A rare visit to Alaska by high-level Asian dignitaries and notable members of the Trump administration has brought renewed attention to the controversial $44 billion Alaska LNG project.
However, skepticism echoes among state lawmakers and industry analysts, as major questions linger regarding a mega-project that has faced decades of failed attempts by Alaska businesses and leaders.
The proposed Alaska LNG project seeks to channel vast quantities of natural gas from the North Slope through an 800-mile pipeline, followed by super-chilling the gas in Southcentral Alaska before exporting liquefied natural gas to countries such as Japan, Korea, and Taiwan.
The initiative is designed to be built in stages, with the first phase estimated at $11 billion for construction of the gas line that will provide natural gas to Alaskans, followed by additional phases that would build the liquefaction plant and marine terminal needed for Asian exports.
With a history of similar gas line projects faltering for over fifty years due to escalating costs and investment struggles, many Alaskans harbor doubts about the feasibility of the Alaska LNG project.
Recent delegations from various Asian nations visited Alaska this week, showing interest in the project and seeking further details.
A Taiwanese official expressed that should the project materialize, Alaska LNG could potentially become Taiwan’s main energy source.
Accompanying them were three high-ranking officials from President Trump’s administration, who pledged comprehensive support for the endeavor during their unique excursion to the Alaska oil and gas fields near the Arctic Ocean, the project’s inception point.
Trump has described Alaska LNG as “truly spectacular” and has urged Asian countries to invest in the project or purchase its gas to alleviate trade imbalances with the United States.
During Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s three-day sustainable energy conference in Anchorage, increasing focus on the Alaska LNG project was evident.
The head of Glenfarne Group, the private firm leading the project, claimed that natural gas could potentially reach Alaskans by 2028, although he acknowledged the challenging road ahead.
State lawmakers and industry experts believe that this newfound spotlight on the project could attract potential investors by highlighting several of its benefits:
The project’s proximity to Asian nations in need of secure energy supplies,
Its existing federal permitting approvals and a designated right-of-way along the trans-Alaska pipeline,
And its backing from administrations under both Trump and former president Biden.
While Alaska Senate Majority Leader Cathy Giessel acknowledged the renewed interest, she remains skeptical about the project’s realization.
Giessel questioned whether the $44 billion cost projection might be overly optimistic.
“Until a company commits $10 billion to $20 billion to initiate construction, I will remain doubtful,” she commented during an interview on Thursday.
Despite acknowledging the positives of the project, Giessel noted concerns about escalations in material costs and labor, suggesting that the current calculations may be significantly underestimated.
In contrast, Rep. Chuck Kopp, R-Anchorage, expressed his confidence that the recent interest from Asian partners and positive developments imply that construction could begin in the next two to three years.
“While we have witnessed commitments made and discarded before, this moment presents a real opportunity with tangible investment interest and federal support,” Kopp asserted.
In a significant announcement, Glenfarne stated that more than 50 global companies had expressed interest, totaling over $115 billion in potential contract value related to the project.
The partnerships would encompass various aspects, including equipment supply, services, investment, and customer agreements.
However, Glenfarne has not revealed the identities of these interested companies.
Micah Hirschfield, a spokesperson for Glenfarne, had previously announced a media briefing for further information but canceled it due to the company’s packed agenda.
Giessel questioned the implications of the announcement, asking, “What does this mean in practical terms? Are these companies genuinely willing to invest or merely expressing interest?”
She argued that, given its scale and the involvement of Alaska, the project should be more transparent in its dealings.
Kopp remains hopeful that Glenfarne’s claims of interest from over 50 companies will lead to binding agreements in the near future.
“I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect solid commitments within two to three months,” he stated.
Critics, like former oil and gas attorney Brad Keithley, caution that this expression of interest could be akin to nonbinding memorandums of understanding, which in the past have not translated into reliable partnerships.
“They’re playing ‘shock-and-awe’ with that large number, but fundamentally, it’s predominantly an expression of interest,” Keithley commented.
While this week’s activities surrounding the Alaska LNG project have reignited public interest, Keithley emphasized that the project’s economic viability will ultimately dictate whether it garners real investment.
Sen. Jesse Bjorkman, R-Nikiski, noted that there is considerable momentum behind the project, generating excitement among stakeholders.
However, he recognized that many unresolved details still linger.
Bjorkman expressed concerns that Alaskan ratepayers may bear high costs for gas as the state’s smaller population and businesses will be purchasing the gas prior to the commencement of exports after the initial $11 billion phase.
“The constituents I represent desire reliable power for their homes while keeping their energy costs as low as possible,” he stressed.
Alaska House Speaker Bryce Edgmon commented that the renewed focus on the project has sparked enthusiasm.
“There’s no doubt that the optimism surrounding the project is growing,” he noted.
“Nonetheless, the intricate details will determine its success.”
Questions remain regarding the level of investment from interested parties, Edgmon added.
Among the Asian countries participating in the recent delegation were Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines, all exploring the Alaska LNG project.
Pan Men-an, secretary-general to the president of Taiwan, elaborated during the sustainable energy conference about Alaska’s significance in Taiwan’s efforts to increase natural gas imports from the U.S.
In March, Taiwan’s CPC Corp., a state-owned energy firm, signed a letter of intent to acquire gas from Alaska LNG.
Pan pointed out that if the project comes to fruition, it could provide a vital energy source for Taiwan, which currently imports 96% of its energy.
He highlighted that, “The proximity of the Alaska LNG project stands out for Taiwan, offering shorter shipping durations, reduced transportation risks, and a robust, reliable supply.”
Takehiko Matsuo, the vice minister for international affairs at Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, indicated Japan’s interest in the project as a means to diversify its energy supply, which is heavily reliant on imports through the South China Sea.
Matsuo expressed concerns regarding the estimated costs of the venture as well as the timeline for development, as initial gas exports are projected to begin in 2031.
Glenfarne’s ambitious plan includes a goal to reach a final investment decision concerning the domestic portion of the project by 2026, which would signal the start of construction.
In a recent discussion, Governor Dunleavy interviewed Glenfarne’s CEO Duval about the goals for the project.
Duval asserted that the installation process for the pipeline could begin as early as 2027 under the first phase, while first deliveries of natural gas to Fairbanks could be achieved by late 2028, with assurances that it would certainly occur by 2029.
He acknowledged the rigorous scrutiny that Glenfarne will face in relation to the project’s financing from various sources, including rating agencies, bondholders, and potential investors, serving as a mechanism to prevent cost overruns.
“This rigorous oversight cultivates a profound accuracy in cost estimation, and it ensures that expenditures are controlled,” Duval explained.
He concluded that while the project will undoubtedly face hurdles, effective project financing oversight will support successful execution without inflation of costs.
“We’re aware that this is a challenging endeavor,” Duval stated.
As of now, no inquiries were posed by Dunleavy regarding the companies expressing interest in the Alaska LNG project, leaving further transparency in the operational partnerships still in question.
image source from：https://www.adn.com/business-economy/energy/2025/06/05/alaska-lng-has-caught-a-wave-of-high-level-attention-is-it-winning-over-its-skeptics/
