JUNEAU, Alaska — President Donald Trump has consistently advocated for a significant natural gas pipeline project in Alaska since taking office, an initiative that has recently gained renewed attention despite facing numerous challenges over the years, even with backing from state officials.
During a press conference with Japan’s Prime Minister earlier this month, Trump included the Alaskan pipeline in his remarks, receiving favorable responses from Governor Mike Dunleavy and U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan, both members of the Republican Party. The proposed pipeline, which spans nearly 810 miles (1,300 kilometers), is designed to transport natural gas from Alaska’s extensive North Slope region to a port, primarily targeting markets in Asia.
However, critics argue that this initiative is merely a rebranding of a longstanding project that has struggled to gain momentum. Concerns regarding its feasibility include a staggering estimated cost of $44 billion for both the pipeline and its surrounding infrastructure, competition from other energy projects, and doubts about its financial viability. A state senator noted that Alaska has invested approximately $1 billion over the years in attempts to advance the pipeline’s construction.
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) refers to natural gas that has been cooled to a liquid state, facilitating shipping and storage. As a non-renewable fossil fuel, natural gas is extracted from beneath the earth’s surface. The pipeline in question would extend from the North Slope’s gas fields to south-central Alaska. The liquefaction facility proposed in Nikiski, located southwest of Anchorage, is intended to process and export the LNG.
Since the beginning of his administration, Trump has promised to ensure the pipeline’s construction to deliver affordable energy to both Alaskans and global allies, emphasizing its importance in an executive order focused on resource development that he signed on his first day in office. During his recent discussion with Japan’s Prime Minister, Trump highlighted the project’s locations close to Japan and mentioned ongoing talks about a potential joint venture, although further details were not provided.
Japan’s Foreign Ministry acknowledged the meeting as beneficial for both nations and affirmed cooperation aimed at enhancing energy security, which includes boosting LNG exports to Japan, but did not specifically mention the Alaska project. Trump had previously shown enthusiasm for the pipeline initiative during his first term, attending a signing ceremony in Beijing in 2017, which involved an agreement between then-Alaska Governor Bill Walker and representatives from Chinese companies for collaboration on the project. Unfortunately, that effort did not come to fruition; Walker left office in 2018, and his successor, Dunleavy, shifted the project in a different direction. Alaska has a history of new governors altering their predecessors’ initiatives, and Walker did so as well.
Walker remarked that Trump’s actions have significantly raised global awareness of the pipeline project.
The obstacles facing the project are substantial. Currently, there are no means to deliver Alaska’s extensive gas reserves to the market, with major companies historically focusing on the more lucrative oil production in the North Slope region. The trans-Alaska oil pipeline, operational since 1977, plays a pivotal role in the state’s economy. Additional gas produced alongside oil is typically reinjected back into the fields.
Moreover, evolving markets and fluctuating costs have posed significant challenges to the project.
Looking ahead, state officials are grappling with the prospect that Alaska may need to import gas to satisfy the energy demands of its largest region. This could be driven by diminishing production capabilities in the aging Cook Inlet basin, located hundreds of miles from the North Slope and the state’s oldest oil and gas production area dating back to the 1950s.
Not long ago, the notion of gas imports was perceived by lawmakers as a defeatist prospect, yet it is now being viewed with a sense of acceptance, with some hoping it serves merely as a temporary measure until a new gas pipeline is established. Alaskan House Majority Leader Chuck Kopp encouraged optimism among residents, warning against negative outlooks.
“We need to be mindful of how we frame these discussions, as negative perceptions can become self-fulfilling prophecies,” Kopp stated. “A successful energy project of this magnitude could dramatically enhance the economic stability of our state.”
Meanwhile, Roger Marks, an economist specializing in oil and gas in Alaska, expressed skepticism regarding the pipeline’s realization and urged more focus on preparing for the possibility of imports. “Creating unrealistic expectations has only diverted attention away from what truly must be prioritized,” he concluded.