The $44 billion Alaska LNG project, which U.S. President Donald Trump touted Japan, South Korea and other nations “want to invest trillions of dollars each,” involves constructing a 1,300-km pipeline from Alaska’s North Slope to the southern coast. Natural gas would then be cooled to a liquid state and shipped to the world’s top three LNG importers—China, Japan, and South Korea—starting in 2029.
The U.S. has been trying to export Alaskan natural gas to Asian countries since the 2010s, but the enormous cost of building the infrastructure has hindered Asian countries from investing in the project.
Trump, who has been pushing for U.S. energy independence and dominance, wants to jumpstart the long-delayed Alaska LNG project with investment from major importers such as South Korea and Japan while securing a stable export market. In 2023, China accounted for 17.6% of global LNG imports, followed by Japan (16.5%) and South Korea (11.3%). Collectively, the three countries account for 45.4%, or nearly half, of all LNG imports.
Transporting LNG from the shale gas fields near Houston, Texas, to Korea typically takes up to three weeks or a month if the Panama Canal is congested. Shipping LNG from Alaska to Asian countries takes only a week. Large LNG carriers often struggle to navigate the Panama Canal, meaning that when they choose to detour around Africa’s Cape of Good Hope, transportation can extend to 45–50 days.
“The U.S. likely sees the Alaska LNG project as a strategic move to compete with Canada and Russia for the Asian LNG market,” said Shin Hyun-don, a professor at Inha University.
When the project was first proposed in 2013, global oil prices averaged around $100 per barrel, raising hopes that the project could be profitable. Oil giants ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and BP initially set up subsidiaries to join the project. But the American shale gas revolution soon drove oil and natural gas prices down, dimming the prospects of the multi-billion-dollar Alaska project. By 2016, all major oil companies had pulled out, leaving only Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC), a state-owned entity, to carry the project forward.
The situation resembles real estate redevelopment projects, which thrive when property prices soar but stall when the market cools and raw material costs rise. LNG projects require massive investments in liquefaction facilities, pipelines, and export terminals. The capital-intensive nature of the project requires securing long-term contracts, often spanning 20 years, before construction begins, akin to pre-selling apartments before development.
Many see the Alaska LNG project as expensive and challenging. The project involves building a long pipeline from Prudhoe Bay in Alaska’s North Slope region to the Pacific port of Nikiski. The pipeline alone costs $10.7 billion, contributing to the project’s overall price tag of $44 billion.
When ExxonMobil and other energy giants pulled back from the project in 2016, global energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie called the Alaska LNG project “one of the least competitive energy projects in the world.”
“With Alaska’s harsh climate limiting construction to only half of the year and the state’s high corporate tax rates, profitability will be hard to achieve,” said Jung Yong-heon, a former professor at Ajou University.
South Korea’s Industry Minister Ahn Duk-geun said the government recently agreed to establish a working-level group to discuss the project, though it remains too early to determine whether Korea will participate.
