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 Sep 12, 2012 2:13 AM

Proposed West Coast BC LNG Terminals
 
Seems like alot of major energy players are looking at monetizing their enormous tight gas/shale gas reserves in the Montney, Horn River, Cordova Embayment, and Liard basins situate in NE BC.

While natural gas is roughly in the $2 MMBtu range here... in Asia it approaches $17 MMBTu. With arbitrage, the netbacks for NE BC gas producers would be considerable as long-term lng contracts in Asia are tied to the price of oil. LNG shipping time to Japan, for example, is also apparently the same transit time from the proposed coal bed methane lng terminals on Australia's east coast.

Some estimates are that the numerous BC proposed lng terminals could result in an additional roughly $600 billion in BC GDP, plus additional $billions annually into BC government coffers.

In any event, another lng proposal was announced yesterday:

1. BG Group, with it's proposed ~$24 - $32 billion lng terminal on Ridley Island in Prince Rupert, entered into an agreement with pipeline major Spectra Energy yesterday to construct a massive 48-inch pipeline from NE BC to Prince Rupert with an estimated $6 - $8 billion cost.

The BG Group is contempalting their PR facility to have lng throughput of 4.4 billion cubic feet/day, which equates to 30% of all natural gas produced in Canada in 2011. We are looking at a minimum $30 - 40 billion investment exclusive of further $billions in field development here alone.

http://www.spectraenergy.com/content...c_lng_full.jpg

http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...132/story.html


2. Royal Dutch Shell/Mitsubishi/Korea Gas/Petro China are proposing a $12 billion lng terminal in Kitimat and have applied to the NEB for exporting 3.5 billion cubic feet/day, which equates to 25% of all natural gas produced in Canada in 2011. The ng will be sourced from their upstream NE BC fields.

In addition, they have entered into an agreement with TransCanada Pipelines for a new $4 billion pipeline from NE BC to Kitimat.

3. Encana/Apache/EOG Resources are proposing a $6 billion lng terminal in Kitimat with another pipeline to NE BC. They are also estimating $15 billion worth of field development over a 25 year period to source the terminal.

4. Malaysian giant Petronas purchased a $1 billion interest in a NE BC field from Progress Energy and a few months back purchased Progress Energy for $6 billion. Interestingly enough, another unnamed bidder (speculated to be Exxon, Shell, or BG) came in with a higher offer, which Petronas met.

Petronas already has a site lined up in Prince Rupert albeit they have not disclosed their plans yet.

5. News reports from the U.S. have confirmed that Exxon is looking at constructiing an lng terminal on BC's west coast as well.

Japanese Inpex and Itochu are also rumoured at constructing an lng terminal off BC's west coast.

Quote:

Doug Bloom, president of Spectra Energy’s western Canadian transmission operations, said other global energy companies are interested in B.C.’s export gas potential as well. “There are still other parties that are investigating LNG in British Columbia that have chosen to not yet make themselves public
http://www.vancouversun.com/business...#ixzz26DPfji2M

I'm sure that alot of consolidation will occur over the coming years. Make no doubt about it... if these lng plants all come to fruition the intensive capital and labour requirements will likely rival Fort Mac in AB.

Chadillaccc Sep 13, 2012 5:51 AM

Extremely impressive numbers! How exciting!!

Metro-One Sep 13, 2012 6:30 AM

Forget Alberta's crappy oil pipeline, here is some real investment for BC's economy! I really hope the full scale of this comes to fruition.

lubicon Sep 13, 2012 7:29 PM

So:

Oil pipeline = bad
Gas pipeline = good?

Metro-One Sep 13, 2012 7:51 PM

:previous:Its because nearly all of the economic benefits to be had from the oil pipeline occur in Alberta while BC takes the majority of the environmental risk. All of the processing facilities, extraction sites, etc... for these gas pipelines will be in BC (along with the tax revenue), which means major economic benefit for us along with the risk. Also, correct me if i am wrong, I believe potential natural gas leaks / spills are not as harmful as crude oil leaks.

