NO AK LNG
HELP STOP THE ALASKA LNG PIPELINE
The AK LNG pipeline is a +$44 billion proposed liquid natural gas (LNG) pipeline that would run from Alaska's North Slope to Nikiski. While it is sometimes touted as a solution to Alaska’s energy crisis, it would not come online in time to meet the current Cook Inlet natural gas shortage. Different versions of this project have been proposed for decades, and this project has continued to leak -over $500 million of public money, all while failing to bring any energy online that could actually help lower energy prices for Alaskans.
After major players (Exon-Mobile, BP, Conoco Phillips) walked away from the project, the Alaska Gasline Development Corporate (AGDC), a public corporation of the State of Alaska tasked with developing the pipeline, gave Glenfarne group, a billionaire-owned outside company who has never built a gas pipeline, 75% ownership of the project. This agreement was made only after major industry players (Exon-Mobile, BP, Conoco Phillips) walked away from the project because it was not commercially viable. The details of the AGDC-Glenfarne agreement are secret as are many aspects of this project (total project cost, consumer cost of gas). If AK LNG is such a good deal for the state, what’s with all the secrecy?
Now Glenfarne is asking the state and local jurisdictions to give up guaranteed revenue and remove property taxes from the project as well as prevent tax increases for decades. We simply can’t afford to give our resources away to billionaires.
The idea that this pipeline would be of any economic benefit to the state is a literal "pipe dream". The LNG pipeline would be many years on the horizon, one of the most expensive energy solutions available, does nothing to reduce carbon pollution, and after decades of talking in circles, is still missing many key players. The one gas producer currently on board, through a conditional agreement, does not currently produce any oil or gas. There is no pipeline company (although AGDC has repeatedly misrepresented Glenfarne as "North America's largest pipeline company" despite never having built a pipeline). There are no buyers (only non-binding letters of interest currently being signed by Asian governments to ease trade tensions with the Trump Administration). The project as proposed is only economically feasible with significant subsidies from the state or federal government. Once again, Alaskans would be paying the bill (and the negative consequences) for executives’ and politicians’ pipe dreams.
Despite the project being economically unfeasible and bad for Alaskans, now the Trump Administration is trying to force the pipeline through. Alaskans need to stand up and stop this project for good.
We’re organizing to stop this economically reckless pipeline.
Want in? Sign up to:
Get updates on the campaign to stop the pipeline
Learn how you can take action
Stay connected with a growing movement for climate justice
Together, we can protect what matters. Add your name and join the fight.
-
The AK LNG project would expand the Point Thomson field on Alaska's North Slope and require a new gas treatment plant at Prudhoe Bay. From there a pipeline would bisect the state to Coldfoot, then Livengood and across the Minto area, following the railroad and Parks Highway near Nenana, Healy and down under the Cook Inlet to Nikiski, where a new liquefaction plant would liquify the natural gas for shipping to the international market. None of this is possible without extreme government subsidies - public money that should be going toward the rapid renewable energy transition we need.
-
The AK LNG gas export project would cause climate pollution greater than 10 times that of the Willow project with as much as 2.7 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the lifetime of the project.
Even if Alaska decarbonized except for this project, our emissions would still triple, making this a massive carbon bomb.
AK LNG's path to profitability directly clashes with the scientific consensus that carbon emissions will need to be reduced 40-60% by 2030 to keep global warming at manageable levels. So these pipe dreamers are saying that their own wallets are more important than our children’s and grandchildren's futures. -
Over the many years of AK LNG proposals, the state has considered countless ways to make it work. But the reality is, the numbers just don’t pan out, and interest in the pipeline is driven by politics, not market demand.
The most recent proposal involves private energy company Glenfarne Group doing the initial front end engineering design studies, with no commitment to actually build the pipeline.
Says oil and gas analyst Larry Persily, "The fact that the Glenfarne Group is interested in the Alaska LNG project does not change the reality that it is a costly and risky endeavor the market shows no indication of wanting or needing… It would be one of the most expensive LNG projects in the world. It could not deliver any gas until the early 2030s. Its construction cost estimates [of $44b] are old. LNG demand in Japan -- long seen as Alaska's best hope for marketing its gas -- is in steady decline. There are many lower-cost options for LNG buyers in Asia. If private investors want to give it a try, good for them. But the state can ill afford to burn through any more money speculating on this boondoggle.”
The AK LNG project has wasted at least $500 million of public money that could have been put toward renewable energy resources that would already be producing power for Alaskans. As we face a massive energy crisis and at the same time, a formidable state budget crisis, it’s time to put down the pipe dream and invest in real solutions for Alaskans.
-
Pipelines displace people and are culturally violent towards Alaska Native people, especially women, children and gender non-conforming people via the creation of “man camps” - temporary worker housing which places outsiders in communities they have no connection with. This has been shown to lead to increased rates of violence towards members of these communities.
-
Tell your legislators: Fund Alaskans, not a pipe dream! We don’t need to keep spending millions of state dollars on a handful of AGDC salaries and benefits to support the ill-advised AK LNG project. We need to fund education, energy infrastructure and healthcare, and the services Alaskans need.
This new report concludes that there is no plausible economic argument or benefit to continue chasing the State’s many years-long efforts to push through this dangerous pipeline.
Read the full report at the link below:
NEW REPORT OUT NOW: Alaska’s Pointless Pipe Dream
some highlights from the report:
Nearly $500 million of Alaskan state funds have been poured into AGDC with no substantive results (and estimates of over $1 billion into different iterations of this pipeline proposal overall). AGDC, whose president is the highest paid state employee, has been a waste of state money since the beginning. Continuing to spend state funds to support it is taking funding away from critical needs like education, health, and energy infrastructure.
We are facing an energy crisis, and this pipeline will not solve it. The current proposal with Glenfarne Group, a relatively small private energy company, agreeing to do the front end engineering design studies, does not guarantee the project will be built or that North Slope gas would arrive in time to prevent a natural gas shortage. Even if North Slope gas did reach Southcentral Alaska on their comically optimistic timeline of 2028, it would be too late to fill a supply gap that could begin as early as this year. Alaska instead needs to use these funds to invest in reliable and rapidly scalable forms of renewable energy, which will actually help to meet our current energy shortfalls, decrease costs, improve the health of our communities, and increase Alaska’s energy autonomy.
The AK LNG pipeline doesn’t make economic sense. Gas from an in-state pipeline would be the same price or likely far more costly than imported LNG, and the pipeline project would cost at least ten times as much to build as an LNG import project. The projected costs do not even factor in spur lines to major communities, like Fairbanks, or upgrading infrastructure in homes that are not currently outfitted for LNG. The project as proposed is only economic with a mysterious $10b infusion that could only come from our Permanent Fund.
Tell your legislators: Fund Alaskans, not a pipe dream!
In the past, legislators have been reluctant to cut funding for AGDC, seeing it as politically safer to toss them a few million every year, even though it’s only going to a handful of salaries to keep alive a pipe dream that will never pan out. Legislators haven’t gotten enough pushback for this choice. They need to understand that funding AGDC is not the risk-free, crowd-pleasing choice. It should not be their default tendency, and it does harm to the state not only by draining away funds, but by legitimizing a bogus solution to our real energy problems.
We don’t need to keep spending millions of public dollars on a handful of AGDC salaries and benefits with nothing to show for it. We need to fund education, real energy infrastructure, healthcare, and other services that will keep Alaskans in the state.