Connect with us

Published

3 months ago

on

Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are considering investing in a massive natural gas project in Alaska in an attempt to reach trade deals that would both satisfy demands from President Donald Trump and avoid high U.S. tariffs on their exports.

Alaska has long sought to build an 800-mile pipeline crossing the state from the North Slope in the Arctic Circle to the Cook Inlet in the south, where gas would be cooled into liquid for export to Asia. The project, with a staggering price tag topping $40 billion, has been stuck on the drawing board for years.

Alaska LNG, as the project is known, is showing new signs of life — with Trump touting the project as a national priority. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said earlier this month that the liquified natural gas (LNG) project could play an important role in trade negotiations with South Korea, Japan and Taiwan.

“We are thinking about a big LNG project in Alaska that South Korea, Japan [and] Taiwan are interested in financing and taking a substantial portion of the offtake,” Bessent told reporters on April 9, saying such an agreement would help meet Trump’s goal of reducing the U.S. trade deficit.

Taiwan’s state oil and gas company CPC Corp. signed a letter of intent in March to purchase six million metric tons of gas from Alaska LNG, said Brendan Duval, CEO and founder of Glenfarne Group, the project’s lead developer.

“You can imagine the geopolitical enhancements whether it’s for tariff or military reasons — Taiwan is really, really focused on getting that signed up,” Duval told CNBC in an interview. CPC has also offered to invest directly in Alaska LNG and supply equipment, Duval said.

March trade mission

Duval and Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy traveled to South Korea and Japan on a trade mission in March, meeting with high-ranking officials in government and industry. Japanese and South Korean companies have asked whether their development banks can help finance Alaska LNG, Duval said.

“Lately, there has been quite a lot of inquiries from India, so there’s a fourth horse that’s entered the race,” Duval said. Thailand and other Asian countries have also shown interest, he said.

The Alaska LNG project has three major pieces: The pipeline, a gas processing plant on the North Slope and a plant to liquify the gas for export at Nikiski, Alaska. These facilities are estimated to cost roughly $12 billion, $10 billion, and $20 billion respectively, Dunleavy said at an energy conference in Houston in March.

The permits for Alaska LNG are already in place, the CEO said. Glenfarne expects to reach a final investment decision in the next six to 12 months on the first phase of the project, a pipeline from the North Slope to Anchorage that will supply gas for domestic consumption in Alaska, Duval said.

Construction on the LNG plant is expected to begin in late 2026, the CEO said. The goal is to complete construction on the entire Alaska LNG project in four and a half years with full commercial operations starting in 2031, he said.

Alaska LNG plans to produce 20 million metric tons of LNG per year, equal to about 23% of the 87 million tons of LNG that the U.S. exported last year, according to data from Kpler, a commodity researcher.

‘Unleashing’ Alaska’s resources

Alaska plays a central role in Trump’s goal to boost production and exports of U.S. oil and gas, part of the White House’s agenda for U.S. “energy dominance.” The president issued an executive order on his first day in office seeking to tap Alaska’s “extraordinary resource potential,” prioritizing the development of LNG in the state.

“We’ll have that framed on our walls in Alaska for decades,” Gov. Dunleavy said at the Houston conference last month, referring to the executive order.

Once a net importer, the U.S. has rapidly become the largest exporter of LNG in the world, playing an increasingly vital role in fueling power plants in Asia and Europe for allies with limited domestic energy resources. Japan and South Korea, for example, each took about 8% of U.S. LNG exports last year, according to Kpler data.

The Trump administration views Alaska LNG as “an important strategic project,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said at the Houston energy conference. LNG exports from Alaska would reach Japan in about eight days rather than having to pass through the congested Panama Canal from terminals on the Gulf Coast, Dunleavy said at the same conference.

“They can have the opportunity to get delivered to them the most efficient LNG from an allied partner,” while avoiding chokepoints, Duval said. “This is the only LNG the U.S. can supply that has a direct route, and they are very cognizant about that in today’s environment.”

