Alaska Poised To Beg for Relief From Crippling Federal Shipping Restrictions
The Jones Act keeps energy-hungry Alaskans from using their own natural gas.

Alaska is a cold state where residents need energy to keep the chill at bay. Fortunately, the state is blessed with natural resources, including abundant oil and natural gas that can help satisfy that need. Unfortunately, as I've written before, a nationalistic, century-old law requires that shipping between American ports be conducted only by U.S.–built and –flagged ships. And there aren't any liquid natural gas tankers that satisfy the requirement. Now Alaska officials are seeking a waiver so they can use their own resources to resolve a growing energy crunch.
You are reading The Rattler from J.D. Tuccille and Reason. Get more of J.D.'s commentary on government overreach and threats to everyday liberty.
Resource-Rich but Starved for Energy
"Alaska is facing an acute energy shortage," state Sen. Robert Myers (R–Fairbanks) told a State Senate Transportation Committee hearing on his proposed waiver resolution on March 20. "The Alaska Department of Natural Resources has projected shortfalls in the Cook Inlet natural gas supply beginning in the very near future. As such, various utilities are now discussing liquefied natural gas imports to solve the crisis. Alaska is in a unique quandary in which it prides itself on its oil and gas resources yet is unable to utilize its own natural gas from the North Slope gas fields."
Myers' statement was meant more for the record than for his fellow lawmakers. Alaskans are well aware of the problem and have been trying to overcome it for years. As it stands, the gas Alaskans use comes not from the abundant supply in the vast North Slope reserves, but from closer to home in the Cook Inlet. Interest in drilling there has waned, though, leaving one company, Hilcorp, as the main producer. Going forward, Hilcorp has warned that it may not be willing or able to supply gas at the same rate as in the past.
That should be fine, given all that North Slope gas. But the North Slope is far from Alaska's population centers. A new pipeline was approved in 2020 but is still struggling to find investors willing to foot the estimated $44 billion cost. South Korean companies seem interested (the gas will also be shipped overseas), but that still leaves completion of the project years in the future.
But liquid natural gas (LNG) is shipped all over the world. There's no practical reason the gas can't be transported by tanker from the North Slope wells to the users in the state's populated areas. But there's a big legal barrier.
Required To Use American Tankers That Don't Exist
Over a century ago, Congress passed the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, better known as the Jones Act, mandating that "No merchandise…shall be transported by water…between points in the United States…in any other vessel than a vessel built in and documented under the laws of the United States and owned by persons who are citizens of the United States." There's more to it, but the nationalistic law, intended to protect American shipping, effectively barred transporting goods between American ports in foreign-built and foreign-flagged vessels. That means North Slope natural gas can be transported to Alaska's populated south only in American tankers. If you can find any. You can't.
"LNG carriers have not been built in the United States since before 1980, and no LNG carriers are currently registered under the U.S. flag," the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported in 2015. And, while you'd think that demand—not just in isolated states like Alaska and Hawaii, but also territories like Puerto Rico—would drive supply, there's a huge hurdle. "U.S. carriers would cost about two to three times as much as similar carriers built in Korean shipyards and would be more expensive to operate," the GAO added.
The GAO created its report at a time when Congress was considering extending the Jones Act to require that exports of natural gas be carried only in U.S.-flagged shipping. The GAO concluded that such a law would "increase the cost of transporting LNG from the United States, decrease the competitiveness of U.S. LNG in the world market, and may, in turn, reduce demand for U.S. LNG."
Congress wisely dropped the idea of extending the Jones Act, but Alaskans are still stuck with the original law, waiting for nonexistent domestically-built LNG tankers to show up with loads of North Slope natural gas. If they don't wait but instead try to ignore a law with which it's impossible to comply, they risk millions of dollars in fines, since the federal Department of Justice vigorously enforces the Jones Act.
In 2017, the feds fined an energy company $10 million for transporting a drill rig from the Gulf of Mexico to Alaska's Cook Inlet in a foreign-flagged vessel. The company planned to bring more natural gas to the resource-rich but energy-starved state.
Pleading for Relief From the Law
As Myers pointed out in his statement to the Alaska Senate, the federal government does permit waivers of the Jones Act, from time to time, and has done so for Alaska in the past. In an email to me, he mentioned that Crowley, an American shipping company that has defended the Jones Act, is now transporting LNG to Puerto Rico from the Gulf Coast in a French-built tanker. The company is permitted to do so through a narrow legal carve-out to the Jones Act that allows tankers built overseas before 1996 to be reflagged as American for the purposes of serving Puerto Rico. That won't help Alaska.
What will help Alaska in the short term is another waiver. In his proposed resolution, Myers points out that Alaskans face shortfalls in the natural gas supply beginning in 2027; that "in 2024, 39 percent of the electricity generated in the state was from natural gas, and nearly half of households in the state use natural gas to heat their homes"; and that U.S. military bases in the state, such as Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, will also suffer from the crunch.
The resolution, which is still in committee, continues:
BE IT RESOLVED that the Alaska State Legislature respectfully urges the United States Congress to recognize the imminent and acute need to stabilize the state's energy supply and enact a Jones Act waiver that facilitates the urgent transportation of domestic liquefied natural gas between ports in the state until Jones Act-compliant vessels are available.
If Congress goes along with the request, Alaska will get a temporary breather. But U.S. states and territories shouldn't have to beg permission of the federal government for companies to be able to transport abundant goods and resources between American ports in the ships that actually exist and are available instead of a fantasy fleet that has failed to materialize after 125 years of bad law.
