Alaska LNG developer Glenfarne says the project can compete with U.S. Gulf Coast liquefied natural gas (LNG) exporters because it would access stranded natural gas (gas isolated from markets) on Alaska’s North Slope and use shorter routes to Asia. When completed, shipping costs to Asia would be at least 65% lower than for Gulf Coast LNG, according to Tim Fitzpatrick, Glenfarne’s communications director. The project, backed by President Donald Trump, would connect the North Slope to a southern Alaska export plant through an 800-mile pipeline. Critics question whether the lower transport costs justify estimated infrastructure spending of $44.5 billion to $54.5 billion, or about $2.2 billion to $2.7 billion per million tons per annum (MTPA) of capacity. Glenfarne says that comparison includes pipeline and gas-treatment infrastructure required to commercialize the stranded gas, and puts delivery costs at about $1.4 billion per MTPA. U.S. LNG projects approved since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have generally averaged about $1 billion per MTPA or less. Glenfarne says the project should be judged on delivered LNG costs rather than upfront spending. It has identified customers for 13 million tons of LNG annually and needs 16 million tons per year to support financing. President Donald Trump said South Korea would help finance the project as part of a $200 billion investment package for U.S. projects, but Seoul said the role was not yet settled.