Trump officials are visiting Alaska to discuss a gas pipeline and oil drilling
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — The Trump administration is sending three Cabinet members to Alaska this week as it pursues oil drilling in the pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and reinvigorating a natural gas project that's languished for years.
The visit by Department of Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin comes after Trump signed an executive order earlier this year aimed at boosting oil and gas drilling, mining and logging in Alaska. It also comes amid tariff talks with Asian countries that are seen as possible leverage for the administration to secure investments in the proposed Alaska liquefied natural gas project.
Their itinerary includes a meeting Sunday with resource development groups and U.S. Sens. Dan Sullivan and Lisa Murkowski in Anchorage before heading to Utqiagvik, an Arctic town on the petroleum-rich North Slope where many Alaska Native leaders see oil development as economically vital to the region.
The federal officials also plan to visit the Prudhoe Bay oil field Monday — near the coast of the Arctic Ocean and more than 850 miles (1,368 kilometers) north of Anchorage — and speak at Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy's annual energy conference Tuesday in Anchorage.
While it's not unusual for U.S. officials to visit Alaska during warmer weather months, Dunleavy's office said the officials' visit is significant. Dunleavy, a Trump ally, said he is thankful for an administration that 'recognizes Alaska's unique value.'
Government and industry representatives from a number of Asian countries, including Japan, are expected to participate in a portion of the trip, reflecting pressure from the U.S. to invest in the pipeline — despite skepticism and opposition from environmental groups.
In Alaska, some environmentalists criticized the agenda for Dunleavy's conference. Highlighting fossil fuels alongside renewable or alternative energy make 'energy sources of the past look more legitimate at a conference like this," said Andy Moderow, senior policy director with the Alaska Wilderness League.
'I think we should be looking at climate solutions that work for Alaskans, not trying to open up places that industry is taking a pass on, namely the Arctic refuge,' he said.
A push for more drilling
Trump has long taken credit for provisions of a 2017 tax law championed by Alaska's congressional delegation that called for two oil and gas lease sales in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge's coastal plain by late 2024. The first one remains the subject of ongoing litigation, with the main bidder a state corporation that saw its seven leases later canceled by then-President Joe Biden's administration. A judge in March ruled Biden's administration overstepped, and the Interior Department, in line with Trump's executive order, is working to reinstate the leases.
There weren't any bids in the second sale, held under Biden and blasted by the state as overly restrictive.
Debate over drilling in the refuge — home to polar bears, musk ox, birds and other wildlife — has long been a flashpoint. Indigenous Gwich'in leaders consider the coastal plain sacred land, noting its importance to a caribou herd they rely upon.
Many North Slope Iñupiat leaders who support drilling in the refuge felt their voices were not heard during the Biden era. During the Trump officials' visit, they also hope to make a case for additional development in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, which Trump has advocated, and for being included in planning decisions.
Nagruk Harcharek, president of Voice of the Arctic Iñupiat, an advocacy group whose members include leaders from the region, called the officials' visit 'a step in the right direction.'
'Gigantic natural gas pipeline'
For years, the state has sought to develop its stores of North Slope natural gas as a way to provide affordable energy to more residents and bolster revenues via exports. But cost concerns, shifts in direction, competition from other projects and questions about economic feasibility have stymied progress. Oil companies have long reinjected gas that occurs with oil deposits on the slope to produce more oil, which remains Alaska's economic lifeblood.
The latest gas proposal calls for a roughly 810-mile (1,300-kilometer) pipeline that would carry gas from the North Slope to port and a facility that would process and export liquefied natural gas to Asian countries. In a March speech to Congress, Trump touted his ongoing support of the 'gigantic natural gas pipeline." He said countries like Japan and South Korea 'want to be our partner, with investments of trillions of dollars each.' No firm commitments from countries have been made.
The company advancing the project — in partnership with a state corporation — is in a stage of refining cost estimates, previously pegged at around $44 billion for the pipeline and related infrastructure, before final decisions are made on whether to move forward with the project.
Alaska in the spotlight
While Dunleavy has likened Trump's friendly approach to energy development as 'Christmas every day,' Alaska's fortunes remain tightly linked to the volatility of oil prices, which are down sharply from a year ago, squeezing state revenues.
