Connect with us

Alaska

Private company takes over feasibility assessment and development of $44 billion Alaska LNG project

Published

on

Private company takes over feasibility assessment and development of  billion Alaska LNG project


The long-struggling, $44 billion Alaska LNG project has landed a private partner that will take over majority ownership of the company that seeks to deliver natural gas from the North Slope to Alaskans and the world.

The Glenfarne Group will also lead development of the project to construction and operation after the board of the Alaska Gasline Development Corp. on Thursday agreed to a binding deal with the company, according to a statement from AGDC, a state agency.

“Glenfarne’s financial, project management, and commercial expertise is well matched to lead this vital project forward,” said Brendan Duval, Glenfarne’s founder. “Alaska LNG will provide desperately needed energy security and natural gas cost savings for Alaskans and give Glenfarne unmatched flexibility to simultaneously serve LNG markets in both Asia and Europe through our three LNG projects.”

The change in ownership is significant in part because the state corporation has run the project on its own for nearly a decade, after the major oil companies that were its original partners backed out in 2016.

Advertisement

Glenfarne, founded in 2011, is a New York company that develops, owns and operates energy and infrastructure projects. The company is the developer, owner and operator of Texas LNG, the most recent U.S. LNG project to fully sell its LNG volumes with a total market value over $60 billion, its founder Brendan Duval said in February.

“Alaska LNG will ensure a brighter future for generations of Alaskans and I look forward to working with Glenfarne as they lead Alaska LNG forward,” said Frank Richards, president of the AGDC.

“Today is a historic day for Alaska,” Gov. Mike Dunleavy said. “Alaska LNG will strengthen the U.S. geostrategic position in the North Pacific, provide vital energy security for our residents, our military bases, our businesses, and our Asian allies, and unlock billions in economic benefit at home and abroad.”

The project has seen renewed interest from Asian companies that might serve as investors or gas buyers, and President Donald Trump has touted the pipeline as a key project he’d like to see built.

Trump said in his speech to Congress this month that his administration is working on a “gigantic” natural gas pipeline, referring to Alaska LNG. The project’s gas exports to Asia could be so large that they could help alleviate trade imbalances.

Advertisement

The state gas line corporation declined to release the contract with Glenfarne.

The project envisions development of a roughly 800-mile pipeline delivering natural gas from the North Slope. The gas would be processed at a treatment plant on the North Slope and liquefied in Nikiski on the Kenai Peninsula, then exported to Asian markets in oceangoing tankers.

Richards told the gasline board on Thursday that the deal calls for Glenfarne to assume 75% equity of 8 Star Alaska, the state agency’s project development company. The state gas line agency will hold the remaining ownership.

The state has the option to invest in individual facilities such as the gas treatment plant, he said.

“We’ve reserved the right for investment, for the state, of up to 25% in any of the subprojects or all,” Richards said. “And that will be an ongoing discussion with the Legislature and the administration on if that is an opportunity they would like to take or not.”

Advertisement

Glenfarne will cover the costs of the engineering and design work that needs to be completed before a final decision to build the project is made. Duval said the money will come from a consortium of private investors, but a federal loan guarantee could help support that effort, he said.

“They will fund and resource the Alaskan LNG project to final investment decision,” Richards said. “This covers the entire Alaska LNG project, and not just the initial phase of the pipeline.”

Duval said it’s possible a final investment decision could be made by the end of this year. LNG deliveries could begin in 2030 or 2031, he said.

It is unclear what investors, if any, would provide the large sums of money for construction of the project.

It’s also unclear where the natural gas would come from. The agency has signed a deal with a small oil and gas explorer in Alaska in an effort to provide gas for the first phase. Great Bear Pantheon, however, currently does not produce oil or gas. There’s no guarantee it will produce gas in Alaska.

Advertisement

Richards said the gas line agency is working on securing gas sales precedent agreements with other producers, including for gas at the Point Thomson and Prudhoe Bay fields.

Richards said the agreement with Glenfarne covers the entire Alaska LNG project, and not just the initial phase of the pipeline. “So gas treatment, pipeline and liquefaction (plant). But the priority is going to be the phase-one pipeline and gas for Alaskans,” Richards said.

The first phase of the project has been estimated to cost $11 billion. It calls for the construction of a 750-mile pipeline to deliver the gas from the North Slope to the Interior and Southcentral Alaska, where electric utilities are looking at importing natural gas as Cook Inlet gas dwindles.

After the first-phase construction, the larger project to export the gas can be built, according to the plan. That portion of the project includes the construction of a liquefaction facility.

Richards said he was calling into the meeting from Asia. He said he was on a trade mission with Glenfarne and Gov. Dunleavy to Asian countries, looking for companies that might commit to buying Alaska’s gas or investing in the project.

Advertisement

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.





Source link

Alaska

Wayne and Wanda: I’m ready to break up with Alaska but facing resistance from everyone

Published

on

Wayne and Wanda: I’m ready to break up with Alaska but facing resistance from everyone


Dear Wanda and Wayne,

I never thought I’d be the person writing this letter, but after this winter, I think I might be done with Alaska. I was born here, grew up here, raised my family here, and never imagined living anywhere else. I defended Alaska to the haters. I rolled my eyes at people who retired to Arizona. I told myself long winters are worth it because summers are the best.

But this winter broke something in me. It was so long, dark, icy and relentless. By the time spring finally arrived, I felt angry that winter took so much out of me and that I spent months feeling trapped by weather, darkness and road conditions. Angry that I’m getting older and still structuring my life around surviving winters instead of enjoying my life. And at the time I’m writing this, this spring has sucked! My heat is still coming on every day. I’m still wearing my puffer jackets!

Part of me wonders if it’s not really about the winter at all. I’m divorced and my two kids are grown and doing their own thing, both staying in Alaska for now. For the first time in my life, nothing is really anchoring me to a place. And if I’m being honest with myself, in addition to feeling trapped by the weather, I’m bored with it here. The dating scene feels impossibly small. Every time I open a dating app, it’s the same people. Half the time I already know them, or know someone who dated them (and broken up with them for a good reason!).

Advertisement

So I’m sketching out plans to move somewhere warmer, bigger and completely unfamiliar. I think I want to know what life feels like somewhere else while I’m still young enough to enjoy it. I really feel this is a moment for a big change.

The problem is that nobody seems supportive. When I bring it up, people act like I’m having a midlife crisis. Friends tell me I’ll regret it. Family members remind me that the kids are here. Other Alaskans give me the usual speech about how the Lower 48 is generic. It’s gotten to the point where I almost don’t talk about it anymore because I’m tired of defending myself.

But all the resistance has me questioning myself and whether moving is a legitimate and logical step, or whether I’m just exhausted from a hard winter and romanticizing a different life. How do you know the difference between running toward something and simply running away?

Wanda says:

You’re asking whether you’re running toward or away from something — essentially if you’re taking a positive step or being reactive. Those aren’t mutually exclusive. Sometimes we leave both because we’re exhausted by what we’ve been carrying, and also because we are moving toward something new at the same time.

Advertisement

Every reason you listed for staying in Alaska has changed. You raised your children here? They’re grown. You had a marriage here? That chapter is closed. You tolerated winters for the sunny payoff? Nailed it: This spring has sucked.

Now you’re primed for a reset, and questioning how you want the near term and future of your life to unfold is not a crisis, it’s taking action. And it’s way more productive than floating along season to season in a fog of monotony, settling for an unfulfilling existence. Your friends and family may genuinely believe they’re protecting you from a mistake, but they’re also protecting their own worldview. Your decision to leave can feel like an implicit criticism of their choices.

But this isn’t a committee decision, and you’re a grown woman capable of major decisions, who absolutely should explore life’s possibilities without defending it to everyone you know. So go explore. Visit places. Rent before you buy. Spend a winter somewhere else. Gather information instead of arguments. And know that no matter where you land, you can always come home again — even if it’s just for a long visit in the middle of summer.

Wayne says:

This isn’t a midlife crisis that can be glossed over with a motorcycle, lip filler, a 20-something boyfriend (who probably went to high school with your kids — yikes), or kicking off your Cowgirl Era with a hat, boots and a two-week Nashville dive bar tour.

Advertisement

This is an existential crisis with your health and happiness at risk. And you’ve faced it thoughtfully, sat with it thoroughly, and are now making the best decisions selfishly. Good for you! You can’t fault your family and friends for also being selfish and wanting you to stay in AK. Of course they don’t want their mom and friend moving far away. But you’ve got to mute that noise and focus on what’s best for you.

Yes, Alaska life is special, but it sure isn’t easy. And we don’t get medals for stubbornly battling through decades of winters. What we do get is some sweet and fleeting summer moments followed by more winters. You know that, and it’s not enough for you anymore.

Most people would totally understand an 18-to-20-year-old Alaska kid taking off to see what else is out there in the world. What, we’re supposed to stop being interested in new experiences once we hit a certain age? And we’re expected to stick around someplace forever just because we’ve always been there?

It’s time for you to go. See what life feels like when you’re not scraping ice off your windshield in May. See how much fun you can have with new people in new places. It’s exciting, it’s living, and you deserve it.

