SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
alaska
Alaska's North Slope Gasline Is a Cautionary Tale for Fossil Fuel Boosters Like Trump
The allure of quick profits from resource extraction often comes at the expense of long-term sustainability, not just for the environment but for taxpayers too.
Jan 30, 2025
Alaska's vast wilderness and abundant natural resources have long been a source of pride and a cornerstone of its economy, supporting sustainable industries like fishing and tourism and resource development like logging, mining, and drilling. With large swaths of open lands and waters, spectacular views, abundant wildlife, and unique geological elements like volcanos and glaciers, Alaska holds an almost mythical allure for Americans. There is a perception of endless opportunity, but these riches also come with responsibility—both for Alaskans and for the rest of the nation.
Recently, U.S. President Donald Trump signed a sweeping executive order titled "Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential," aiming to boost oil and gas drilling, mining, and logging in the state by rolling back numerous protective actions implemented by the Biden administration. While this move has been met with enthusiasm by some state leaders, others urge caution considering the environmental and fiscal responsibilities that would ensue if its intentions were realized.
Alaska is unlike any other state when it comes to natural resources. About 61% of Alaska's land is owned by the federal government, meaning what happens in Alaska is not only a local matter, it is also a national one. The executive order impacts public lands that belong to all Americans and some that are sacred to Indigenous peoples. Protecting Alaska's wild lands and resources isn't just Alaska's responsibility; it's a shared duty for all of us.
President Trump's executive orders may promise economic growth, but they fail to account for the real costs of overextending our natural and financial resources.
And yet the push to exploit these lands often rests on flimsy economic premises that fail to stand the test of time. Take the North Slope Gasline; For 15 years, the state-owned Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC) has promoted this project as a game-changer, spending nearly half a billion dollars of public money. Despite this significant public investment, no tangible progress has been made. A new report, Alaska's Pipe Dream: The Economic Folly of the North Slope Gasline, released by a coalition of groups, reveals what many already suspected: AGDC continues to spend millions on a gasline that's no closer to fruition than when it was first proposed in 2008.
The numbers are grim. The latest version of the proposed 800-mile gasline for LNG export is projected to cost a staggering $44 billion, while global market trends are rapidly shifting away from fossil fuels toward renewable energy sources. Meanwhile, Alaska continues to write checks—nearly $500 million so far—hoping for a miracle that seems increasingly unlikely.
Imagine what could have been done with that money: better schools, improved healthcare, resilient infrastructure, or renewable energy investments that would genuinely prepare Alaska for the future. Instead, the state continues to sink public dollars into a project that doesn't pencil out, hoping it will magically deliver economic salvation.
In addition to being an economic bust, the gasline would exacerbate global warming, locking in extensive fossil fuel use for decades into the future. With its effects on warming 80 times greater than carbon dioxide on a short-term basis, addressing methane emissions is crucial in efforts to combat climate change and mitigate its impacts.
This is a cautionary tale for all Americans. The allure of quick profits from resource extraction often comes at the expense of long-term sustainability, not just for the environment but for taxpayers too. President Trump's executive orders may promise economic growth, but they fail to account for the real costs of overextending our natural and financial resources.
Alaska can't afford to be reckless with its land, money, or reputation. Whether it's the AGDC's pipe dream or new drilling and mining projects, we need to ask tougher questions about who would benefit and at what cost. Rushing into poorly planned developments risks leaving future generations to clean up the mess—financially and environmentally.
For those who dream of traveling to Alaska to view bears, moose, caribou, eagles, whales, and sea otters in their natural habitats, this matters. For those who seek exceptional fishing, hiking, camping, kayaking, heli-skiing, and cultural experiences, this matters.
For those who cherish the idea of public lands remaining pristine and accessible, this matters. Alaska's resources belong to all Americans, and so does the responsibility of ensuring they're managed wisely.
Leaders in Alaska—and across the country—should learn from the past and make decisions that reflect the realities of today's economy and tomorrow's environmental needs. As an initial step, efforts to build the North Slope gasline should be abandoned. It's time to pull the plug on this ill-conceived venture and look to renewables to meet our current and future energy needs.
Keep ReadingShow Less
By Fast-Tracking LNG, Trump Is Putting Big Oil Above the People
President Trump made it clear in his campaign that his apparent priority was to uplift struggling Americans. This is simply and totally at odds with his promise to “drill, baby, drill.”
Jan 24, 2025
On Day One of his second term, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an assortment of executive orders to reverse steps taken by the Biden administration to mitigate climate change. He replaced those steps with orders meant to enrich a variety of corporate interests, the most prevalent being the oil and gas industry. In less than 24 hours, Trump froze crucial clean energy funds that America needs from the Inflation Reduction Act, presented the Arctic to corporate polluters on a silver platter, and prepared to turbocharge dirty energy exports.
One of the most striking executive orders is one that calls for the unfettered expansion of methane gas exports, or LNG. In this order, there is very specific, seemingly-tailored language that policy researchers confirmed is meant to expedite the approval of Delfin LNG, a floating offshore facility that the former administration refused to greenlight due to widespread changes in “project ownership, design, financing, and operations” that had been made since the project’s original approval in 2017. In short, it’s a carbon bomb project that would be responsible for 92 million metric tons of pollution annually—equivalent to 24 coal plants.
Last week during a confirmation hearing for transportation secretary, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) made sure to call on nominee former Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.) to approve permits for several oil and gas export terminals while accusing the Biden administration of “slow walking” the Delfin project. It seems that this executive order will only help aid this company in a quick turnaround to move forward while disregarding environmental review.
As rapid oil and gas expansion will burden Americans with higher prices and dump even more pollution into our air and water, Big Oil and their political mouthpieces will line their pockets more than ever before.
However, Delfin is just one of 14 pending LNG export facilities poised to be rapidly approved by the Trump administration. In new research from Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen, we examined announced supply agreements between exporters and LNG buyers to find that 76 million metric tons per year of LNG is under agreement to be sold from all of these facilities. The supply agreements executed so far represent an obscene amount of climate pollution—at least 510 million metric tons per year, equivalent to that of 135 coal plants.
These numbers are staggering not just for the climate impact, but for the impact on American consumers. Before the second Trump term even began, former Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm warned that LNG exports could outpace global fuel demand. More LNG exports could precipitate a sharp increase in domestic gas prices leaving American consumers with higher energy bills.
While these 14 pending LNG projects have publicly disclosed buyers, there are several more pending LNG projects that could also pick up speed in the next few months. Another major executive order, “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential,” will have the Trump administration rolling back several of the Biden administration's achievements aimed at protecting the Arctic. It would also prioritize the development of the Alaska LNG facility.
The long delayed project, which is set to be one of the largest LNG export terminals in the U.S., was approved by the Biden administration in 2022. But the massive $44 billion boondoggle, which involves building an 800-mile pipeline across Alaska, has always been too risky for the private sector. That’s why the state of Alaska has been lobbying for public financing—including via a scheme to loot clean energy loan funding from the Inflation Reduction Act. If the Trump administration successfully steers our tax dollars towards Alaska LNG, it will mean lighting the fuse of a carbon bomb 10 times dirtier than the Willow Project.
President Trump made it clear in his campaign that his apparent priority was to uplift struggling Americans. This is simply and totally at odds with his promise to “drill, baby, drill”—as rapid oil and gas expansion will burden Americans with higher prices and dump even more pollution into our air and water, Big Oil and their political mouthpieces will line their pockets more than ever before. These Day One executive orders, and the giveaways to oil and gas they offer, confirm that Trump has already abandoned the people he once again pledged to serve and put profit first instead.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden Tried to Protect the Vulnerable Bering Sea; Will It Work?
The climate emergency has led to dramatic changes for Alaska fish and wildlife and for the subsistence-based communities of the Arctic who depend on these creatures for their survival.
Jan 22, 2025
In early January, as one of his last acts in office, former U.S. President Joe Biden banned future offshore oil and gas drilling on more than 625 million acres of U.S. coastal waters including the entire East Coast, West Coast, and the eastern Gulf of Mexico as well as the northern Bering Sea.
He did this using presidential powers granted under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953, which in 2019 a federal judge in Alaska ruled cannot be rescinded by a future president. This means, despite his day one executive order reversing Biden’s order, President Donald Trump will likely have to get Congress to pass legislation negating this drilling ban. Three Republican congressmen from Louisiana and Texas have already introduced legislation to do that, but may have a hard time getting fellow Republicans from states like South Carolina and Florida—where anti-drilling sentiment is strong—to go along.
