:previous:

Interesting find. Right away two things jumped out at me:

1. Planned completion date: early 2020's;
2. Ownership: Osaka Gas - 2/3; Idemitsu - 1/3;

Obviously Osaka Gas is the senior partner in the project and has entered into many off-take LNG agreements over the years.

Curiously enough, almost 5 years ago, back in May, 2011, Mitsubishi, Osaka Gas, Tokyo Gas et al purchased a $1 billion interest in a field the Cordova Embayment basin in the far NE corner of BC.

http://www.mitsubishicorp.com/jp/en/...000012153.html

And Osaka Gas et al (under the Mitsubishi umbrella) are a partner in the LNG Canada project with Royal Dutch Shell. Just speculation and conjecture on my part... but wouldn't it be kinda ironic if Osaka Gas' interest in the LNG Canada project would actually be directed towards this specific nat gas generating facility? Probably a long shot... but still.

I don't think 2020 is a realistic start date given these price projections:

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2016/02/28...raph_610px.jpg

Source: BC Budget 2016

^ What matters is the spread between the world price (JCC or LNG spot) and the north america price.

Definitely. General trends are flat everywhere though.

http://knoema.com/ncszerf/natural-ga...ata-and-charts

Supply potentially outpacing demand at an increasing rate worldwide:

http://www.ey.com/GL/en/Industries/O...d---LNG-supply

Haha. What a comedian. Ya don't even realize what ya just posted, do ya?!

It's a graph for BC budget purposes in terms of calculating natural gas prices for future royalty revenues. And said graph involves a tabulation of ~10 - 15 future price estimates by independent forecasters knowledgeable in the field. That's it.

And, as usual, the BC gov't typically utilizes very conservative price estimates in that regard. Hell, I have personally gone through BC budgets with a fine tooth comb over the past 15 - 20 years.

Now what the hell has that graph have to do with LNG? Nuthin'! Yep.

Obviously ya have no understanding of LNG. I know that. You must know that as well. At least I hope so.

And you are also the same fella that previously stated that "natural gas should be left in the ground in BC" in another Canada Forum thread. And... by definition/extension... natural gas in Alberta as well as oil in the AB oil sands.

Makes sense since ya reside within inner Van City - home of the fringe enviro crowd. At least fess up. BTW, ya have a propensity of makin' similar statements and "logic" in other threads on here as well.

And yep... ya are definitely our own in-house "Al Bundy" on this forum. :cheers: "Married... with Children" has always been my fave TV show! :D

I've never said that NG should be left in the ground. Taking it out now at record-low prices is dumb for all involved.

"And... by definition/extension" = you pulling shit out of your ass.

Care to respond to my other links? Or are those too much reality for you?

:koko:

Keep making up facts bro. How many times have you promised LNG now?

You realize that the Petronas plant won't be exporting LNG until some time after 2020, right? What does your crystal ball say about prices then?

I don't have a crystal ball, I leave it to the professionals. Check my links above on worldwide supply, demand, and price forecasts as far out as 2025 in some cases.

Though if the last year of falling oil prices and over production have shown us anything, it's that so called experts and billion dollar companies are terrible at making predictions.

Haha. Fer chrise sakes man. "Leave it to the professionals"? What the hell does that mean? Hell, many international "LNG professionals" follow me on my Twitter feed. And we have all had back-and-forth internal feedback over many years. You?

To wit, just the international head of LNG, oil and gas for Deloitte Australia, for example.

On that note alone, recently he posited that FLNG would be cheaper in BC than land-based LNG. A complex topic on its own. As a matter of fact, he is very familiar with BC and all proposed LNG projects. And yet, he was not even aware/perplexed that the ExxonMobil/Imperial Oil LNG proposal up on Tuck Inlet in Prince Rupert decided against a barge-proposed FNLG system v. a land-based LNG platform. Even sent him the applicable doc explaining reasons behind same from the applicable regulatory authority.

So what are your own "professional's" viewpoints on just that foregoing specific matter? I understand the reasons behind same... but curious minds wanna know your take! Don't let me hear crickets regarding same. ;)

And your post that "Check my links above on worldwide supply, demand, and price forecasts as far out as 2025".

Again. Fer chrise sakes man. Ya posted stuff above that is not even relevant to LNG here in BC as I have posited previously. Stuff that is completely irrelevant.

