Anchorage Daily News

While Alaska's political ties are with the South 48, our economic ties are with Asia. That's true now and has been since statehood.

Our constitution and our compact with the federal government established that our new state would support itself with our natural resources. But when we offered what we had for sale, the United States wasn't buying.

For years we tried to sell our timber to Seattle. They weren't interested, so we sold it to Japan. We couldn't get a shovelful of coal past the Pacific Northwest, so we exported it to Korea. We have marketed millions of tons of seafood to Asia, and we became the first supplier of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Japan.

Not only did the entire LNG business on the Pacific Rim begin with deliveries from Alaska, we have shipped a tanker load from Kenai every week since 1969. As a result of all of this trade, Alaska has developed strong market ties, lasting friendships and an excellent reputation for reliability throughout the Pacific Rim.

Therefore, I was shocked when a bid from China to buy North Slope gas prompted a statement from our congressional delegation that Congress will likely block it.

Doesn't Congress understand that America's trade deficit with China is a disaster? Last year the United States spent $222 billion more on goods labeled "Made in China" than the Chinese paid for items and commodities "Made in USA." And the solution is not to stop trading.

The attitude of Congress toward Alaska trade is nothing new. When the trans-Alaska oil pipeline was authorized in 1972, Alaska was forbidden from exporting oil to Japan. That provision was unconstitutional as we were the only state prevented from exporting a specific commodity to a foreign country.

What made it especially maddening to those of us who helped broker the statehood deal is that the oil and gas at the North Slope belongs to us.

The federal government expressly granted us 103 million acres of lands and resources so that we could sustain ourselves.

As governor in 1993, I filed a lawsuit to force the feds to lift the oil export ban. Congress read the brief and promptly lifted the ban, making my lawsuit moot.

If Congress wants energy from Alaska it can tap the lands in Alaska it owns, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The oil pipeline is at less than half capacity, so Congress can access millions of barrels of ANWR oil per day whenever it chooses.

But if Congress tries to tell us what to do with our resources, it will violate Alaska's compact. That will mean that all bets are off regarding who owns what within Alaska's boundaries.

Now, consider the benefits to America and Alaska if our gas is sold to China according to the recent offer by Sinopec, their largest oil and gas services company. According to their spokesman, Dominic Lee, our gas would reduce America's trade deficit with China by $30 billion a year. That's nearly $1 trillion over 30 years.

Unlike the North Slope producers, Sinopec isn't asking the state for tax breaks and fiscal certainty. They want supply certainty. They are willing to pay the going rate, and the numbers are staggering. They estimate that 10 years from now the premium Asian price for LNG delivered will be $20 per million BTUs.

That rate over 30 years will generate $219 billion in taxes for the U.S. federal government, $314 billion for the state of Alaska and $204 billion for the producers. All the latter have to do is turn the spigot and send the lion's share of their earnings to their stockholders.

And there will be another winner. The Chinese will soon surpass the United States in releasing harmful carbon pollution because of their heavy dependence on high-sulfur coal. LNG from Alaska will reduce that pollution and improve prospects for a healthier global environment.

It's high time Congress faces the realities of globalization of both trade and the environment. On both fronts, Alaska can play a major role.

Walter J. Hickel served as governor of Alaska from 1966 to 1968 and 1991-1994 and as U.S. secretary of the interior from 1969 to 1970. He is the founder of the Institute of the North.

ADVERTISEMENT