The Anchorage Daily News reported Friday that Glenfarne is the “operator of Texas LNG,” a project to export 4 million tons a year of LNG from Texas.
The Anchorage newspaper based its declaration on a statement from Glenfarne founder CEO Brendan Duval that his company does indeed operate the Texas LNG export plant.
Saying that Glenfarne operates a Texas LNG export project conveys the distinct impression that Glenforne is producing LNG and shipping it to locations outside the U.S.
Glenfarne is the private company that now owns 75 percent of the enterprise that would build the giant Alaska LNG project. The Dunleavy administration has refused to release even a general description of the terms.
In a column in February, Duvall wrote that Glenfarne operates the Texas LNG plant and the Magnolia LNG export plant in Louisiana.
“Every day, Glenfarne meets the critical energy needs of the countries where we operate. In the United States, we are the developer, owner and operator of Magnolia LNG and Texas LNG,” Duval bragged to the readers of Alaska’s largest newspaper.
There’s a big problem with these claims.
Glenfarne is not operating LNG export projects in Louisiana and Texas because they have not been built. They are in the works, but the company has yet to make a final investment decision to build either one.
Duval said he hopes to make a final investment decision on building the Texas LNG project by the end of 2025.
That would be the same time frame on which he hopes to make a final investment decision on building a 42-inch gasline from the North Slope to the Kenai Peninsula, costing more than $10 billion.
Glenfarne, the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation and the governor will claim that Duval was not lying to Alaskans when he said his company operates plants that do not exist.
They will say he was using the term “operator” to refer to the planning efforts that are taking place.
Glenfarne is operating the companies that are trying to get the plants built, they will claim, so he didn’t mislead anybody. They speak a different language than I do.
Perhaps they will even say that anyone who does a simple internet search can discover that Texas LNG has not been built and Magnolia LNG is years behind. That is true. The status of those projects is no secret.
If the Texas plant is built, it may be in operation by 2029.
Now that Duval is operating in Alaska, his choice of words is a red flag about a company that has now acquired 75 percent—on terms that are secret—of the Alaska LNG project.
The bad habit of promoters to inflate themselves to the point of bursting with grandiose claims is worrisome, given our half-century history of exploding gas line bubbles.
The Glenfarne website refers to the Texas and Louisiana projects as “late-stage LNG export” businesses, a term that disguises their yet-to-be-built status.
Even the press release from the state and Duval’s company about the acquisition of the Alaska LNG planning work contained a misleading statement that needs to be clarified.
While this latest press release did not repeat the fabrication that Texas LNG is in operation, it said something that will give people a false impression of Glenfarne’s size.
“Together with Alaska LNG, Glenfarne’s permitted LNG portfolio totals 32.8 MTPA of capacity under development,” the press release claims. That would be 32.8 million tons of LNG a year.
The Magnolia project would export 9 million tons, while the Texas plant would export 4 million tons. They are relatively small parts of the “LNG portfolio,” all of which has yet to be built.
Nearly two-thirds of the “LNG portfolio” is the Alaska project, with Glenfarne as the lead developer starting last week.
We know that the Dunleavy administration is giving Glenfarne a $50 million backstop, so that if the company walks away from the project and declines to make a final investment decision on the $10 billion first phase, it will get up to $50 million back for whatever work it does from now until then.
The Alaska LNG project is bigger, more expensive, more complicated and far more difficult than anything in the Glenfarne portfolio.
Dunleavy calls Glenfarne “a well-qualified industry leader” and says it can “bring this great project to the finish line.”
I think Alaskans deserve to know the terms under which AGDC “divested” 75 percent of the project to Glenfarne.
IN ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT, there was a good analysis from a writer in Korea about the international politics that are complicating the Alaska LNG debate, with threats of Trump blackmail being used to generate interest in the Alaska project.
Reporter Ashley Song wrote about the dilemma facing South Korea and how Dunleavy was pushing Korean leaders to buy gas from Alaska.
“If Korea does not purchase LNG—or at least clearly express intent—will that help resolve its trade deficit?” he asked. “Will it genuinely benefit Korean companies hoping to supply ships, pipes, and steel modules for the project? The key is Korea committing to buy Alaskan gas.”
Song said, “Dunleavy’s remarks signaled a sharpened tone from Washington, aligning energy diplomacy with broader trade negotiations. Stressing his close ties with former President Donald Trump, Dunleavy implied that LNG cooperation could influence upcoming U.S.-Korea tariff discussions.”
“Yet despite the fanfare, Dunleavy left Seoul without securing any letters of intent or investment commitments from Korean entities. Neither the government nor major players in the energy or steel sectors made public moves toward a binding agreement.”
“This reflects Seoul’s growing dilemma. On one hand, participation in the Alaska LNG project could offer leverage in upcoming U.S. tariff talks, particularly as American policymakers scrutinize Korea’s trade surplus. On the other, the scale and uncertainty of the project make it a daunting prospect.”
“Even if South Korea were to join, LNG imports wouldn’t begin until at least 2029 or 2030—and only if construction moves forward smoothly in Alaska’s harsh climate and complex environmental landscape.”
Song wrote that officials are cautious, which is exactly what you would expect.
“The project hasn’t reached the construction phase,” one government source told Yonhap News Agency on March 31. “Even if imports eventually happen, it will be years down the line. We need more clarity on volumes, pricing, and investment terms.”
Your contributions help support independent analysis and political commentary by Alaska reporter and author Dermot Cole. Thank you for reading and for your support. Either click here to use PayPal or send checks to: Dermot Cole, Box 10673, Fairbanks, AK 99710-0673
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by PostX News and is published from a syndicated feed.)