State lawmakers across party lines overwhelmingly passed a resolution urging Congress to provide Alaska with 90% of royalty revenues for oil and gas leases in the Arctic refuge, arguing the U.S. government reneged on past promises for such a share. The resolution also asked for that to be extended to the petroleum reserve.
Alaska's tax structure allows companies like ConocoPhillips Alaska — which is pursuing a massive oil project known as Willow in the reserve — to write off a portion of their development costs against production taxes they incur elsewhere on the North Slope. While lawmakers widely support Willow, they also have argued a change in federal royalty share would address a hit to state revenues created by production in the reserve.
Becky Bohrer, The Associated Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
5 Must-Read Analyst Questions From MDU Resources's Q1 Earnings Call
MDU Resources' first quarter results showed a mix of strong revenue growth and lower-than-expected profitability, with management attributing performance to higher earnings in its Pipeline and Natural Gas Distribution segments. The company benefited from increased demand for natural gas transportation and storage, alongside rate relief in key utility markets and robust customer growth—particularly within its electric and natural gas service territories. CEO Nicole Kivisto noted that 'our Pipeline and Natural Gas Distribution segments grew earnings by 13.9% and 11.5% respectively, year-over-year, driving our solid first quarter performance.' However, higher operating and maintenance expenses, including outage-related costs, and lower returns on non-qualified benefit plan investments, weighed on overall profitability. Is now the time to buy MDU? Find out in our full research report (it's free). Revenue: $674.8 million vs analyst estimates of $653.1 million (14.7% year-on-year growth, 3.3% beat) EPS (GAAP): $0.40 vs analyst expectations of $0.47 (14.9% miss) Adjusted EBITDA: $167 million vs analyst estimates of $166.1 million (24.7% margin, 0.5% beat) EPS (GAAP) guidance for the full year is $0.93 at the midpoint, roughly in line with what analysts were expecting Operating Margin: 16.9%, in line with the same quarter last year Market Capitalization: $3.38 billion While we enjoy listening to the management's commentary, our favorite part of earnings calls are the analyst questions. Those are unscripted and can often highlight topics that management teams would rather avoid or topics where the answer is complicated. Here is what has caught our attention. Chris Ellinghaus (Siebert Williams Shank) asked about the accretiveness of capital light contracts for large customers. CEO Nicole Kivisto explained that these arrangements, especially at the Ellendale site, are immediately beneficial to earnings and spread transmission costs among customers. Chris Ellinghaus (Siebert Williams Shank) inquired about the impact of Bakken oil and gas dynamics. Kivisto and CFO Jason Vollmer responded that rising gas-to-oil ratios and industrial demand support long-term pipeline growth despite oil price fluctuations. Chris Ellinghaus (Siebert Williams Shank) raised concerns about housing starts and customer growth in Boise. Kivisto noted that Boise remains a higher-growth market relatively insulated from economic swings, supporting utility customer additions. Brian Russo (Jefferies) questioned why electric segment earnings fell despite higher volumes. Vollmer attributed it to increased operations and maintenance costs, data center ramp-up effects, and lower investment returns on benefit plans. Ryan Levine (Citi) pressed on progress for the Bakken East pipeline project and the role of tariffs. Vollmer stated that while tariffs may affect material costs, they are manageable within project planning and are not expected to derail the project. Looking forward, our analysts will closely watch (1) the ramp-up of additional data center capacity and its contribution to electric segment earnings, (2) regulatory progress and outcomes on pending rate cases in Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho, and (3) milestones in the Bakken East pipeline and Baker Storage expansion projects. The pace of infrastructure investment and execution on planned capital projects will also remain key areas of focus. MDU Resources currently trades at $16.71, down from $17.60 just before the earnings. At this price, is it a buy or sell? The answer lies in our full research report (it's free). Market indices reached historic highs following Donald Trump's presidential victory in November 2024, but the outlook for 2025 is clouded by new trade policies that could impact business confidence and growth. While this has caused many investors to adopt a "fearful" wait-and-see approach, we're leaning into our best ideas that can grow regardless of the political or macroeconomic climate. Take advantage of Mr. Market by checking out our Top 5 Growth Stocks for this month. This is a curated list of our High Quality stocks that have generated a market-beating return of 183% over the last five years (as of March 31st 2025). Stocks that made our list in 2020 include now familiar names such as Nvidia (+1,545% between March 2020 and March 2025) as well as under-the-radar businesses like the once-small-cap company Comfort Systems (+782% five-year return). Find your next big winner with StockStory today.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
