Alaska's long-running push to build a major gas pipeline is still moving forward, even after state lawmakers failed to pass a key tax bill that supporters said was needed to help advance the project, the Alaska Beacon reported.
Here's what to know
The Alaska Gasline Development Corp. is preparing to ask the Legislature for another $2.5 million in 2027, signaling that state officials are not ready to walk away from the proposal.
At a board meeting, AGDC President Frank Richards said the corporation wants that funding for a previously announced program that would let Alaska residents invest in the pipeline project.
"It will be something that we'll have to go to the legislature next year to be able to say, 'Here's the program. If the state is interested, then these are the funds necessary for us to be able to accomplish this work,'" he stated.
AGDC holds the remaining 25% of the project, while Texas-based Glenfarne owns 75%.
Richards' comments came during the board's first meeting since the Alaska House voted down a compromise tax-cut proposal tied to the current version of the pipeline plan.
TCD Picks » Quince Spotlight
💡These best-sellers from Quince deliver affordable, sustainable luxury for all
More background
The compromise would have shifted the tax structure by reducing the state's petroleum property tax on the pipeline and associated infrastructure while putting more weight on a tax linked to the gas moving through the line.
It also would have created a corporate income tax for some privately held oil and gas producers that do not currently pay one.
Gov. Mike Dunleavy and many House members opposed that increase, while the Senate would not move the bill ahead without it.
Concerns about the proposed trans-Alaskan natural gas pipeline surpass tax breaks and corporate incentives — the project has long been controversial for myriad reasons, from habitat destruction to interference with Indigenous land rights.
Moreover, new fossil fuel infrastructure will contribute to planet-warming emissions, creating risks to both the environment and public health.
With a new governor set to take office in December 2026 and new legislative majorities due in January 2027, pipeline backers may have another opening.
What's being done?
He suggested the 2027 push could once again involve some form of tax relief for the project.
The investment program is intended to give residents a way to invest in the pipeline project.
Richards signaled that AGDC sees 2027 as a fresh start.
"So next year we'll have a new administration. Next year we'll have — certainly — a newly elected legislature, and they'll be starting again from scratch," he began.
"Hopefully, [we'll be] looking at tax relief in some way or form for the project."
Where can I learn more?
Alaska's pipeline debate is part of a wider argument over who should pay for gas infrastructure and whether to build more of it at all.
Other stories have looked at pollution concerns tied to expansions, utility spending on gas systems as some communities move away from fossil fuels, and growing evidence about the health impacts of oil and gas.
• In North Carolina, a natural gas pipeline expansion drew warnings about air pollution and health risks.
• In Massachusetts, utilities poured $100M into gas lines after 10 communities went fossil fuel free.
• Across the U.S., oil and gas pollution is linked to asthma and premature deaths.
Those questions go well beyond a single project's bottom line. Tax breaks, public funding, and new pipeline construction can affect public health, local infrastructure decisions, and how long gas remains part of the energy mix.
Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips, smart advice, and a chance to earn $5,000 toward home upgrades. To see more stories like this one, change your Google preferences here.