North Pacific talks

Trump told reporters during a joint press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba in February that the two countries were discussing the pipeline and the possibility of a joint venture to exploit Alaska oil and gas. Trump said he discussed the “large scale purchase of U.S. LNG” in an April 8 phone call with South Korea’s acting President Han Duck-Soo, and Korea’s participation in a “joint venture in an Alaska pipeline.”

Japan wants to maintain its security agreement with the U.S. against a rising China and avoid tariffs, officials at the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority told the Alaska Senate finance committee during a February presentation. “We are now in a completely ‘transactional’ trade world,” the executives said. Tokyo must invest more in the U.S., buy more LNG and enter a joint venture linked to Alaska oil and gas, they said.

The project would likely be a structured as a loose joint venture, with Asian partners signing contracts for large volumes of LNG, Duval said, and won’t necessarily translate into Japan, Taiwan and South Korea holding direct equity stakes in Alaska LNG, though Glenfarne is open to the possibility, he said.

Glenfarne’s goal is to be the long-term owner and operator of Alaska LNG with partners, Duval said. Glenfarne is a privately-held developer, owner and operator of energy infrastructure based in New York City and Houston. The company assumed a 75% stake in Alaska LNG from the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation in March, with AGDC keeping 25%.

Roadblocks and commercial viability

The Trump administration is clearly pressuring Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan to invest in Alaska LNG, said Bob McNally, president of Rapidan Energy and former energy advisor to President George W. Bush. Although Japan wants to both placate Trump and diversify its LNG supplies, Tokyo may yet hesitate to invest in Alaska LNG due to the project’s cost, complexity and risk, McNally said.

Another roadblock is that Democrats could return to power in 2028 and try to stop the project from advancing, citing environmental effects, McNally said. President Joe Biden, after all, paused permits for new LNG exports to countries including Japan that don’t have free trade agreements with the U.S. But Trump reversed Biden’s suspension as part of a torrent of executive orders tied to energy on his first day in office in January.

In addition to political risk, Alaska LNG “doesn’t have a clear cut commercial logic,” said Alex Munton, head of global gas and LNG research at Rapidan. “If it did, it would have had a lot more support than it has thus far, and this project has been on the planning board for literally decades,” Munton said. There are more attractive, existing LNG options for Asian customers on the Gulf Coast, he said.

The project is expensive even by the standards of an LNG industry that builds some of the costliest infrastructure in the energy sector, Munton said. The price tag of more than $40 billion likely needs to be revised upwards given that it is two years old, the analyst said.

“You have to assume that the costs are going to be much higher than the publicly quoted figures,” Munton said. Alaska LNG will likely need “public policy or a public commitment of funds to bring it to life,” the analyst said.

Duval said Alaska LNG will be competitive with no government subsidy. “It is a naturally competitive source of LNG, independent of the geopolitical benefits, independent of the tariff discussions,” he said.

“We have the support of the president of the United States,” Dunleavy said in Houston. “We have Asian allies that need gas. Geopolitical alliances are changing. Tariff questions are coming up. When we really look at it in that context, it’s a very viable project.”

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla was forced to reimburse Full Self-Driving in arbitration after failing to deliver

Published

1 hour ago

on

July 7, 2025

By

Tesla was forced to reimburse Full Self-Driving in arbitration after failing to deliver

Tesla Self-Driving

Tesla has been forced to reimburse a customer’s Full Self-Driving package after an arbitrator determined that the automaker failed to deliver it.

Tesla has been promising its car owners that every vehicle it has built since 2016 has all the hardware capable of unsupervised self-driving.

The automaker has been selling a “Full Self-Driving” (FSD) package that is supposed to deliver this unsupervised self-driving capability through over-the-air software updates.

Almost a decade later, Tesla has yet to deliver on its promise, and its claim that the cars’ hardware is capable of self-driving has been proven wrong. Tesla had to update all cars with HW2 and 2.5 computers to HW3 computers.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

In January 2025, CEO Elon Musk finally admitted that HW3 also won’t be able to support self-driving and said that Tesla will have to upgrade the computers. 6 months later, Tesla has yet to communicate a plan for retrofits to owners.

