the Railbelt’s lowest-cost power for decades. These aren’t just success stories — they’re models for cost control. In the Railbelt, projects like the Dixon Diversion merit serious study. Expanding existing hydropower infrastructure is often more feasible than starting fresh, and it can provide dependable power when the region needs additional supply. Geothermal energy should be part of this conversation too. Alaska sits on the Pacific Ring of Fire with genuine potential beneath our feet. We have workers skilled in drilling and building in harsh conditions, and we can use that expertise to develop homegrown power that keeps costs down for rural and urban Alaska alike. This isn’t new thinking for me. In 2010, I authored legislation creating the Renewable Energy Grant Fund and the Emerging Energy Technology Fund. Those bipartisan initiatives supported more than 100 energy projects across Alaska and gave rural communities more ways to reduce expensive diesel dependence. That work was built on a principle that remains true today: Alaska energy policy should lower costs, improve reliability and use the resources we have here. For rural Alaska, this means preserving the Power Cost Equalization Program, which reduces the electric rates paid by rural consumers to levels comparable to those paid by consumers in Anchorage, Fairbanks and Juneau. But it also means building energy infrastructure diverse enough that rural communities have multiple affordable options. Many communities face high energy costs because of geography and supply logistics. An all-of-the-above energy strategy, including natural gas, hydropower, geothermal and other local sources, is how we address that reality and make an impact across the state. Alaska’s future won’t come from choosing between natural gas and renewables. It will come from recognizing that different communities need different solutions. A more diverse energy portfolio strengthens the entire state. What matters is whether we stay focused on affordability and reliability for Alaskans. We build in challenging conditions and solve problems other states simply don’t face. Get energy policy right, and we make it easier for families to stay and businesses to invest long-term. That’s the goal: energy that works for Alaska today and tomorrow. Republican former lawmaker Lesil McGuire served 16 years in the Alaska House and Senate, representing Anchorage districts. She is a candidate for governor of Alaska. The Anchorage Daily News welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to [email protected] or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.