Better that ya stay outta this thread... as I know that ya are wayyyyy outta your league here... but perhaps ya obviously just don't yet realize same?! ;)

PS. What is your price forecast for gasoline at my local Chevron station here in 2025? I just may wanna make a material decision in that regard moving forward. :P

Just an interesting note on Australian LNG facilities - on the one hand ya have the western Australian LNG projects (northwest shelf), which are all based upon offshore natural gas deposits.

OTOH, ya have 3 Aussie LNG terminals that will (or have) come on-stream in eastern Australia (Gladstone region). And these three facilities all utilize coal seam gas (coal bed methane), which is of a much lower quality than typically sourced natural gas.

To put that into context, Asian natural gas requirements are "richer" than that of North American utilities, for example. Ergo, Asian utilities also require that LPG is injected into imported LNG in order to upgrade same.

On that same note, since these 3 Gladstone region LNG facilities utilize CBM as their source... opex is much more expensive. IOW, once a CBM well is drilled it begins to deplete immediately and requires additional CBM wells to be drilled to replace same in short order, which increases opex.

BTW, shipping time from NE BC to Tokyo Harbour, for example, is similar from that of the Aussie Gladstone region.

With that background outta the way... both Origin and ConocoPhillips have a combined 75% interest in APLNG. China's Sinopec (with a 25% interest) is the only off-take partner.

Both Origin and CP have entered into off-take agreements with their 75% interest based upon JCC-linked prices. And that's where same becomes interesting based upon $U.S per barrel:

1. $U.S 25/barrel - covers all operating and continuing capex on steady basis;

2. $U.S. 30/barrel - able to pay interest on financing;

3. $U.S. 40/barrel - not only pays interest charges but can amortize dabt on an accelerated basis;

4. Above $U.S. 42/barrel - profit begins to kick in above and beyond operating and financing costs;

From Origin's CEO Grant King himself.

And the foregoing is based upon the recently completed APLNG - with Aussie capex per installed million ton/per annum capacity is the highest on the planet.

And that's in today's flooded LNG environment with markets expected to balance out by 2020/2021 - when LNG facilities in BC are expected to first come on-line.

Just some context.

Unreal. The fed enviro CEAA assessment for the Petronas-led LNG consortium was days away from completion... when the CEAA asked for another 90-day extension. And the clock only begins on that once the proponent has filed all relevant documents/responses to further queries. And that alone could take many months.

To put things into perspective, Petronas filed their CEAA project description back in February, 2013. The enviro review was supposed to be on a 365-day clock. And here we are over 3 years later and this matter could take another 6 months or more.

Even the BCEAO issued enviro certification back in the fall of 2014.

Over the weekend... senior gov't officials flew to Ottawa on the matter in order to discuss and clarify project details. Even the Japanese ambassador to Canada has written a letter to the CEAA warning them of the risk to the project of any further delays. BTW, JAPEX is part of the Petronas consortium.

Again. Unreal.

http://www.vancouversun.com/business..._lsa=d66c-964f

Things are getting more pessimistic for BC's LNG prospects:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/lng-...lock-1.3564280

Pessimistic? Haha. Ya never fail to disappoint Warren. And obviously don't understand LNG. Also read the same article along with hundreds of others. Frankly, a kinda dumb article and the author himself has never written upon LNG or even understands the industry himself either - just not able to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Brent Jang of the Globe and Mail has always been considered the most knowledgeable source on LNG here in BC in by insiders. And his take from yesterday:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle29829681/

And from a few days earlier:

http://af.reuters.com/article/energy...BrandChannel=0

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle29791565/

Ahhh yes, of course the "expert" who agrees with you is the well-respected one. Since 2011 this has been all talk. And so it continues...

Yep, Brent Jang of the G & M is very highly qualified/regarded on the topic of LNG here in BC. Anyone who even understands this nascent industry concurs as well. I also KNOW that this entire matter is wayyyyy over your head... akin to so many other matters on this site... so why bother to post? :D

"All talk" by who since 2011? Petronas? With ~$17 billion sunk into its BC LNG project already prior to final FID? Remember the old adage... "Money Talks... Bullshit Walks? ;)

Petronas still hasn't made a final investment decision. You know that. All hot air...

What is your profession that gives you all this expert insider knowledge you claim to have? If you do actually have access to all this information... you probably shouldn't be posting it.

More delays...

http://www.alaskahighwaynews.ca/regi...rnal-1.2314274

Looks like very little chance of anything happening in the next 5 years.

Other projects:


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle30851968/

Even the "done deal" for Hawaii fell apart:

http://vancouversun.com/business/ene...cs-lng-exports

It's looking like Canada has missed the boat for LNG more and more every day.