Alaska should get its waiver in the short term. But the whole country should be relieved of the crippling burden that is the Jones Act.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I am not now a Libertarian, but isn't the problem basically this
The federal government owns approximately 61.3% or about 222 million acres of land in Alaska, making it the largest landowner in the state.
WHY??? Drill and do with your state resources what you need to do.
Liquified natural gas ships and other ships travel on the seas, not upon the lands, so land ownershit isn't the problem described here (I do agree with you that federal ownershit of WAAAY too much shit in general IS a problem). The problem is the Jones Act! And Trump and His Elongated Tusk and His Pet Musk Ox and His Armies of Trumpanzees Gone Apeshit can break the laws AND the USA Cunts-Tits-Tuition nine ways to Sunday, butt they can SNOT be bothered to violate or disregard or discard this fucking STUPID and EVIL Jones Act!
That is a problem but selling off the government land still won't solve the problem of getting it from oil fields to customers. To fix that, you either need pipelines (which have some special challenges in AK) or ships. And the Jones Act unnecessarily gets in the way of shipping.
Alaska itself bid on federal oil leases when no private sector oil companies bid on them. Socialism for the win! But then it couldn't even contract with a drilling company.
Juneau Alaskans are jonesin to sunset this act.
It's always the Jones Act. What about a shortage of pipelines?
From the article...
"But the North Slope is far from Alaska's population centers. A new pipeline was approved in 2020 but is still struggling to find investors willing to foot the estimated $44 billion cost."
Please cough up the $44 billion and Alaska will be all set! I bet that shit would be MUCH cheaper to bribe Congress to rescind this law, or to bribe Trump into "phone-and-a-pen-style" instructing His Goons to IGNORE this stupid Jones Act!
A new pipeline was approved in 2020 but is still struggling to find investors willing to foot the estimated $44 billion cost. South Korean companies seem interested (the gas will also be shipped overseas), but that still leaves completion of the project years in the future.
Just a fleeting thought, what do you want to bet that a MAJOR part of that $44 billion cost for the pipeline will (would) be for specially flavored constituencies such ass environmental lawyers and biologists who study precious, priceless endangered species of bacteria?
A few million at most. Building pipelines over frozen land is expensive.
The Alaska Permanent Fund is sitting in $80 billion. It would easily pay for the pipeline. But Alaska would prefer getting subsidies from the rest of us. Just like the farmers.
Fat chance traitortrump will do it
Yes, true, TraitorTrumpToTheDump believes in Magic and Fairy Tales... Make the people SUFFER enough, through tariff-taxes and shit like this Jones Act, and suddenly, magically, ship-building and other heavy industries will re-appear in Made Great Again America! Laws and tariffs like this? Ha! BIG Government Almighty! Less personal freedom and economic, buying freedom!
Old “New Thang” MAGA make way for the NEW New Thang!!! MAGA meet MANGABA, Making Almighty NEW Government Almighty Bigger Again!!! All Hail MANGABA!!!
(Shit will also stimulate the economy by giving regulators, judges, and lawyers LOTS of NEW shit to fight about!!!)
MANGEE… Making Almighty NEW Government Expensive and Expansive!!!
similar carriers built in Korean shipyards
Well just tariff them. That will reduce the cost of American manufacturers making them more competitive on the world market. Taxes make us more wealthy, doncha know.
A one time tax would be better than a ban.
In a project worth tens of billions the cost of a few made-in-America LNG tankers is a small component.
What US shipyard is willing to build an LNG tanker? US shipyards only want federal government contracts.
If the Jones Act did what it is supposed to do, shouldn’t there be plenty of American gas ships?
Also – I thought the ship just had to be under an American flag, not necessarily built in America. Why don’t any Americans want to own ships? Are there perhaps even more regulations we aren’t bitching about enough? Can’t they just do what car makers do, slap the last few parts on and call it made in America?
I'm guessing steel tarrifs won't help build ships either.
Steel tariffs will destroy a lot of other US manufacturing as well. It will also increase the costs for the ships the US Navy orders.
'That means North Slope natural gas can be transported to Alaska's populated south only in American tankers. If you can find any. You can't.'
Uh, no dimwit. The issue is not a lack of LNG tankers. The issue is the continuing and unpredictable polar ice cap.
The many TCF of natural gas has been stranded on the North Slope for decades, and probably always will be. BTW, there are other production issues that add to disincentives for gas there.
One of the few good ideas that Sarah Palin had before she imploded her political career through a shameful intervention in her sister's divorce was to build both this pipeline and a pipeline up the MacKenzie River valley in Canada. She didn't originate the ideas but she pushed for them.
Wouldn't it be possible for Alaska do do what a lot of cruise ship companies do? Hire a foreign tanker to load up with North Slope gas, have it make a brief stop in, say, Prince Rupert, and then proceed to an Alaskan port. As long as it doesn't go directly between two U.S. ports, it doesn't violate the Jones Act. Granted, it would waste some fuel, but it would still probably be cheaper than importing it from a foreign country especially when gas from it is subject to Trump's idiot tariffs.
No gas terminal at Prince Rupert. But there is an export terminal under construction at Kittimat, further south and east and at the end of a fjord. Canada would put retaliatory tariffs on all the gas and won't allow the tankers to leave Kittimat until they are paid. It would make more sense for Alaska to get its gas from from Kittimat except Trunp will tariff the Hell out of it.
Trump Derangement is actually the many stupid Trump policies. But Alaskans voted for them so no sympathy.
Don't waive the Jones Act. Repeal the whole thing!