The reports published Oct. 23 and 24, 2026, about Polar LNG and Russia’s Novatek concern a new company, but the problem it says it can solve is half a century old. North Slope gas has sat underground near Prudhoe Bay since oil started flowing in 1977, because no one has found a way to ship it at a profit.
Where it stands: Neither the state-backed Alaska LNG pipeline nor Polar LNG’s tanker plan had reached a final investment decision as of October 26. Polar LNG said on Oct. 23 that it is targeting first deliveries by the end of 2030 and has asked Treasury’s sanctions office to license its purchase of a partly built Novatek plant base.
Polar LNG’s former chief executive, Joel Riddle, alleges Novatek was covertly funding and steering the startup, according to reporting by the FT and the New York Times. The company rejects that, calls him a “disgruntled former employee” and says “Development activities are being pursued in full compliance with applicable US laws.” Novatek says it is seeking a “minority shareholder” stake and denies its role hinges on sanctions relief; Tech Wave, the parent, says Novatek owns none of it. Business Standard reported that U.S. officials have not established any sanctions breach. Our main report walks through those claims; what follows is the backstory.
Why North Slope gas is called stranded
The Alaska Beacon put known reserves, mostly at Prudhoe Bay, at about 35 trillion cubic feet. That gas rises with the oil. With no buyer in reach, producers pump it back into the reservoirs, about 8 billion cubic feet a day, a volume the Beacon compared with Japan’s entire daily gas use in 2024.
Distance is the core problem. The fields are hundreds of miles from Anchorage and Fairbanks and far from the Lower 48 and Asia. Every plan since has been an attempt to close that gap more cheaply than the last.
The 1970s: Congress, Carter and a Canada pipeline
Congress passed the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Act of 1976 during a national gas shortage. Its findings state that “large reserves of natural gas in the State of Alaska could help significantly to alleviate this supply shortage.”
Two routes competed. El Paso proposed a line beside the oil pipeline to a liquefaction plant on the coast. Carter instead backed an overland route through Canada. The approved project was 4,748 miles long and was to be finished by 1984 for $10 billion to $15 billion, the Beacon reported. It was never built, and in 1979 its lead sponsor told a congressional committee it had made no progress getting the state to help with a financing plan.
The 1980s and 1990s: Yukon Pacific’s LNG line
Former Gov. Wally Hickel founded Yukon Pacific in 1981 to pipe gas to Valdez for liquefaction and shipment to Asia. The plan, priced at $12 billion, went through two environmental impact statements, won long-term rights of way and had support from the Bush and Clinton administrations. Railroad giant CSX bought the company in 1988. The Beacon’s verdict on it was blunt: “What it lacked was economics to justify construction.”
The tanker idea behind Polar LNG is about as old. Arco Alaska considered shipping North Slope gas by icebreaker in the 1980s, according to the Beacon.
The 2000s: gas-to-liquids, federal guarantees and AGIA
Gov. Tony Knowles pushed the Canada route again. BP tested turning gas into synthetic crude that could ride the oil pipeline, building a test facility in Nikiski that it closed in 2009.
Congress tried money. The Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act of 2004 authorized federal loan guarantees of up to $18 billion, indexed to inflation, for a single qualifying project. No pipeline followed.
Gov. Frank Murkowski negotiated with BP, ConocoPhillips and Exxon Mobil over what was then a $20 billion line, asking lawmakers to lock in oil taxes as well; they balked. Gov. Sarah Palin’s Alaska Gasline Inducement Act of 2007 took a different route, awarding TransCanada a state license with up to $500 million in reimbursement. A rival BP-ConocoPhillips plan called Denali also faded. Shale gas then flooded the Lower 48 and undercut the case for shipping Alaska gas south.
The 2010s and 2020s: the state takes the wheel
The legislature created the Alaska Gasline Development Corp. in 2010, and over time the effort shifted to an all-Alaska line feeding an LNG plant in Nikiski. The state paid TransCanada about $327 million in AGIA reimbursements between 2010 and 2015, plus a later buyout, the Beacon reported.
AGDC filed its federal application in April 2017. FERC authorized the project in May 2020, and the Energy Department approved exports to non-FTA countries that August. In March 2025, AGDC chose Glenfarne as lead developer.
📨 Get Free Accountability Coverage Alerts
Free · No spam · Unsubscribe anytime
Glenfarne puts the cost at $44.5 billion to $54.5 billion. It first targeted a final investment decision in late 2025, then said it could not proceed without property tax relief, which lawmakers had repeatedly balked at as of late September, Alaska Public Media reported. Larry Persily, who once ran the federal office coordinating Alaska gas line work, estimates the state has spent more than $1 billion on gas line efforts in 25 years. “We want to think it’s different,” he told the Beacon.
Ice, shallow water and the tanker shortcut for North Slope gas
Skipping the 800-mile pipeline has obvious appeal, but the coast creates its own costs. The Beaufort Sea is shallow near shore, so tankers cannot easily come in to load, former oil and gas attorney Brad Keithley told the Anchorage Daily News. “The economics was always a big issue, and the companies never even got to the permitting,” he said.
Back in 2018, Keith Meyer, who formerly led the state’s Alaska LNG effort, contended that the pipeline savings, which the ADN now puts at $11 billion, would be eaten up by icebreakers, Arctic facilities and remote operating costs. He called the idea “not economically practical.”
Supporters point to change on the water. Qilak LNG’s David Clarke said in 2019 that sea ice has thinned and that far more of it is first-year ice, Alaska Public Media reported. Mead Treadwell told a state Senate committee in 2021 that Qilak would run a subsea line 6 to 9 miles out to a gravity-based plant sitting in about 45 feet of water, and argued that the trip to Tokyo is only 40 miles shorter from Cook Inlet than from the North Slope. Polar LNG plans to buy six icebreakers, the company told Reuters in April.
| Era | Plan | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 1976-79 | Canada overland line, $10B-$15B | Approved, never built |
| 1980s-90s | Yukon Pacific LNG to Valdez, $12B | Permitted, no economics |
| 1980s | Arco icebreaker tanker idea | Not built |
| 2000s | BP gas-to-liquids pilot | Nikiski plant shut 2009 |
| 2004 | Federal loan guarantee law, $18B | No pipeline followed |
| 2007-15 | AGIA license to TransCanada | Fizzled; state paid ~$327M |
| 2017-20 | AGDC Alaska LNG application | FERC, DOE approvals in 2020 |
| 2019 | Qilak LNG tanker plan, $5B | Not built |
| 2025-26 | Glenfarne-led Alaska LNG | No final investment decision |
| 2026 | Polar LNG nearshore plant | OFAC license pending |
How Polar LNG and Glenfarne’s pipeline compare today is in our side-by-side explainer. Why Asian buyers matter to both plans is in our report on the Japan and Korea pitch, and what the Polar LNG plan would mean locally is in our guide for Alaskans.
In its March 2026 report to the Energy Department, the Alaska LNG project company said it had not yet signed any long-term LNG export or gas supply contracts.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is North Slope gas called stranded?
Because there has never been an economic way to move it to buyers. The gas comes up with Prudhoe Bay oil and is pumped back underground, where it helps push more oil out. Known reserves are about 35 trillion cubic feet, according to the Alaska Beacon, but the fields sit hundreds of miles from Alaska’s cities and thousands from big markets.
How many times has an Alaska gas pipeline been approved?
Several plans won major approvals without being built. A Canada route won presidential approval in the 1970s, Yukon Pacific’s LNG plan had federal and state permits, and the current Alaska LNG design received a FERC authorization in 2020 and a non-FTA export order from the Energy Department. None has reached construction of the main line.
Has anyone tried shipping gas straight off the North Slope by tanker?
The idea dates to Arco Alaska in the 1980s. Qilak LNG proposed it in 2019 and Polar LNG in 2026. Industry figures have long doubted it because the coast is shallow and icebreaking ships and Arctic facilities are expensive. None has been built.
How much has Alaska spent chasing a gas line?
Former federal gas line coordinator Larry Persily told the Alaska Beacon the state has spent more than $1 billion over 25 years. Separately, the Beacon reported the state reimbursed TransCanada about $327 million under the 2007 AGIA law.
Where does Alaska LNG stand now?
Glenfarne, which took the lead role in 2025, had not reached a final investment decision as of October 26. Its project company told the Energy Department in March 2026 that it had signed no long-term export or supply contracts.
Sources
- Alaska natural gas pipeline dreams stretch over half a century — Alaska Beacon (via Arctic Today), June 18, 2026
- 15 U.S.C. 719: Congressional findings (Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Act of 1976) — U.S. Government Publishing Office, 2023 edition
- 15 U.S.C. 720n: Loan guarantees (Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act) — U.S. Government Publishing Office, 2023 edition
- Alaska LNG Project LLC Semi-Annual Report, Docket No. 14-96-LNG — Alaska LNG Project LLC filing to the U.S. Department of Energy, March 27, 2026
- Texas investor with Trump family ties pursues project to tap North Slope gas — Anchorage Daily News, March 3, 2026
- New proposed LNG project would ship gas from North Slope to Asia on ice-breaking tankers — Alaska Public Media, October 23, 2019
- Senate Resources Standing Committee minutes (Qilak LNG presentation) — Alaska State Legislature, March 22, 2021
- Trump claims South Korea will invest $50B in Alaska gas pipeline. Not so fast, Korean officials say — Alaska Public Media, September 30, 2026
- Planned LNG plant in Alaska seeks equipment from sanctioned Russia firm — Reuters (via Eye on the Arctic), April 1, 2026
- Polar LNG Announces Leadership Change and Outlines Vision for Alaska North Slope Development — Polar LNG (company statement), October 23, 2026
- Former CEO: Russian Firm Backed Alaska Gas Venture — Newsmax (via Yahoo News), October 24, 2026
- Whistleblower CEO quits over hidden Russian cash behind gas deal in Trump peace talks: NYT — Raw Story, October 24, 2026
- Top executives quit $25 bn US gas project over alleged Russian control — Business Standard, October 25, 2026
This article is news reporting and analysis based on the public sources listed above, as they stood on the dates shown. Where officials, lawmakers or analysts disagree, including on whether an action is lawful, their positions are attributed to them; Donald Trump Class Action is not a court and nothing here is legal advice. Facts in a developing story can change.