tasha.elizarde
Jun 25, 2018
Edited: Jun 26, 2018

Climate Change in an Oil State: Alaska, the Enviro-Paradox

Before getting into the topic at hand, a little bit about me: I'm 19 and have lived in Alaska my entire life. I live in a decidedly more urban location, a city of 35,000 people (and the state's capital city). My home, Juneau, is also home to one of the most strident examples of climate change: the Mendenhall Glacier. It's been eroding faster and faster because of a variety of reasons, but researchers agree that the speed at which the glacier is receding is due in part to global warming.


Vexing is the situation Alaska is in when we talk about climate change, because while our state is what many refer to as "the forefront of climate change", we're also funded heavily by industries that contribute most to climate change. Historically, 90% of our general fund budget has been funded by oil revenue, and many argue that our state economy was founded on oil. Alaska residents receive an oil-funded Permanent Fund Dividend every year, while 31 communities are expected to have to relocate due to climate change-caused erosion.


There's much to be said about the climate change discussion, but often I compare Alaska to the rest of the world when it comes to the issue. We're facing a problem that is disproportionally impacting communities around the world, but we continue to pursue projects that are paradoxical to the mission of ensuring for each individual the same means that our forefathers declared America's independence for: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. None of which cannot be had if "the common welfare" is threatened by a changing climate.


Thoughts?

0 comments0 replies
New Posts
  • tasha.elizarde
    Oct 24, 2018

    Counting the Votes in Alaska's Shifted Election

    Discussion 
    The gubernatorial race in Alaska is heating up. This November 6th, we will be deciding who will be our next Governor and Lt. Governor for the next term. Up until last week Wednesday, our race was a fight between three candidates: incumbent Governor Walker (I), former Alaska Senator Dunleavy (R), and former US Senator Begich. Governor Walker and former US Senator Begich had a near split vote, many people torn over who they should vote for. Governor Walker dropped the race though, leaving Walker supporters open to voting for Begich or Dunleavy. Not all voters will be able to vote in the different election, though. On the day Walker left the race, there were already about 1,000 absentee ballots received by the Division of Elections. That means that at least 1,000 people voted in an election thinking it would be a three-way race, not the two-way race it is now. Ultimately though, these votes can't be changed in this situation. What do you think — in the situation that a huge change in an election occurs, should we provide early voters with the opportunity to vote for someone else?
  • Felicity Wong
    Oct 17, 2018

    2018 Midterms

    Discussion 
    November is coming up, which means that the 2018 midterms for Congress (House and Senate) are nearing. Will the Democrats or Republicans take back/stay in control of the House? The Senate? Both? Why do you think so? What will be the impacts of the results? Here's an infographic/analysis created by Politico that is worth checking out if you're trying to follow the different blue and red candidates in the 2018 midterm elections across all 50 states: https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/house-senate-race-ratings-and-predictions/
  • tasha.elizarde
    Oct 14, 2018

    The U.S.A. as an Arctic Nation

    Discussion 
    The US isn't the first country you might think of when you think of the arctic, but thanks to Alaska, the US is a major stakeholder in Arctic issues. In fact, the USA is a permanent participant in the Arctic Council, the intergovernmental organization that coordinates action between arctic nations. What happens when we don't think of the US as part of the arctic? Most of the country is not in the arctic -- only the northernmost part of Alaska is inside the arctic circle -- but the implications of not considering the arctic in our governmental and corporate decisions are many. After all, problems that impact the arctic do not stay in the arctic, nor are they only applicable to the arctic. The hot ticket issue impacting the arctic is climate change, and the changing biodiversity in the arctic also impacts the biodiversity of everywhere else in the world too. The problems impacting the indigenous community are also uplifted in arctic forums, given that indigenous peoples are greatly intertwined with arctic issues. Decisions made at any level ultimately will impact the arctic in some way, so it is important that public officials understand how the arctic works in order to make effective decisions about it. Thoughts? Questions? Comments about the arctic?