Canadian Mind Sep 13, 2012 8:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 5830424)
:previous:Its because nearly all of the economic benefits to be had from the oil pipeline occur in Alberta while BC takes the majority of the environmental risk. All of the processing facilities, extraction sites, etc... for these gas pipelines will be in BC (along with the tax revenue), which means major economic benefit for us along with the risk. Also, correct me if i am wrong, I believe potential natural gas leaks / spills are not as harmful as crude oil leaks.


Natural Gas = Methane. One of these pipelines bursting would be no more harmful to the environment then every beer drinking male in this country making his personal "contribution" to the atmosphere.

Mitchapalooza Sep 13, 2012 9:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lubicon (Post 5830396)
So:

Oil pipeline = bad
Gas pipeline = good?

Yes, precisely that.

A natural gas leak would be 100000000 times less damaging to the environment than a crude oil leak.

Stingray2004 Sep 15, 2012 6:50 AM

Aside from the 4 major contemplated lng terminals/ global energy giants described above... BC Energy Minister Rich Coleman today confirmed that 2 other majors also have serious intentions... one player is looking at Kitimat and the other is looking at Prince Rupert for their respective lng terminals.

Coleman also identified global energy giant Exxon Mobil as one of these companies.

Again, many of these players are also involved in Australia's lng terminal boom... and are both knowledgeable about prospects for offset buyer diversification/success as well as NE BC ng basin probable reserves in order to meet these lng requirements over a 20+ year time frame.

BTW, basins in Alberta will also eventually become part of the source supply inclusive of the Duvernay formation.

At the end of the day... pretty big stuff.

libtard Sep 17, 2012 10:44 PM

What makes BC think its so deserving of more energy revenues.

There are hundreds of pipelines criss crossing North America. I didn't hear Montana or Wyoming screaming about more revenues when the Keystone XL pipeline was proposed.

BC get over yourself. Let the pipeline run through the province and be thankful you're at the end so you get a terminal. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

giallo Sep 18, 2012 5:08 AM

Just because Montana and Wyoming don't complain, that means BC shouldn't as well? Tight logic.

The pipeline runs through the entire province horizontally. If they pipe ruptures, the chance that the affected area will be in BC is around 90%. Oh, and without the terminal on BC's coast, the oil wouldn't be going anywhere in Asia. BC definitely has a right to a bigger piece of the pie as it takes on most of the risk, and has the land to export abroad.

If you think that's too much to ask, try exporting it down south first, and then to Asia. I'm sure they'll give you a better distribution deal *sarcasm*.

Mitchapalooza Sep 18, 2012 5:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by libtard (Post 5834909)
What makes BC think its so deserving of more energy revenues.

There are hundreds of pipelines criss crossing North America. I didn't hear Montana or Wyoming screaming about more revenues when the Keystone XL pipeline was proposed.

BC get over yourself. Let the pipeline run through the province and be thankful you're at the end so you get a terminal. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

LOL are you freaking kidding me with this post?

Have you ever taken a look at the topography of Wyoming/Montana VS British Columbia? BC is the most mountainous region of North America, with the most avalanches/rockslides/mudslides occurences by a WIDE margin....as a result of that topography, the province is taking on a HUGE HUGE amount of enviromental risk, one that could potentially damage OTHER BC based industries that would put THOUSANDS out of work. The fishing industry in North BC alone employs thousands of people...all who would be out of a job if there was a marine spill of crude oil.

So yes BC deserves to be compensated for that level of risk....Alberta is lucky to have oil reserves, BC is lucky to be located next to the Pacific...Alberta does not deserve to reap all the benefits while BC is left holding the f'ing bag on this one....and as long Alberta continues to think they can hold BC ransom, the longer this province and its people are going to fight this pipeline....as you can see BC has other means of revenue in natural gas, they certainly do not NEED this Alberta oil to maintain a strong economy.

At this point, Alberta NEEDS BC, not the other way around...BC is doing just fine on their own and have been for decades and has their own untapped energry resources that would employ tens of thousands of people and invest billions upon billions into the BC GDP & economy.

renthefinn Sep 19, 2012 3:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mitchapalooza (Post 5835857)
LOL are you freaking kidding me with this post?

Have you ever taken a look at the topography of Wyoming/Montana VS British Columbia? BC is the most mountainous region of North America, with the most avalanches/rockslides/mudslides occurences by a WIDE margin....as a result of that topography, the province is taking on a HUGE HUGE amount of enviromental risk, one that could potentially damage OTHER BC based industries that would put THOUSANDS out of work. The fishing industry in North BC alone employs thousands of people...all who would be out of a job if there was a marine spill of crude oil.

So yes BC deserves to be compensated for that level of risk....Alberta is lucky to have oil reserves, BC is lucky to be located next to the Pacific...Alberta does not deserve to reap all the benefits while BC is left holding the f'ing bag on this one....and as long Alberta continues to think they can hold BC ransom, the longer this province and its people are going to fight this pipeline....as you can see BC has other means of revenue in natural gas, they certainly do not NEED this Alberta oil to maintain a strong economy.

At this point, Alberta NEEDS BC, not the other way around...BC is doing just fine on their own and have been for decades and has their own untapped energry resources that would employ tens of thousands of people and invest billions upon billions into the BC GDP & economy.

I agree with your comments, Alberta should go get it's own ocean.... We should be charging tariffs on any oil transported through BC and using our piece of the Pacific... I'm sure some sort of middle ground could be negotiated....

Wrecker Sep 19, 2012 10:21 PM

BC is doing fine, because of how much Alberta contributes to the rest of the country (including BC) in taxes & jobs. I suppose Alberta could impose export taxes to the rest of the country...but what good does a pissing match do?

vitc Sep 19, 2012 11:35 PM

Question for the political junkies - what real impact would a NDP government have on these LNG projects? Does he have a position?

lubicon Sep 20, 2012 4:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vitc (Post 5837594)
Question for the political junkies - what real impact would a NDP government have on these LNG projects? Does he have a position?

I suppose it depends on whether their opposition to tankers extends to LNG ships as well. If so, then the projects are as good as dead.

casper Sep 22, 2012 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lubicon (Post 5838414)
I suppose it depends on whether their opposition to tankers extends to LNG ships as well. If so, then the projects are as good as dead.

If you can't go West. Go East to Churchill Manitoba and export to Europe. I think the oil/gas companies want world prices and don't care who the buyer realy is.

Doug Sep 23, 2012 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casper (Post 5841078)
If you can't go West. Go East to Churchill Manitoba and export to Europe. I think the oil/gas companies want world prices and don't care who the buyer realy is.

Europe is a declining market, Asia is a growing market.

There was already been an oil pipeline flowing through BC from Alberta since the 50s. It passes through Jasper National Park and crosses the Fraser River. it has never had a serious spill.

How many truck and train accidents have occurred in other provinces while hauling goods to and from BC ports?

If oil pipelines pass environmental assessment, does the Constitution even allow a government to impede inter-provincial commerce? I know in both the US and Australia state governments have zero jurisdiction over interstate trade and transportation.

casper Sep 23, 2012 4:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug (Post 5841148)
Europe is a declining market, Asia is a growing market.

There was already been an oil pipeline flowing through BC from Alberta since the 50s. It passes through Jasper National Park and crosses the Fraser River. it has never had a serious spill.

How many truck and train accidents have occurred in other provinces while hauling goods to and from BC ports?

If oil pipelines pass environmental assessment, does the Constitution even allow a government to impede inter-provincial commerce? I know in both the US and Australia state governments have zero jurisdiction over interstate trade and transportation.

Sounds like they also want to twin the pipeline from the 50s down to Vancouver. I agree the West Coast is a good option.

My point is if they can’t make this work due to environmental and public acceptance issues, then go east. Oil is a commodity, currently Europe gets most of its oil from the middle east. If they start to get their oil from Canada, then the middle east oil will likely end up in Asia.

s211 Sep 24, 2012 3:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casper (Post 5841078)
If you can't go West. Go East to Churchill Manitoba and export to Europe. I think the oil/gas companies want world prices and don't care who the buyer realy is.