Tesla is now attempting to deliver its promise of unsupervised self-driving on HW4 cars, which have been in production since 2023-2024, depending on the model. However, there are still significant doubts about this being possible, as the best available data indicate that Tesla only achieves about 500 miles between critical disengagements with the latest software on the hardware.

The situation is creating a significant liability for Tesla, which already needs to replace computers in millions of vehicles, and it may need to do so in millions more.

On the other hand, many customers are losing faith in Tesla’s ability to deliver on its promise and manage this computer retrofit situation. Some of them have been seeking to be reimbursed for their purchase of the Full Self-Driving package, which Tesla sold from $8,000 to $15,000.

A Tesla owner in Washington managed to get the automaker to reimburse the FSD package, but it wasn’t easy.

The 2021 Model Y was Marc Dobin and his wife’s third Tesla. Due to his wife’s declining mobility, Dobin was intrigued about the FSD package as a potential way to give her more independence. He wrote in a blog post:

But FSD was more than hype for us. The promise of a car that could drive my wife around gave us hope that she’d maintain independence as her motor skills declined. We paid an extra $10,000 for FSD.

Tesla’s FSD quickly disillusioned Dobin. First, he couldn’t even enable it due to Tesla restricting the Beta access through a “safety score” system, something he pointed out was never mentioned in the contract.

Furthermore, the feature required the supervision of a driver at all times, which was not what Tesla sold to customers.

Tesla doesn’t make it easy for customers in the US to seek a refund or to sue Tesla as it forces buyers to go through arbitration through its sales contract.

That didn’t deter Dobin, who happens to be a lawyer with years of experience in arbitration. It took almost a year, but Tesla and Dobin eventually found themselves in arbitration, and it didn’t go well for the automaker:

Almost a year after filing, the evidentiary hearing was held via Zoom. Tesla produced one witness: a Field Technical Specialist who admitted he hadn’t checked what equipment shipped with our car, hadn’t reviewed our driving logs, and didn’t know details about the FSD system installed on our car, if any. He hadn’t spoken to any sales rep we dealt with or reviewed the contract’s integration clause.

There were both a Tesla lawyer and an outside counsel representing Tesla at the hearing, but the witness was not equipped to answer questions.

Dobin wrote:

He was a service technician, not a lawyer or salesperson. But that’s who Tesla brought to the hearing. At the end, I genuinely felt bad for him because Tesla set him up to be a human punching bag—someone unprepared to answer key questions, forced to defend a system he clearly didn’t understand. While I was examining him, a Tesla in-house lawyer sat silently, while the company’s outside counsel tried to soften the blows of the witness’ testimony.

He focused on Tesla’s lack of disclosure regarding the safety score and the fact that the system does not meet the promises made to customers.

The arbitrator sided with Dobin and wrote:

The evidence is persuasive that the feature was not functional, operational, or otherwise available.”

Tesla was forced to reimburse the FSD package $10,000 plus taxes, and pay for the almost $8,000 in arbitration fees.

Since Tesla forces arbitration through its contracts, it is required to cover the cost.

Electrek’s Take

This is interesting. Tesla assigned two lawyers to this case in an attempt to avoid reimbursing $10,000, knowing it would have to cover the expensive arbitration fees – most likely losing tens of thousands of dollars in the process.

It makes no sense to me. Tesla should have a standing offer to reimburse FSD for anyone who requests it until it can actually deliver on its promise of unsupervised self-driving.

That’s the right thing to do, and the fact that Tesla would waste money trying to fight customers requesting a refund is really telling.

Tesla is simply not ready to do the right thing here, and it doesn’t bode well for the computer retrofits and all the other liabilities around Tesla FSD.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

BYD says its about to launch the ‘largest-scale’ smart driving software update in history

Published

1 hour ago

on

July 7, 2025

By

BYD says its about to launch the 'largest-scale' smart driving software update in history

BYD-largest-scale-software-update

After hitting a major milestone on Monday, BYD claimed it’s about to unleash “the largest-scale smart driving OTA in history.”

BYD preps for the largest-scale software update

BYD announced on Weibo that there are now over 1 million vehicles on the road with its God’s Eye smart driving system.

The milestone comes after it upgraded 21 of its top-selling vehicles with the smart driving tech in February, at no extra cost. Even its most affordable EV, the Seagull, which starts at under $10,000 (69,800 yuan), got the upgrade.

BYD didn’t reveal any specifics, only promising “it is safer and smarter.” The Chinese EV giant has three different “God’s Eye” levels: A, B, and C.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

The highest, God’s Eye A, is typically reserved for BYD’s ultra-luxury Yangwang brand, which utilizes its DiPilot 600 smart cockpit with three LiDARs.

God’s Eye B is used for other luxury and higher-end models, including those under Denza, which utilize DiPilot 300 and one or two LiDARs.

BYD-largest-scale-software-update
BYD-largest-scale-smart-driving-update

The base God’s Eye C system, used for BYD brand models, includes 12 cameras, five wave radars, and 12 ultrasonic radars, all supported by DiPilot 100.

Last week, BYD’s luxury off-road brand, Fang Cheng Bao, launched a limited-time offer for Huawei’s Qiankun Intelligent Driving High-end Function Package. The discount cuts the price from 32,000 yuan ($4,500) to just 12,000 yuan ($1,700).

BYD-new-affordable-EV
BYD Seagull EV testing with God’s Eye C smart driving system (Source: BYD)

After selling another 382,585 vehicles in June, BYD now has over 2.1 million in cumulative sales in the first half of 2025, up 33% from last year.

With the “largest-scale smart driving” update coming soon, BYD’s vehicles are about to gain new functions and safety features. Check back soon for more details.

BYD claims it’s “capable of leading the transformation and popularization of intelligent driving” with over 5,000 engineers dedicated to the field. As the world’s largest NEV maker, BYD said it’s committed to transforming the auto industry with safer and more sustainable solutions for global markets.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

The Kia EV3 takes the crown as the most popular retail EV in the UK so far this year

Published

4 hours ago

on

July 7, 2025

By

The Kia EV3 takes the crown as the most popular retail EV in the UK so far this year

Kia-EV3-most-popular-EV

Kia’s electric SUV is a hit in the UK. The EV3 was the most popular retail EV through the first half of 2025, pushing Kia to become the UK’s third top-selling car brand so far this year.

The EV3 is Kia’s fastest-selling EV in the UK and a massive part of the brand’s success this year. Kia said the compact electric SUV contributed to its best-ever June, Q2, and first half EV registrations so far this year.

In January, the EV3 “started with a bang,” racing out to become the UK’s most popular retail EV. The EV3 was the best-selling retail EV in the UK and the fourth best-selling EV overall in the first quarter, including commercial vehicles.

Through the first half of the year, the Kia EV3 maintained its crown as the UK’s most popular EV with 6,293 registrations.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

The EV3 starts at £33,005 ($42,500) as the ‘brand’s most affordable EV yet.” It’s available with two battery packs: 58.3 kWh or 81.48 kWh, providing a WLTP range of up to 430 km (270 miles) and 599 km (375 miles), respectively.

Kia-EV3-most-popular-EV
Kia EV3 (Source: Kia)

Kia sold 31,643 electrified vehicles in the first half of 2025. Although this includes fully electric vehicles (EVs), plug-in hybrids (PHEVs), and hybrids (HEVs), it still accounts for over half of Kia’s total of 62,005 registrations.

Kia's-low-cost-EVs
Kia EV3 (Source: Kia)

After opening orders for the EV4 last week, Kia’s first electric hatchback, the brand expects to see even more demand throughout 2025. With up to 388 miles WLTP range, it’s also the longest-range Kia EV to date.

Next year, Kia will introduce the entry-level EV2, which will sit below the EV3 in Kia’s lineup. Kia is looking to add an even more affordable EV to sit below the EV2. It will start at under $30,000 (€25,000), but we likely won’t see it until closer toward the end of the decade.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending