Alaska
Alaska agency boosting gas line asks skeptical Legislature to consider investing up to $800M
JUNEAU — The state agency advocating for a $44 billion gas line in Alaska is asking the Legislature to consider investing up to $800 million in the long-sought but faltering megaproject.
There has been renewed interest in building an 800-mile gas pipeline from the North Slope since President Donald Trump announced his strong support for the project. Several Asian nations have shown an interest in investing in the pipeline and buying gas from Alaska, but no concrete deals have yet been signed.
Gov. Mike Dunleavy and Alaska’s three-member, all-Republican congressional delegation have been bullish on the Alaska LNG project. Some lawmakers have been equally optimistic, but multiple legislators said they remain skeptical that the pipeline will be built, particularly on the fast timeline touted by the project’s new private developer.
Frank Richards, president of Alaska Gasline Development Corp., told legislators this week about the upsides of the project. It has been fully permitted and is eligible for $28 billion in federal loan guarantees, he said.
Delegates from South Korea and Thailand are set to come to Alaska soon to study the project, AGDC officials said this week. Additionally, the Trump administration is urging leaders of several Asian nations to commit to the pipeline with representatives set to attend a June summit in Alaska, The New York Times reported.
[South Korea and other Asian countries plan visits to the state as they eye Alaska LNG project]
The renewed interest in the pipeline comes after AGDC — the state agency leading the project — announced in January that Glenfarne had signed on to become its lead developer.
The terms of AGDC’s deal with Glenfarne, a New York-based company, remain confidential. But AGDC told lawmakers this week that Glenfarne agreed to take a 75% stake in exchange for bringing the project to a final investment decision — a pivotal step in completing a megaproject.
Richards said Wednesday that Glenfarne had recently “suspended” calls for an Alaska development agency to provide $50 million as an insurance policy for remaining engineering and design work. Instead, Richards said Glenfarne would be willing to use private capital to complete that work, which is estimated to cost $150 million.
‘It is in our future’
In recent months, some lawmakers have been buoyed by the prospects for the project.
Anchorage GOP Rep. Chuck Kopp penned an opinion piece in the Daily News encouraging Alaskans to “shake the cynicism off.” Fellow Anchorage Republican Rep. Mia Costello introduced a legislative resolution that urges support for “the rapid advancement” of the pipeline.
“We really will be having a gas line. It is in our future,” Costello said at a Tuesday media conference.
Still, multiple lawmakers said while they support the pipeline, they have lingering doubts and questions. Some legislators have been skeptical about the project’s costs and timelines; others have questioned why Glenfarne, a relatively new player in the oil and gas sector, was chosen as the lead developer.
Richards said other offers were discussed, but Glenfarne got the tick of approval from AGDC’s board and investment bank Goldman Sachs.
Some lawmakers have bristled at what they say is the Legislature’s limited oversight of the project.
In 2014, the Legislature approved Senate Bill 138, which granted AGDC broad authority to develop the pipeline.
Republican former House Speaker Mike Chenault, a current AGDC board member, said the agency’s independence was by design. He said that gives AGDC the ability to make decisions in a timely matter.
“I believe that if the Legislature gets involved, that this project will go away,” he said.
With Southcentral Alaska facing a looming shortfall of natural gas from Cook Inlet, the pipeline has been touted as a way to secure gas supply for Alaska in the long term. But the project is also being discussed as a way to fill state coffers.
Officials at AGDC said the state’s current stake in the project could potentially raise hundreds of millions of dollars per year in new revenue, but that is still set to be negotiated with Glenfarne and any other potential investors.
There is an opportunity for Alaska to invest substantially more in the project to collect more revenue for the state, Richards said.
“The big question for the state of Alaska going forward is really going to be around that equity financing,” he said Wednesday to a joint legislative committee.
The project has recently been split into phases. The first phase would see an 807-mile gas pipeline built from the North Slope to Nikiski. The second phase would see plants built to treat gas and prepare it for export.
Richards told lawmakers that the state, Alaska Native corporations, Alaska businesses and individual Alaskans could invest up to 25% in those subprojects. For the pipeline, that would cost roughly $800 million. For the pipeline and two plants, the cost would be over $3.5 billion, AGDC board members said earlier in the month.
The Legislature is currently grappling with strained revenue and a dire fiscal outlook, making it unlikely that it could fund the 25% stake in the pipeline, lawmakers said.
Anchorage Republican Sen. Cathy Giessel said that she had heard little interest from lawmakers for the state to put “money into this project.” Giessel, chair of the Senate Resources Committee, said “$800 million, of course, is an absurd amount.”
Timing, tailwinds and wariness
Project timelines have also been greeted with skepticism by veteran legislators.
Richards told lawmakers this week that a final investment decision could be reached by the end of the year. A pipeline could be constructed and delivering gas for Alaskans by 2030 or 2031, he said.
During a joint legislative committee hearing, House Speaker Bryce Edgmon said that there seemed to be “missing key ingredients” in answers to legislators’ questions from AGDC. Edgmon, a Dillingham independent, suggested that the 2031 timeline seemed “more aspirational than it is reality.”
The costs of the project have also come under scrutiny. The full gas line project was estimated in 2023 to cost $44 billion, AGDC board members said. The pipeline itself was expected then to cost just under $11 billion.
Rep. Zack Fields, D-Anchorage, said that the trans-Alaska pipeline was completed in 1977 at a cost of $8 billion. He said that the gas pipeline is expected to cost 37% more than TAPS, but that inflation has increased prices more than five-fold over the past 48 years.
Fields asked how that cost estimate for the gas pipeline could be “plausible.”
Warren Christian, an AGDC board member, said the project’s costs were carefully calculated by ExxonMobil.
An updated cost estimate is expected after engineering and design work is completed, AGDC officials said.
While pipeline discussions continue, concrete plans have been advancing to import gas for Southcentral Alaska. Gas line boosters said the project could be a viable long-term fix for the state’s energy needs.
Veteran legislators say they’ve heard that before.
Anchorage Democratic Sen. Bill Wielechowski said there seemed to be some positive “tailwinds” behind the project, citing interest from the Trump administration and in Asia. But Wielechowski estimated this was the eighth version of the pipeline he’s heard pitched during his 18-year tenure in the Legislature.
“I’m a bit wary at this point, just based on promises we’ve heard in the past,” he said. “New administrations, new people come in and it sounds great, and then, for whatever reason, it just doesn’t work.”
As an example, he pointed to TransCanada. In 2008, the Legislature approved paying up to $500 million for the Calgary-based company to help with pre-construction costs. Seven years later, the Legislature appropriated $64 million to buy out TransCanada’s stake in the project.
Wielechowski said the state should consider investing in the pipeline to raise more state revenue for Alaska. But echoing many in the Capitol, he remained somewhat doubtful the project would come to fruition.
“I want it to happen. I share the sentiment that I think many Alaskans share — I’ll believe it when I see it,” he said.
Alaska
Travel prices are going up, up and away. Here’s what to watch.
Up, up and away … that’s where most travel prices are going.
It’s true. Not only are our nation’s geopolitical thrusts in the Mideast affecting the cost of your fill-ups, every component of your trip from airfares to car rentals and hotel stays are subject to price hikes.
Imagine filling up a jetliner with jet fuel that’s doubled in price. It’s enough to melt your credit card, regardless of the number of points you get for every dollar spent!
Because the price of oil affects everything, higher prices are eating away at your travel budget in many ways.
Bag fees
There’s lots of press on this. All airlines are increasing their checked-bag fees because of the jump in fuel prices.
Back in 2009, Alaska Airlines instituted a $15 fee for the first checked bag and $25 for the second bag. At the time, there was no charge for the first bag and a second bag was $25.
Last week, Alaska Airlines, along with other major airlines, increased its fees to $45 for the first checked bag and $55 for the second bag. Delta Air Lines charges the same.
Even if the cost of oil comes down, I don’t expect bag fees will ever be reduced.
Travelers who live in Alaska are somewhat insulated from the new hikes because both Delta and Alaska Airlines offer two free checked bags, with conditions:
1. Alaska offers two free checked bags for travelers flying to or from Alaska who are enrolled in Club 49. This does not affect other flights on Alaska. Separately, ATMOS credit card holders can get a free checked bag. Also, elite members of the ATMOS scheme get one or two free checked bags systemwide.
2. Delta offers two free checked bags for travelers flying to or from Alaska who are SkyMiles members who live in Alaska. Again, this does not apply to other Delta flights. Separately, Delta American Express cardholders can get a free checked bag.
3. Elite-level travelers with the oneworld airline cartel, including Alaska Airlines, can get one or two checked bags on American, British Airways, Japan Airlines, Qantas or other oneworld carriers.
[Anchorage’s international airport rolls out self-driving wheelchairs]
Main Cabin vs. Basic Economy
The spread between the lowest available price, Basic Economy, and a more flexible ticket, Main Cabin, has increased. While the difference used to be $20-$30 each way when the Basic Economy scheme was introduced in 2018, the round-trip upcharge now can exceed $100.
For example, the lowest Basic fare to Portland is $337 round-trip on Alaska Airlines. The upcharge to Main Cabin, with full loyalty points, pre-assigned seats and more flexibility on changes and cancellations, is $447, a 33% upcharge.
This trend is not specifically attributable to the new Iran War. It’s just a cost that continues to rise.
New fees
I’m impressed at the creativity of airline people who dream up new fees. Here are some of my favorites from Alaska Airlines:
1. Phone reservations: $15
2. Partner award booking fee: $12.50
3. Pet travel fee: $100 in the cabin, $200 in the baggage compartment with a kennel
4. Left on board item return fee: $20
On Condor Airlines, operating the only nonstop service from Anchorage to Europe, travelers can choose from four different bundles in economy class. The least-expensive, Economy Zero, from $840 round-trip, features fees for travelers:
1. Carry-on bag fee, up to 8kg: $35; a small bag like a purse always is included for free
2. Checked bag: $75
3. Airport check-in: $30
All three of these fees are included in the next-highest fare bucket, Economy Classic, from $900 round-trip. It’s cheaper to buy the bundle than it is to buy the components a la carte. Seat assignments are additional, from $25 for economy.
Airfares on the rise
There are a few good deals available for travel to select West Coast/Intermountain destinations in May, including:
1. Anchorage-San Francisco on Alaska Airlines, from $307 round-trip. Fly May 15-28 only. Add $90 round-trip for Main cabin.
2. Anchorage-Los Angeles on Alaska Airlines, from $317 round-trip. May 15-25 only. Add $90 round-trip for Main.
3. Anchorage-Phoenix on United, Delta or Alaska, from $267-$287 round-trip. Fly May 8-June 9 only. Add $90-$100 for Main.
4. Anchorage-Denver $357 round-trip on Delta. Fly May 8-June 9 only. Add $90 round-trip for Main.
For travel to other destinations, or later in the summer, be prepared to pay more.
Flying to Hawaii? Alaska Air’s nonstop prices out at $706 round-trip between May 30 and June 6. Add $110 round-trip for Main.
Nonstop flights from Anchorage to Salt Lake City start at $669 round-trip with Delta on May 17. That’s $100 more than the cost for the same flights last month. Add $90 more for Main.
Hotel costs continue to rise, accompanied by pesky resort fees.
The Outrigger on the Beach in Waikiki is a very nice beachfront hotel. It’s not plush, or the nicest property. But it’s solid. The cost is $334 per night.
But there’s more: a $50 per night resort fee, plus a variety of taxes and charges, totaling $112.55 per night.
Down in Seattle, the Sound Hotel in the Belltown neighborhood is marketed by Hilton. The discounted rate for “Honors” members — it’s free to join — is $313.34 per night for a king room in late May. Taxes and fees add an extra $56.40 per night.
There’s no appreciable bump yet for hotel rates as a result of the oil price surge. Yet. But if these hotel rates seem high, they’re in line with hotel rates in Anchorage this summer. At the Sheraton in Anchorage in June, it’s $450 per night, plus $54 in taxes and fees, when booked at Expedia.
Car rentals are not cheap
My go-to site for car rentals is the Costco site, which compares major brands and automatically includes Costco discounts.
In Las Vegas, for a one-day rental in May, Budget charges $67 per day, which includes taxes and fees of $22.77. In Anchorage, the same kind of car, medium SUV, costs $92.97 with Alamo.
The biggest differences so far in car rental rates seems to be the bill you’ll pay when you fill up the tank before returning. There’s no appreciable jump in prices because of the new war.
When it comes to making travel arrangements for the spring and summer, it’s more risky making completely non-refundable arrangements.
I made the decision to purchase most of my summer travel plans in advance, but only after determining I would not need to change the dates. Particularly with airline tickets, it’s expensive to change your dates.
There’s lots of uncertainty regarding travel arrangements, particularly international travel. As fuel prices go up due to oil shortages, travel companies will look for ways to recoup the increased costs. In most cases, those higher costs will be borne by travelers.
Alaska
Murkowski warns decreasing national fuel prices could spell disaster for rural Alaska
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (KTUU) – The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz has led to a decrease in oil prices nationally, but Alaska’s senior senator said the state faces a different situation that could threaten rural communities.
“If you can’t produce power because you don’t have the diesel or you just can’t pay the prices, your little communities can collapse,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said at a Friday press conference at the Arctic Encounter Summit in Anchorage.
The price of oil has been a double-edged sword for Alaska. On one hand, the increased price of North Slope oil brings more revenue to the state, but consumer prices can also rise.
North Slope oil prices were $106.36 a barrel on Thursday.
“This is a very precarious time,” Murkowski said. “Our state has enjoyed a bounty because we have benefited from the higher prices of oil that goes into our treasury, but it’s the Alaskans in … the off-road communities that are threatened to be hit most hard.”
See a spelling or grammar error? Report it to web@ktuu.com
Copyright 2026 KTUU. All rights reserved.
Alaska
New oil and gas lease sale set for Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, amid litigation
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — The U.S. government plans another oil and gas lease sale for Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge — following two prior sales that saw no interest from major oil companies and amid ongoing litigation aimed at blocking drilling in a region seen as sacred by the indigenous Gwich’in.
The sale will be held June 5, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management announced Friday. It would be the first in the region under a law passed by Congress last year calling for four lease sales in the refuge’s coastal plain over a 10-year period. But it would be the third in the refuge overall, following one held near the end of President Donald Trump’s first term that has been tangled in litigation and another in early 2025, shortly before then-President Joe Biden left office, that yielded no bids.
Drilling supporters, including Alaska political leaders, argued last year’s sale was too meager an offering to draw interest.
The upcoming sale also would be the third federal oil and gas lease sale this year alone in Alaska under an aggressive push by the Trump administration to expand development in the state. There were no bidders in a sale last month for the aging Cook Inlet basin, while a lease sale in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska — where the large Willow oil project is under development — drew hundreds of bids despite pending legal challenges to the sale.
Bill Groffy, the land management agency’s acting director, in a statement said the success of last month’s petroleum reserve sale signaled a “robust and continuing demand for Alaskan energy, underscoring the need for more opportunities like the Coastal Plain sale.”
Leaders from Gwich’in villages near the arctic refuge and conservation groups vowed to continue fighting efforts to open the refuge’s coastal plain to drilling. The Gwich’in consider the coastal plain sacred, as it provides calving grounds for a caribou herd they rely on. The plain, bordering the Beaufort Sea in northeast Alaska and featuring rolling hills and tundra, also provides habitat for wildlife including muskoxen and migratory birds.
“The Trump Administration’s relentless push to auction off this sacred land despite overwhelming public opposition and industry that has already signaled they are not interested makes clear that this administration values corporate interests over the rights and lives of Indigenous peoples,” Galen Gilbert, first chief of Arctic Village Council, said in a statement. “We will continue to fight with every tool available to protect the Coastal Plain for our children and all future generations.”
Debate over drilling in the region spans decades.
Leaders of Kaktovik, an Iñupiaq community within the refuge, consider responsible development key to their region’s economic well-being and have welcomed efforts by the Trump administration to open more lands for drilling.
The Bureau of Land Management has said the coastal plain could contain 4.25 billion to 11.8 billion barrels of recoverable oil, but there is limited information about the amount and quality of oil. Meanwhile, conservation groups see the refuge as the crown jewel of the country’s refuge system and a place that should be off-limits to development. The refuge itself is the largest in the country, covering an area roughly the size of South Carolina.
Andy Moderow, senior director of policy at Alaska Wilderness League, said the planned sale “simply runs counter to common sense.”
“Any oil and gas company that is even thinking about buying these leases should know that, if they do, they will be sending a clear message to the American people that no place in Alaska is too sacred to drill in a quest for corporate profits,” he said in a statement urging companies to sit out the sale.
-
Massachusetts5 minutes agoPolice shoot and kill man armed with knife in Lexington, DA says
-
Minnesota11 minutes agoBoldy, Eriksson Ek help Wild cruise past Stars in Game 1 of Western 1st Round | NHL.com
-
Mississippi17 minutes agoGeorge County High School senior killed in Highway 26 crash, MHP says
-
Missouri23 minutes ago
Missouri Lottery Powerball, Pick 3 winning numbers for April 18, 2026
-
Montana29 minutes ago
Montana Lottery Powerball, Lotto America results for April 18, 2026
-
Nebraska35 minutes agoGallery: Huskers Run-Rule No. 12 USC to Take Series
-
Nevada41 minutes agoIN RESPONSE: Cortez Masto lands bill would keep the proceeds in Nevada
-
New Hampshire47 minutes agoNew Hampshire grapples with nuclear waste storage – Valley News