Trump's Tariff Threats Revive Interest in $44 Billion Alaska Gas Project
New pipeline could shorten L.N.G. trips
Proposed pipeline
Alaska
Nikiski
From new export facilities
in Alaska, liquified natural
gas could reach Japan in
about a week.
JAPAN
U.S.
Tokyo
It takes about three weeks from states along the Gulf Coast, or about 30 days depending on Panama Canal congestion.
Houston
Pacific Ocean
Proposed pipeline
Alaska
Nikiski
JAPAN
U.S.
Houston
Pacific Ocean
Tokyo
From new export facilities in Alaska, liquified natural gas could reach Japan in about a week.
It takes about three weeks from states along the Gulf Coast, or about 30 days depending on Panama Canal congestion.
Note: The Shipping routes are approximate.
Sources: Alaska LNG; Searoutes
By Weiyi Cai
The geography behind a plan to ship natural gas from the North Slope of Alaska to Asia makes good sense. Alaska has vast stores of gas and is just a little over a week at sea from Asia, which has some of the world's biggest importers of liquefied natural gas.
But those countries have long been wary of the enormous cost of building the infrastructure to make it happen. That has contributed to a decades-long standstill.
Now, Asian buyers are giving the Alaska natural gas project a second look.
Their pivot was driven not by a change in the underlying economics, but by an abrupt political shift in Washington, where President Trump is pressuring countries to buy more American energy and appears bent on tapping Alaskan reserves.
Under threat of new tariffs, officials and executives in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are considering ways to participate in the plan called Alaska L.N.G. The $44 billion project involves constructing an 800-mile pipeline from fields north of the Arctic Circle to southern Alaska. From there, the gas would be cooled to liquid form and shipped to Asia.
In Japan, a state-owned bank and a government-backed energy group have been exploring whether to provide financing and investment for Alaska L.N.G., according to three people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss plans that are in their early stages.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
16 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump Aides Insist That Tariffs Will Remain, Even After Court Ruling
President Trump's top economic advisers stressed on Sunday that they would not be deterred by a recent court decision that declared many of the administration's tariffs to be illegal, as they pointed out a variety of additional authorities that the White House could invoke as it looks to pressure China and others into negotiations. They also signaled that Mr. Trump had no plans to extend an original 90-day pause on some of his steepest tariff rates, raising the odds that those duties — the mere announcement of which had roiled markets — could take effect as planned in July. 'Rest assured, tariffs are not going away,' Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, said during an appearance on 'Fox News Sunday.' Asked about the future of the president's so-called reciprocal tariffs, first announced and quickly suspended in April, Mr. Lutnick added, 'I don't see today that an extension is coming.' The president's tariff strategy entered uncharted political and legal territory last week after a federal trade court ruled that Mr. Trump had misused an emergency economic powers law in trying to wage a global trade war. The decision would have put a quick halt to those duties, which form the centerpiece of the president's strategy of pressuring other countries into trade talks. But an appeals court soon granted the government a brief administrative pause to sort out arguments in the case, which is expected to reach the Supreme Court. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Did The U.S. Air Force Cancel The F-22 Raptor?
It is the absolute apex of air-to-air combat. It rules the skies like a bird of prey, from which it takes its name. It's one of the stealthiest fighter jets in the world. The Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor is the pinnacle of what air dominance can be. So ... it was canceled. In 2009, the U.S. Department of Defense decided to end production of the fighter after only 186 planes were produced, significantly less than the original order of 750. What happened? Airpower is supposed to be one of the pillars of America's military strength, so why take its best piece off the board? The answer comes down to the fact that the nature of America's threats change and evolve over time, meaning that an asset that seemed critical in one era seems less so in another. Plus, put simply, the F-22 is wildly expensive, so if it's not an absolute must-have, the cost-benefit analysis just doesn't shake out. Read more: These Are The Worst American Cars Ever Made The F-22 was a revelation when it first flew in 1997. With a top speed of an incredible Mach 2.25 (1,726 miles per hour), supercruise capability (meaning it could fly for extended periods above the speed of sound), and a coat of radar-absorbent material, it was more advanced than any other fighter in the world at the time. It was a spaceship in a world full of paper planes. Ironically enough, that was part of its problem. Because Russia and China had nothing comparable in the first decade of the 21st century, the F-22 almost seemed like overkill. At a massive per-unit cost of $150 million, did America really need something that far beyond any of its competitors? For that matter, America's main adversaries at the time had no airpower at all. With the U.S. embroiled in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq against low-tech insurgent forces, a high-cost air-dominance fighter just didn't fit the country's needs at the time. Since even the Pentagon doesn't have infinite money (though it sure seems like it sometimes), it had to make some tough choices over where to put resources. For the budget-draining War on Terror, the F-22 just didn't have an argument to make. Not helping matters was the fact that Congress restricted use of the F-22 to just the U.S. Air Force. Translation: There would be no sales to foreign allies, which cut off a major revenue stream that could have offset its costs. Of course, since the end of production in 2009, a lot has changed. Russia and particularly China have upped their military capabilities, including in the air. With the benefit of hindsight, should the U.S. have kept the F-22 rolling off the assembly line? Not necessarily. For one thing, the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is an even newer fighter jet (though it has problems of its own). While slower and less stealthy than the F-22, it has vastly more advanced sensor capabilities. Not only can it gather a huge amount of information about the battlespace, its true party trick is its ability to disseminate that information to other F-35s and to headquarters. Meanwhile, the Air Force has also moved forward by looking backward. The decades-old F-15 airframe has gotten a major update in the form of the F-15EX. For one thing, it's much cheaper than the F-22 (its unit cost is only $94 million), which is appealing as the Pentagon looks to cut overspending. More importantly, the F-15EX can bring a whopping 12 air-to-air missiles to the fray, compared to the F-22's measly eight. The F-15EX was also designed to carry the newest and most advanced ordnance in the Air Force's arsenal, hypersonic missiles. Given all that, you could argue that the F-22 has lost its crown as the best air dominance fighter ... to a much older, and cheaper, plane. Want more like this? Join the Jalopnik newsletter to get the latest auto news sent straight to your inbox... Read the original article on Jalopnik.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sound Off: June 1, 2025
Sun Herald readers weigh in on local and national topics. Perhaps someone could develop a device that when a traffic light changed from red to green a signal was sent to the cars in front of the light. That signal would cause a loud ding to sound on the car's speakers alerting those looking at their phones that it was time to move. I'm not sure I've ever laughed harder than I did when I read about how people are making money on Wall Street basing their buys on the idea that Trump Always Chickens Out (TACO). With the Chrisley pardons, President Trump proved that he has zero integrity. The people who were defrauded of millions will never get their money back. If it's possible to have negative integrity, Trump is the charter member of the group. If there's one thing we should have learned by now, it's that Democrats will do anything to win an election. Considering the person in charge of the scheme admitted to it in print and on camera, I'm having trouble figuring out how anyone could say there isn't election fraud in Gulfport. Candidates have always held events where their 'patrons' donate and pledge their support. Is that voter fraud? The GOP in Gulfport is making accusations of voter fraud already. President Trump used that to push the lie that he won the 2020 election. Now he is in office selling everything that is not nailed down. Republicans must be really scared of the Black woman winning the mayors race in Gulfport. Wasn't Elon Musk trying to buy votes in Wisconsin? When Democrats use the Republican play book, they really get upset.. I'm old enough to remember when Elon Musk traveled the country handing out checks to people. I'm trying to figure out why that would be OK, but free meals aren't. I trust that the good people of Gulfport are smart enough to not vote for Hugh Keating, who, obviously, doesn't have enough merits to run on his own. Stephen A Smith said it best: 'How can anyone trust the lying media, Trump was right, they can't be trusted about anything!'Our country was manipulated by them. Why can't Canal Road in Gulfport be paved to 28th Street? Send your Sound Offs to soundoff@
