An American energy company’s proposal to develop and export natural gas from Alaska has drawn scrutiny amid revelations of undisclosed Russian funding and involvement by a sanctioned Russian firm. The plan, which has been discussed at the highest levels of the U.S. and Russian governments, aims to use Russian technology to liquefy natural gas extracted from Alaska’s North Slope and export it to international markets.
Polar LNG, the U.S.-based company behind the project, intended to deploy a large liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility offshore near Milne Point, Alaska. The project involves purchasing a gravity-based concrete-and-steel platform from Novatek, a major Russian energy producer currently under U.S. sanctions. Novatek would supply the technology and, according to internal documents and messages reviewed by an energy executive involved in the project, may also take an equity stake as a minority shareholder.
Joel Riddle, who resigned as Polar LNG’s chief executive in September, stated that he was misled about the origins of the project’s initial funding. While the company had claimed the investment came from a United Arab Emirates-based firm, Riddle said he discovered some financing was secretly provided by Novatek. He warned that such ties to a sanctioned Russian company could violate U.S. laws and run counter to American interests in Arctic energy development.
Legal memos from the law firm Baker Botts, obtained by a source with knowledge of the matter, confirm that the U.S. Treasury Department’s sanctions enforcement division had raised concerns regarding potential Russian-related sanctions risks associated with the project. Several other top Polar LNG executives have also recently resigned, reportedly over similar apprehensions.
Polar LNG describes itself as a U.S. company promoting “America’s Arctic Advantage” and has conducted extensive lobbying efforts in Washington and Alaska, investing hundreds of thousands of dollars quarterly. The company has engaged former U.S. government officials to support advancement of the project. However, internal documents note challenges related to regulatory approval, environmental concerns from local native Alaska communities, and doubts about the viability of installing the Novatek platform in the relatively shallow waters off Milne Point.
Novatek acknowledged on Friday that it is moving to become a minority shareholder in Polar LNG but declined to comment on financial details or private correspondence. The company expressed willingness to maintain open communication with the U.S. firm.
The project remains at an early stage and faces numerous hurdles, including sanctions compliance, logistical complexity, severe Arctic weather conditions, and political obstacles. It is also seen as competing with an alternative Alaska gas development plan favored by both the Trump and Biden administrations—a proposed $50 billion pipeline that would transport natural gas 800 miles from the North Slope to southern Alaska for shipment to Asian markets. That pipeline project enjoys backing from Japan and South Korea and is viewed by experts as more practical.
Discussions about Polar LNG and similar energy proposals have been part of broader diplomatic efforts involving senior White House officials, including Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, who have held talks with President Vladimir Putin on potential initiatives to improve U.S.-Russia relations amid the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Sources close to those discussions indicate that while the Alaska LNG project may have been mentioned in broad terms, no detailed negotiations took place.
The emergence of Russian funding and Novatek’s prospective involvement in an American gas project has raised questions among some U.S. lawmakers and Ukraine supporters. The Trump administration temporarily waived certain sanctions related to Novatek earlier this year, citing the need to maintain diplomatic channels.
As the project evolves, it underscores the complexities of energy diplomacy and economic interests intersecting with geopolitical tensions. The fate of the Polar LNG initiative remains uncertain amid regulatory scrutiny, executive turnover, and competing infrastructure proposals.