E.P.A. Workers Warn Trump Is Politicizing Their Work
More than 270 employees of the Environmental Protection Agency signed a letter on Monday denouncing what they described as the Trump administration's efforts to politicize, dismantle and sideline the main federal agency tasked with protecting the environment and public health. The letter to President Trump's E.P.A. administrator, Lee Zeldin, was a remarkable rebuke of the agency's political leadership. It followed a similar missive sent this month by more than 60 employees of the National Institutes of Health, who criticized orders they saw as illegal and unethical. 'E.P.A. employees join in solidarity with employees across the federal government in opposing this administration's policies, including those that undermine the E.P.A. mission of protecting human health and the environment,' the E.P.A. workers wrote. The four-page document outlined five overarching concerns with the Trump administration's approach to the E.P.A. The top complaint was that decisions had been made based on a political agenda, not on science and the law. Recent E.P.A. news releases and newsletters have parroted some of Mr. Trump's rhetoric on the environment, the letter said. For example, these materials have praised coal as 'beautiful' and 'clean.' Coal is the dirtiest of the fossil fuels and is a significant source of greenhouse gases. Statements from the E.P.A. have also routinely referred to climate grants issued under the Biden administration as a 'green slush fund,' when there has been no evidence they were used for illicit purposes. 'I've never seen this kind of partisanship, even in the first Trump administration,' said Justin Chen, an environmental engineer in the E.P.A.'s Dallas-based Region 6 office who signed the letter. Mr. Chen emphasized that he was speaking in his personal capacity and not on behalf of his E.P.A. office. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
New York Times
3 hours ago
- New York Times
Trump Administration Live Updates: Senate to Begin Voting on Policy Bill, as G.O.P. Grasps for Support
Provisions added to the president's domestic policy bill to help win the support of Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, center, violated Senate rules and may need to be dropped. The Senate opened debate on Sunday on the embattled Republican tax cuts and domestic policy bill, as G.O.P. leaders toiled to build enough support in their own ranks to push it through before a Fourth of July deadline set by President Trump. The bitter floor fight began in earnest after Senate clerks devoted almost 16 consecutive hours to reading aloud the 940-page bill. Democrats insisted on the reading as a protest and to delay the final showdown, stalling a vote on passage to Monday at the earliest. Late Sunday night, Republicans, still laboring to marshal backing for the measure, delayed a marathon series of votes on amendments to it, which had been expected to begin overnight, until Monday morning. Still, Republicans took to the floor to hail the legislation, which extends a broad array of tax cuts enacted in 2017 during the first Trump administration and boosts spending on the military and border security, while making steep cuts to Medicaid and federal nutrition assistance to pay for them. 'It's a big, beautiful bill if you believe in cutting people's taxes, securing the border, having a strong military and controlling government spending,' Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and chairman of the Budget Committee, said, using the name bestowed upon the legislation by Mr. Trump. Democrats assailed the bill, which also would increase the federal debt limit by $5 trillion, noting that it was projected to significantly increase the deficit and deny essential safety net programs to millions of Americans in order to provide tax benefits mainly to the wealthiest. 'This is a recipe for disaster,' said Senator Gary Peters, Democrat of Michigan, calling the legislation reckless and unconscionable. In a stark display of the political peril for Republicans around the bill, Senator Thom Tillis, Republican of North Carolina, one of the party's most vulnerable incumbents, suddenly announced Sunday that he would not run for re-election next year after voting against bringing the bill to the floor. His opposition had drawn a harsh rebuke from Mr. Trump, who threatened to recruit a primary opponent to challenge him. Later, in a scathing speech on the Senate floor, Mr. Tillis assailed the bill and Mr. Trump, saying the measure was a betrayal of the president's promise to protect Medicaid and warning that his party was 'about to make a mistake.' But Republicans were determined to plunge ahead. As the debate began, they used an accounting gimmick to upend longstanding budget rules and unilaterally declare that extending the tax cuts, estimated to cost roughly $3.8 trillion over a decade, would add nothing to the federal deficit. The move amounted to a substantial blow to the filibuster: It effectively lets Republicans ignore budgeting rules that are meant to prevent adding to the deficit, while still availing themselves of a special process that allows them to pass their bill with a simple majority vote, rather than the 60 votes required to overcome a filibuster. Democrats called the maneuver a trick that would pave the way for disastrous policies. 