OPINION: What will Trump's election mean for Alaska resource development?

It will take a while for us to digest the Nov. 5 presidential election results. Not just for Alaska, but also for the world.

A lot of Alaskans are celebrating Donald Trump’s victory. People in Alaska’s natural resource industries hope for a speedy reversal of President Joe Biden’s policies on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, or ANWR; his halt of a road to the Ambler Mining District in Northwest Alaska; and his move toward expanded protected areas in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, or NPR-A.

Other Alaskans are deeply worried about what Trump will do in a second term.

But “drill, baby, drill” probably won’t happen soon.

Trump can reverse some of Biden’s initiatives quickly, but others are more complicated. Unraveling many of them could take the entire four years of Trump’s new term in office. This isn’t unusual because changing regulatory policy isn’t simple, and there will be lawsuits. It previously took Trump about four years to undo some of President Barack Obama’s initiatives. This will happen again.

Right now, we can expect the U.S. Interior Department’s new move to expand protected areas in the NPR-A to be quickly ended because this is an administrative action. ANWR is more complicated.

Leases in the refuge’s coastal plain were sold in the federal government’s 2021 lease sale under President Trump and then canceled by Interior Secretary Deb Haaland under President Biden.

Seven leases were won in the 2021 sale by the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, or AIDEA, the state’s development finance corporation. Haaland canceled the leases, arguing that the environmental assessments for leasing were rushed and legally flawed. AIDEA sued, arguing that Haaland’s action was also legally flawed. We’ll see how U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Gleason comes down on this. The case is in her court. She is a tough and respected judge.

There will also be a new ANWR lease sale in late December that’s required by the federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Secretary Haaland said she would allow only a small amount of acreage to be leased, and even fewer acres allowed for surface development.

Critics see this as a “poison pill” intended to depress bidding in the sale. Opponents of ANWR leasing say bidding will be depressed anyway because most oil and gas companies have shown little appetite for the refuge. Whether it is due to an assessment that the geology is overrated or that the political environment is too toxic isn’t known.

There is little doubt there is at least some oil in ANWR, because the part of the refuge to be leased in December is in the northwest part of the coastal plain. That’s not far from state-owned lands. Companies have made discoveries on those state lands, and there’s no reason to believe the geology changes significantly at the Canning River, which is the boundary. The question is whether there will be really big discoveries in the refuge — big enough that companies are willing to wade through the political swamp.

A decision by Judge Gleason that the prior leases are legal, along with more favorable rules under a new Trump administration, could change the chemistry. But maybe not. ANWR will continue to be controversial.

The most important thing that industry investors look for, however, is stability, in regulations, taxes and the economy. An overarching question now is whether the sheer scale of Trump’s victory will cause a backlash, particularly if he uses his mandate too aggressively. The pendulum could start swinging back.

We saw this policy whiplash in the swing from Democrat Obama to Republican Trump in 2016, then to Democrat Biden in 2020, and now, in 2024, back to Republican Trump. Whiplash every four years hardly makes for a stable investment environment.

Trump did narrowly win the popular vote. Republicans will control the Senate and likely the U.S. House, but their margins of control will be thin. The new president would be wise to proceed cautiously.

A bigger concern among many Alaska resource companies is trade policy and whether President Trump’s plan for mega-tariffs will invite retaliatory tariffs. This could hurt Alaska companies that sell overseas, such as in fisheries, forest products and minerals.

It may also be difficult for President Trump to deliver on high-profile promises like stopping illegal immigration. He really can’t roll back grocery prices and living costs, either. If his new tariffs on imports rekindle inflation, as most economists believe they will, living costs will rise. His voters will want to know why he didn’t deliver.

It’s inevitable the pendulum will start to swing back because it always does. The question will be how far and fast.

This is important because the initiatives many Alaskans hope to see, like ANWR exploration, changes in restrictive federal land rules and getting a road to Ambler built, will take several years to accomplish.

That’s because new Environmental Impact Statements and changes in land regulations will be needed, and those take time. Wins will also be needed in lawsuits brought by conservation groups. The National Environmental Protection, Clean Water, Clean Air and Endangered Species acts are not going away. They’ve been have been in law for decades. Judge Gleason, and judges like her, will still be around.

The future will be unpredictable and risky. Investors making long-term commitments hate unpredictability and risk.

A plea to new President Trump: Be cautious.

But that’s not Trump.

Tim Bradner is the publisher of the Alaska Economic Report and Alaska Legislative Digest.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.