SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   Alberta & British Columbia (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=127)
-   -   Proposed West Coast BC LNG Terminals (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=201424)

Stingray2004 Mar 2, 2016 3:07 AM

: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.

WarrenC12 Mar 2, 2016 6:13 PM

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

MalcolmTucker Mar 2, 2016 6:15 PM

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

WarrenC12 Mar 2, 2016 7:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker (Post 7355826)
^ 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

Stingray2004 Mar 6, 2016 5:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12 (Post 7355815)
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

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

WarrenC12 Mar 6, 2016 4:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stingray2004 (Post 7360608)
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.

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?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stingray2004 (Post 7360608)
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.

:koko:

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

exbanker Mar 6, 2016 8:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12 (Post 7360855)
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.

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?

WarrenC12 Mar 7, 2016 1:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by exbanker (Post 7361032)
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.

milomilo Mar 7, 2016 3:04 AM

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.

Stingray2004 Mar 13, 2016 4:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12 (Post 7361245)
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.

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

Stingray2004 Mar 15, 2016 3:48 AM

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.

Stingray2004 Mar 22, 2016 12:48 AM

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

WarrenC12 May 4, 2016 1:17 AM

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

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

Stingray2004 May 4, 2016 6:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12 (Post 7430039)
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:

Quote:

Pacific NorthWest hopes B.C. LNG project in final stages before approval
BRENT JANG
VANCOUVER — The Globe and Mail
Published Monday, May 02, 2016 8:22PM EDT

Pacific NorthWest LNG will submit new reports to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency by mid-May in an effort to address lingering concerns about its plans to export liquefied natural gas.

The consortium is seeking to push the project across the finish line after a series of delays that arose mostly because of requests from the agency for greater detail. The upcoming filings are significant because they are seen as the final chapters to Pacific NorthWest LNG’s submissions aimed at winning regulatory approval.

The federal regulator sent a six-page letter on March 18 to Pacific NorthWest LNG, asking the consortium to file more information, such as the construction work schedule for a suspension bridge and pier in northwestern B.C. Those two structures spanning 2.7 kilometres would connect a dock in the ocean with the planned LNG terminal on Lelu Island.

We’re in the midst of responding to what we hope is the final information request,” Pacific NorthWest LNG director Michael Culbert said in an interview. “Let the science answer the questions. We’ve gone through a rigorous environmental assessment process.”

After the CEAA receives the new reports, it may take several weeks for the agency to decide whether the responses are adequate. By late June, the 90-day clock could start ticking – that’s how much time the federal cabinet will have to render its ruling on whether to reject the LNG proposal or approve it with conditions, industry observers say.

If cabinet clears the way, that will allow Pacific NorthWest LNG to make its own final investment decision, potentially in September. Malaysia’s state-owned Petronas leads the consortium. The other partners are from Japan, China, India and Brunei.

“We’re advised by Minister McKenna that it will be no more than a 90-day decision period,” Mr. Culbert said.

A March survey conducted by Abacus Data and commissioned by Pacific NorthWest LNG showed that of the 1,000 B.C. respondents, 63 per cent supported the project, 20 per cent opposed and 17 per cent were neutral.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle29829681/

And from a few days earlier:

Quote:

Petronas Canada LNG project chief sees investment decision in months

Reuters

Fri Apr 29, 2016

CALGARY, Alberta, April 29 (Reuters) - Petronas and its partners hope to make a final decision within months on whether to build what could be Canada's first liquefied natural gas export project, though further delays to the environmental review could push that timeline back, the project chief said late on Thursday.

"Depending on the timing of the CEAA (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency) decision, we would hope that by late summer or early fall we would be in a position to follow up on (a final investment decision)," Michael Culbert, president of Pacific NorthWest LNG, said in a phone interview. Petronas, Malaysia's national oil and gas company, owns a 62 percent stake in the company.

Pacific NorthWest is now working to answer the regulator's final round of questions and Canada's ruling Liberals have pledged that once addressed, the company would have its decision within three months.

"As a human, we all want to see the finish line from time to time. This finish line has continued to be somewhat evasive for us," Culbert said.
http://af.reuters.com/article/energy...BrandChannel=0

Quote:

Petronas names new president of Pacific NorthWest LNG
BRENT JANG
VANCOUVER — The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Apr. 29, 2016 3:01AM EDT

Petronas has named a new president at Pacific NorthWest LNG to oversee construction of the B.C. project, hoping to show Ottawa that the consortium is willing to forge ahead despite a federal environmental review that has taken more than three years.

Adnan Zainal Abidin, vice-president of global LNG projects at Malaysia’s state-owned Petronas, will take over on Sunday as Pacific NorthWest LNG president. The industry veteran joined Petronas in 1984 and rose through the ranks to become an expert in liquefied natural gas.

“This team is the engineering and project management side, which will be built up around Adnan’s skill set,” Mr. Culbert said in an interview. “It’s a good sign for the project to bring that LNG construction expertise in.”

“Here we are, coming up to a year later, and we’re still waiting for that CEAA approval,” Mr. Culbert said. “Investments like this make a lot of sense to me, as a Canadian, to move the project forward. This is the right time to invest. You’re in a down cycle in the energy sector and jobs have been lost. This is job creation and you have a federal government that is in significant deficit position.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle29791565/

WarrenC12 May 5, 2016 3:11 AM

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...

Stingray2004 May 5, 2016 5:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12 (Post 7431694)
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? ;)

WarrenC12 May 5, 2016 3:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stingray2004 (Post 7431807)
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...

milomilo May 5, 2016 5:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stingray2004 (Post 7431807)
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? ;)

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.

WarrenC12 Aug 3, 2016 3:43 PM

More delays...

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

Quote:

Weak oil prices have hit Petronas' bottom line hard--its first quarter profit dropped a staggering 60 per cent this year from last, from an estimated $3.6 billion CAD to $1.4 billion, according to the Journal. Petronas is expected to release its second quarter results on Aug. 22.

Soft LNG prices since 2014 are expected to remain as new supply from the United States, Australia, and Russia is brought into the market over the next five years, according to the Journal.
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

lubicon Aug 3, 2016 6:47 PM

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


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.