'Rather than be honest with the American people about the true costs of their billionaire giveaways, Republicans are doing something the Senate has never, never done before, deploying fake math and accounting gimmicks to hide the true cost of their bill,' said Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader. But Republicans said they were within their rights and were prepared to roll over the Democratic objections. Even as the endgame drew nearer for the legislation, it continued to change as several Republicans remained unsatisfied with it. The Senate official who enforces the chamber's rules determined that two last-minute provisions — added on Saturday to benefit Alaska and Hawaii and help secure the vote of Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska — violated Senate rules and would likely need to be dropped from the bill, according to an aide. Those provisions had been seen as crucial to winning the support of Ms. Murkowski on the initial procedural vote that narrowly passed late Saturday night 51 to 49, with two Republicans and all Democrats opposed. It was uncertain whether she would still back the legislation if those sweeteners were dropped. The ruling by the chamber official, the Senate parliamentarian, involved a special boost to the two states' Medicaid payment rates and one to the prices Medicare pays hospitals in those states for some medical services. Adding to the uncertainty around the measure were new estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which showed that it would pile at least $3.3 trillion on the already-bulging national debt over a decade, nearly $1 trillion more than the version passed by the House. That could pose big problems for the measure in the House, which must give it final approval. Fiscal hawks there have warned that the price tag of the measure must not rise. The C.B.O. also reported that the Senate version of the measure would result in deeper cuts in federal support for health insurance and in more Americans losing coverage than the House version, underscoring the political risks for Republicans. The analysis found that the legislation would leave 11.8 million more Americans uninsured by 2034. Federal spending on Medicaid, Medicare and Obamacare would be reduced by more than $1.1 trillion over that period, with more than $1 trillion of those cuts coming from Medicaid alone. Image Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, wants to offer an amendment to revert the tax rate for the most affluent Americans to the level before the 2017 tax cuts were enacted. Credit... Tierney L. Cross/The New York Times Once the clerks finished their reading, the clock started on 20 hours of debate on the legislation, evenly split between the two parties, though Republicans were not expected to use all their time. At the end of the debate, members of both parties would have the opportunity to offer more changes and force floor votes on those amendments in an hourslong process known as a vote-a-rama. The resolution of those amendments could be crucial to determining the fate of the bill when senators cast their final votes. For instance, Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, wants to offer an amendment to revert the tax rate for the most affluent Americans to the level before the 2017 tax cuts were enacted, generating new revenue. Ms. Collins voted to open the debate on Saturday but told Republican leaders that her vote did not represent a commitment to support the final bill. A group of hard-right conservatives who held out for four hours on Saturday night before agreeing to begin debate also want changes to produce greater savings in Medicaid, a proposal that could weaken support from other senators worried about health care cuts in their states. Democrats are dug in against the proposal. On CNN's 'State of the Union,' Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia, warned on Sunday that 16 million Americans could lose their health care coverage under the bill. The cuts could make health care more expensive and have a 'ripple effect to all of us who have traditional health care as well,' he added, setting the total number of uninsured back to 'where we were before Obamacare.' But Senator Katie Britt, Republican of Alabama, appearing on the same program, dismissed recent polls showing a lack of support for the bill. She maintained that Americans would greatly benefit and said she was excited about the bill's potential. 'I think when the American people actually get to see this in fruition, they absolutely are going to be, too,' Ms. Britt said. Andrew Duehren , Margot Sanger-Katz and Annie Karni contributed reporting.