[Wayne and Wanda: Is it the winter blues I can’t shake off, or something more?]

Advertisement

[Wayne and Wanda: Rebuilding my social life after a divorce]

[Wayne and Wanda: My relationship is poised for big steps, and I’m anxious]





Source link

Continue Reading

Alaska

Here’s Why Alaska Air Shares Popped Higher This Week | The Motley Fool

Published

on

Here’s Why Alaska Air Shares Popped Higher This Week | The Motley Fool


Shares in Alaska Air Group (ALK 1.16%) rose by 12.7% in an excellent week for airline stocks. The move comes as the sector climbs a wall of worry driven by soaring jet fuel prices stemming from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. While the market’s prior concerns are understandable, there’s growing anecdotal evidence suggesting that airlines, including Alaska Air, might emerge from the period in better shape than many expect.

This week’s airline updates

Southwest Airlines (LUV 0.83%) CEO Robert Jordan gave a presentation at the Bernstein 42nd Annual Strategic Decisions Conference, and his remarks surprised the market. It’s no secret that jet fuel prices have soared, and that’s challenging airlines’ profitability. Still, it doesn’t appear to have affected end demand, with Delta Air Lines previously telling investors that strong demand in the first quarter was continuing into the second quarter, even as it raised prices.

Today’s Change

(-1.16%) $-0.54

Advertisement

Current Price

$46.05

That positive trend, with Southwest’s Jordan telling investors that Southwest had participated in seven consecutive fare increases with “no drop off in demand at all.” Jordan went on to note that “I’m becoming increasingly bullish that we will be able to cover these fuel increases with revenue increases,” and also believes that “the industry will retain a much higher percent of the fare increases that would be typical historically.”

Advertisement

What it means to Alaska Air

Given that Alaska competes with Southwest on some routes and is suffering from rising jet fuel prices, the news from Southwest is particularly relevant. For example, in its recent first-quarter earnings report, Alaska’s management said higher fuel costs would impact earnings per share (EPS) by $0.70 in the first quarter and by more than $3 in the second quarter.

Air passengers.

Image source: Getty Images.

These are significant numbers from an airline that analysts expect to report a $0.77-per-share loss in 2026 and then $6.32 in EPS in 2027. However, if Alaska can offset fuel costs with higher prices, then those estimates might need a positive revision.

Lee Samaha has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Alaska Air Group, Delta Air Lines, and Southwest Airlines. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Alaska

State of Alaska Secures Win in Fight for Transparency Around Oil Development

Published

on

State of Alaska Secures Win in Fight for Transparency Around Oil Development


 

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Image-SOM

(Bethel, AK) –Wednesday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a favorable opinion for the State of Alaska in ConocoPhillips Alaska v. Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC), agreeing that State laws requiring disclosure of oil well data are not preempted by federal law.

“Alaska relies heavily on our resources and resource development,” said Acting Alaska Attorney General Cori Mills. “We are also stewards of those resources for the citizens of Alaska. Alaska’s law both allows resource development now, and encourages further development and exploration in the future. We’re pleased that the Ninth Circuit recognized that federal law has not overridden Alaska’s balanced approach.”

The Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission regulates oil and gas operations throughout Alaska, including within the National Petroleum Reserve–Alaska (NPR–A). Under Alaska law, companies need permits from the AOGCC to drill and must submit well data. The AOGCC is required to keep well data confidential for 24 months.

Advertisement

ConocoPhillips drilled several wells on lease holdings within the NPR–A and submitted data to the AOGCC. When the 24-month period expired, the AOGCC notified ConocoPhillips of the upcoming well data disclosure. ConocoPhillips sued in federal court to stop the disclosure process claiming that the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act, the federal law allowing private exploration in the NPR–A, preempted Alaska’s 24-month disclosure law. The federal district court found Alaska law preempted, and the AOGCC sought appellate review by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

On appeal, the Ninth Circuit agreed with the AOGCC. The federal Production Act does not preempt state law. The Ninth Circuit therefore reversed the district court’s holding to the contrary.

“The Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is pleased with the court’s decision upholding Alaska law,” said AOGCC Commissioner Jessie Chmielowski in a declaration filed in the litigation court. “Alaska’s balanced approach to well data confidentiality leads to increased exploration activity, not less. Alaska law allows for a two-year confidentiality period on exploration well data to leverage a company’s investment in drilling. Thereafter, making the data public has incentivized exploration on the North Slope. Placing well data in the public record allows competing companies to evaluate different exploration concepts or interpretations based on seismic data that, without well data, are just educated guesses.”

# # #



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending