What others say: Alaskans shouldn’t bank on increased oil production, prices

  • Monday, August 1, 2016 7:52pm
  • Opinion

A report from the U.S. Energy Information Administration earlier this month contained a small but — from the Alaska view — telling notation.

The July 11 report, “EIA projects rise in U.S. crude oil and other liquid fuels production beyond 2017,” projected a continued decline in Alaska’s output.

“Production in Alaska continues to decline through 2040, dropping to less than 0.2 million b/d (barrels per day) in 2040,” according to the report.

This is not good news for anyone hoping that increased oil production or an increase in oil prices, or both, is going to help Alaska out of its precarious fiscal situation.

To think either of those occurrences is going to materialize to help Alaska is folly. Alaskans, and especially those campaigning for a seat in the Legislature, are making a grave mistake if they choose to reject major deficit-reduction efforts in favor of such wishful thinking. Some people, unfortunately, do argue that our situation will be saved by an oil price and production renaissance.

Alaska had a $3.1 billion deficit for the current fiscal year, a gap that was covered through Gov. Bill Walker’s $1.29 million in vetoes and by drawing on savings accounts. Those savings accounts are going to run dry in about two years unless the Legislature approves significant legislation to straighten out the state’s finances. Gov. Walker put forward solid ideas in December, but legislators repeatedly balked.

Nothing got done.

Once upon a time, not too long ago, revenue from Alaska’s oil fields accounted for about 90 percent of the state government’s general fund revenue. Now it’s a fraction of that amount. Massive and sudden change would be needed in the oil world to return to the good ol’ days.

The Energy Information Administration report is but one of several that constantly come out about the global oil market, of which Alaska is but one of many players. Those reports have a variety of differing projections based on various price and production scenarios, adding to the uncertainty.

Alaska’s own report, from the Alaska Department of Revenue — it issues two reports annually — gives a pretty grim near-term and medium-term outlook about the amount of oil income the state can expect. The cover letter from Revenue Commissioner Randall Hoffbeck spells it out:

“The revenue forecast is based on a revised oil price forecast of about $40 per barrel versus $50 in the fall,” he wrote. “The forecast prices over the next 10 years have also been reduced to reflect anticipated future lower prices. The average price is now not forecast to reach $60 until FY 2021. However, with the global contraction on investment in production, and spare capacity that represents less than three percent of global demand — we also recognize the potential for significant price volatility over the next few years.”

Oil revenue collapsed several years ago, and there’s little sign of improvement. The year-to-year change in the amount of the state’s oil income is staggering, from $1.69 billion in fiscal 2015 to $801 million in fiscal 2016 to a projected $705 million for fiscal 2017, the current fiscal year. And the fiscal 2015 number is down sharply from the days when oil exceeded $100 a barrel; it’s now about $40.

That’s catastrophic. It isn’t going to change anytime soon. And what that means is Alaska urgently needs its residents and its elected officials to live in the real world and not in the world of fantasy.

—Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, July 29, 2016

More in Opinion

Larry Persily. (Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: Unaffordable promises are a dishonest way to campaign

When it comes to government spending — or lack of government revenue, it all adds up the same

Alex Koplin. (courtesy photo)
Point of View: Ranked choice gives voters more voice

The major political parties are not in touch with all Alaskans

A sign warns of the presence of endangered Cook Inlet beluga whales at the Kenai Beach in Kenai, Alaska, on Monday, July 10, 2023. (Jake Dye/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: Could an unnecessary gold mine drive Cook Inlet belugas extinct?

An industrial port for the proposed Johnson Tract gold mine could decimate the bay

Cassie Lawver. Photo provided by Cassie Lawver
Point of View: A clear choice

Sarah Vance has consistently stood up for policies that reflect the needs of our district

Alaska State Sen. Jesse Bjorkman (R-Nikiski), left, and Alaska House Rep. Ben Carpenter (R-Nikiski) participate in the Senate District D candidate forum hosted by the Peninsula Clarion and KDLL 91.9 FM on Monday, Oct. 7, 2024, at the Soldotna Public Library in Soldotna, Alaska. (Photo by Erin Thompson/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: Carpenter has a much better fiscal plan

The sales tax is only one component included in a larger package of bills

"Miss Rosey," a pink fire engine dedicated to raising awareness about cancer prevention and screening, is seen after her unveiling at Central Peninsula Hospital in Soldotna, Alaska, on Saturday, Sept. 28, 2024. (Jake Dye/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: The lifesaving power of early detection

A call to action during Breast Cancer Awareness Month

Pins supporting the repeal of ranked choice voting are seen on April 20, 2024, at the Republican state convention in Anchorage. (James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
Opinion: Do we really need to be re-educated to vote?

Our party primaries were meant to bring the top two (or three) people to the final election for the final vote

This photo shows a sample ballot for the Aug. 16, 2022, special general election. The election was the debut of ranked choice voting in Alaska. (Ben Hohenstatt / Juneau Empire)
Opinion: Keep officials accountable to Alaskans, not party insiders, by voting no on Ballot Measure 2

Alaska’s nonpartisan election system protects every Alaskan’s right to vote for their chosen candidate at every election, regardless of party affiliation

Most Read