Seoul Challenges U.S. Claim That Alaska LNG Investment Is Settled

South Korea has pushed back against a U.S. presentation of Korean investment plans, saying participation in the Alaska liquefied natural gas project and proposed nuclear reactor construction remains subject to commercial and legal review.

Industry Minister Kim Jung-kwan said he protested to U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick after Washington described the projects as part of Seoul’s strategic investment commitment. Kim said the announcement went beyond the two governments’ agreement, particularly by presenting the Alaska project in terms that suggested a decision had already been made.

The disagreement emerged after U.S. President Donald Trump highlighted a package of energy projects that included a $22.3 billion gas-fired power plant in Texas, eight large nuclear reactors and the Alaska LNG pipeline. The projects were linked to South Korea’s $200 billion strategic investment framework with the United States.

Seoul distinguishes between the Texas project and the other proposals. The Texas combined-cycle power plant has been selected, while the Alaska LNG and nuclear projects still require further review. South Korea’s trade and industry ministry said no decision has been made on whether to invest in Alaska LNG or how much any investment would be.

President Lee Jae Myung also emphasized that work on the Alaska proposal would proceed only if its commercial viability is established and Korean legal procedures are followed. He said individual nuclear projects would likewise need to meet commercial standards before investment decisions are taken.

A joint Korea-U.S. statement provides that work on the Alaska project will begin when it satisfies the investment agreement’s commercial-reasonableness standard and applicable domestic legal requirements. It also calls for Korean suppliers to have opportunities to participate and for Korea to receive priority access to LNG at economically viable prices.

South Korean officials have identified permitting delays, labor availability, harsh weather and technical challenges as factors that could affect the Alaska project. Seoul is also seeking measures that could improve its economics, including possible tariff relief for steel and equipment, tax adjustments and long-term gas purchase arrangements.

The nuclear framework envisions two Korean-designed APR1400 reactors and six AP1000 units, but proposed sites and individual projects have not been finalized. Kim said locations mentioned by Washington are states interested in hosting reactors, not confirmed construction sites.

The Korean government says its exposure is limited by a $20 billion annual investment ceiling and a $200 billion overall cap, with funding to be released according to project milestones. The public disagreement underscores that the investment partnership is moving forward, but that Seoul and Washington are not yet aligned on how firmly its largest energy components have been committed.