It’s pretty clear why Biden did what he did, first to thwart Trump’s “Drill Baby Drill” energy plan and to burnish his own environmental legacy. What is less clear to most people is why he included 44 million acres of the Northern Bering Sea off of Alaska in the drilling ban.
“Everything’s declining, even our (summer) moss berries, cloud berries, everything.”
As a Biden White House fact-sheet explained it: “The Northern Bering Sea Climate Resilience Area was established in 2016 and includes one of the largest marine mammal migrations in the world—beluga and bowhead whales, walruses, and seals… the health of these waters is critically important to food security and to the culture of more than 70 coastal Tribes, including the Yup’ik, Cup’ik, and Inupiaq people who have relied on these resources for millennia.”
So, what’s the Northern Bering Sea Climate Resilience Area? Established by President Barack Obama in December of 2016, it was an attempt to meet the concerns of both Alaska Natives and environmental scientists studying the rapidly changing conditions they were witnessing. Alaska and its waters are today warming two to three times faster than the rest of the world due to a climate phenomenon known as “Arctic amplification,” linked to vanishing sea ice. As the Arctic Ocean ice cover that reflects solar radiation back into space has retreated, the dark ocean waters exposed absorb ever greater amounts of heat leading to 2024 being listed as the hottest year on record going back to 1850. 2023 was the previous hottest year. The 10 warmest years have all occurred in the last decade.
This has led to dramatic changes for the fish and wildlife and for the subsistence-based communities of the Arctic who depend on these creatures for their survival. For example, a study published last month found that 4 million common murres, a seabird that frequents the area, recently died as the result of a marine heatwave. This was about half the state of Alaska’s population, and may be the largest documented die-off of a single species of wild bird.
The Bering Sea’s Alaska Native communities—some 70 federally recognized tribes—first requested action under Obama and got both a ban on destructive bottom trawl fishing in the 113,000-square-mile resilience area and a ban on oil drilling in about half the area (rescinded by Trump during his first term and now fully protected by Biden under the Lands Act), also a commitment for the Coast Guard to restrict shipping channels in areas where native communities are involved in fishing, hunting, and whaling (still not finalized by the Coast Guard) and a pledge to consult with these same communities moving forward. Three leading Alaska Native organizations—Kawerak, Inc., the Association of Village Council Presidents, and the Bering Sea Elders Group—released a joint statement on the day Biden acted expressing their “deepest appreciation and gratitude” to him for protecting waters that President Trump hopes to reopen to oil drilling.
I recently interviewed two women from St. Paul Island in the Pribilof Islands, about 300 miles off the Alaskan mainland in the Bering Sea. Destiny Bristol Kushin is a 20-year-old college student working toward an associate degree in environmental sciences, and her grandmother Zinaida Melovidov is an elder who has lived on the island, with a population of just under 400 people, most of her life. They both talked about the decline of the murres that were hunted for meat and whose eggs were collected on a nearby island where they’ve all but disappeared since the die-off.
“Everything’s declining, even our (summer) moss berries, cloud berries, everything,” Melovidov worries.
“Even in the last 20 years since I was born, you can see the differences in the environment, especially with the seasons. Our summers will be later and foggy where they used to be sunny,” Kushin notes. “Our winters aren’t as snowy. It’s mostly wet now, like rain and snow all during the winter time.”
I’ve heard similar concerns about climate impacts on lives and livelihoods from Alaska Natives in the Aleutians and Southwest Alaska whose villages are also at risk from erosion, flooding, and thawing permafrost.
Even if Biden’s drilling ban in the Bering Sea stands the test of Trump, other threats will remain including oil spills from Russian tankers passing through the 55-mile-wide Bering Strait between Alaska and Russia delivering oil to China via Russia’s Northern Sea Route of retreating Arctic ice. Russia’s oil trade with China has increased since Western sanctions were imposed following its 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Reflecting these tensions around oil, in 2023 the Russians refused to participate with the U.S. Coast Guard in a joint oil spill response exercise.
Even with drilling protections for coastal America, the U.S. will remain the world’s leading oil and gas producer, including the 14% of national production that comes from the western Gulf of Mexico where the 2010 BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster took place.
And, with President Trump’s commitment to produce ever more fossil fuels that drive climate disruption and contribute to extreme weather events from heatwaves in the Arctic to the Los Angeles’ firestorms, our problems with oil and gas remain far from over.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular