FILE – The Trans-Alaska Pipeline at Pump Station 1 near Deadhorse, Alaska, on the state’s North Slope, on Monday, June 2, 2025. (AP Photo/Jenny Kane, File)
Alaska has spent decades talking about a North Slope natural gas pipeline. We have had studies, proposals, political promises and plenty of reasons why it supposedly cannot happen. Meanwhile, Alaska continues to sit on an enormous natural resource that could create jobs, attract investment and change our economic future.
That is why I have a problem with Larry Persily’s recent attack on President Donald Trump’s announcement about Alaska LNG. After all these years, when we finally have the president of the United States pushing this project forward and international investors at the table, why is Persily so focused on tearing it down?
[Related opinion: The art of the almost deal]
I have known Dan Sullivan since his days as commissioner of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources. I know his commitment to developing Alaska’s resources and creating economic opportunities for our state. Advancing the gas line has been a priority for him, and he has continued to push for it in Washington. Alaskans should recognize the work that takes.
As someone who served 10 years in the Alaska House of Representatives, including as House majority leader, House minority leader and chair of the House Special Committee on Energy, I understand what it takes to move major energy projects forward. I chaired hearings on gas pipeline proposals and saw firsthand the challenges involved. These projects require political leadership, tough negotiations, financial discipline and years of work. They do not happen overnight.
That is why I believe Persily’s criticism deserves a closer look.
Persily is a longtime Alaska journalist and energy policy commentator. He also served as senior policy adviser to Democratic U.S. Rep. Mary Peltola from Sept. 15 through Dec. 31, 2022, and was appointed and confirmed for Alaska natural gas issues during the Obama administration.
That background does not automatically make his criticism wrong, but it is relevant context. His professional experience includes working in Democratic administrations and for a Democratic member of Congress. Given his criticism of Trump’s announcement, it is fair to ask whether his assessment is focused strictly on the merits of the project or is also influenced by his political perspective.
Let’s be clear. The proposed $54 billion South Korean investment announced by Trump is not the same as a finalized investment commitment. The financing, commercial agreements and economics must all hold up. Nobody should promise Alaskans that this project is guaranteed to succeed.
But there is a difference between asking legitimate questions and dismissing an opportunity before it has a chance to develop.
After decades of discussion, Alaska LNG is receiving attention at the highest levels of government. International partners are evaluating the opportunity, and the federal administration is working to advance it. That progress matters. It takes relationships, persistence and political leadership to get a project of this magnitude in front of the people who can help make it happen.
Sen. Dan Sullivan has consistently advocated for Alaska LNG. He has worked to keep the project on the national agenda, build support in Washington and advance an opportunity that could benefit Alaska for generations. His work should not be dismissed simply because some people do not like the president who is now helping move the project forward.
A successful gas line could create thousands of construction jobs, open new markets for North Slope natural gas, attract private investment and strengthen Alaska’s economic ties with Pacific Rim countries. It could help diversify our economy and provide opportunities for future generations of Alaskans.
Those are possibilities, not guarantees. The project must make financial sense, and Alaska must protect its interests. We should demand answers about financing, contracts, risks and the commitments being made. Oversight is essential but we should also recognize the people doing the work to move this project forward.
Alaska has waited long enough. We have watched too many opportunities stall while our state struggles to find lasting economic growth. We need leaders willing to fight for Alaska’s future, not just critics ready to explain why something might fail.
So I return to my original question: What is Larry Persily really trying to accomplish with his attack on Alaska LNG? Is he offering constructive criticism to help Alaska get the best possible deal, or is his political perspective getting in the way of recognizing a genuine opportunity?
Alaskans can judge his arguments for themselves. What matters is that we look at the facts, demand accountability and do not allow political disagreements to overshadow what is at stake for our state.
Alaska deserves straight answers, responsible oversight and leaders willing to fight for our economic future. We should hold everyone accountable, including the project’s supporters, while giving this opportunity a fair chance to succeed.
Our future is too important to let political point-scoring get in the way.
Charisse Millett is a former member of the Alaska House of Representatives. She lives in Anchorage.
• • •
The Anchorage Daily News welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.