So you guys rant about access to BC ports (provincial jurisdiction BLAH BLAH BLAH) but conveniently ignore that position when goods travel the opposite direction?

Doug Sep 28, 2012 3:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by casper (Post 5841620)
Sounds like they also want to twin the pipeline from the 50s down to Vancouver. I agree the West Coast is a good option.

My point is if they can’t make this work due to environmental and public acceptance issues, then go east. Oil is a commodity, currently Europe gets most of its oil from the middle east. If they start to get their oil from Canada, then the middle east oil will likely end up in Asia.

The costs and environmental issues of shipping bitumen east would be even higher due to increased distance and the fact that east coast and especially arctic ports are often iced in.

casper Oct 4, 2012 2:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by s211 (Post 5842623)
So you guys rant about access to BC ports (provincial jurisdiction BLAH BLAH BLAH) but conveniently ignore that position when goods travel the opposite direction?

It's note quite a rant. If the communities along the route out west do not want the pipeline, then try something else.

There was recent article a few days ago on how the NDP is supporting increasing the volume of oil heating to Ontario/Quebec....
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle4574676/

Stingray2004 Oct 4, 2012 4:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vitc (Post 5837594)
Question for the political junkies - what real impact would a NDP government have on these LNG projects? Does he have a position?

Firstly, the only file that I recall the 1990's NDP administration doing anything right on was the then encouragement in expansion of the conventional natural gas sector in NE BC in terms of tax credits and royalty structure. I will give them credit there at least.

As for the current lng terminals, lng supertankers, natural gas-fired generation plants to power these lng terminals (massive amounts of electricity required), and the utilization of fraccing to bring these unconventional tight gas/shale gas desposits to fruition as the feedstock for the lng terminals, the current NDP position is:

Quote:

B.C. NDP Leader Adrian Dix reassured top Canadian energy officials this week his party wants a smooth transition to power and doesn’t want his planned tax hikes to surprise them if his party wins the next election.

Those in attendance were also pleasantly reassured to hear that Dix fully supports the Liberal government’s plans to expand the LNG industry for export, and would not call for a moratorium on fracking. He also understands the need to use natural gas to generate electricity.
http://www.allpolitics.ca/index.php?...y=NDP&refno=84

Calgarian Oct 4, 2012 3:35 PM

I wonder what spinoff there will be for Alberta based companies in all of this...

Doug Oct 4, 2012 3:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian (Post 5855199)
I wonder what spinoff there will be for Alberta based companies in all of this...

Virtually none as business won't make large capital investments under an NDP government.

Calgarian Oct 4, 2012 4:00 PM

fair enough lol.

s211 Oct 4, 2012 4:41 PM

And therein lies the rub. Don't cut your nose off to spite your face, BC.

SpongeG Oct 7, 2012 7:48 AM

i was in ft st john today, holy crap there is so much going on up there and that part of bc, jobs everywhere, they have a starbucks inside the safeway and apparently its often closed cause they can't staff it and when it is open they have lineups out the door, anyway that means nothing but so much housing and infrastructure going on up there, they are booming

Doug Oct 7, 2012 2:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpongeG (Post 5858343)
i was in ft st john today, holy crap there is so much going on up there and that part of bc, jobs everywhere, they have a starbucks inside the safeway and apparently its often closed cause they can't staff it and when it is open they have lineups out the door, anyway that means nothing but so much housing and infrastructure going on up there, they are booming

And all the gas produced and raw materials used to build infrastructure up there pass through Alberta.

Stingray2004 Oct 7, 2012 4:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug (Post 5858432)
And all the gas produced and raw materials used to build infrastructure up there pass through Alberta.

Actually, BC produces ~3 billion cubic feet of natural gas/day. ~2.2 billion cubic feet flows southward through Spectra Energy's Westcoast Transmission pipeline for BC use and then onto the Sumas/Huntington border crossing into the U.S Pacific Northwest and along the I-5 corridor into California.

In that vein, southern AB foothills natural gas utilizes TransCanada's Foothills pipeline that crosses into BC and then crosses into the U.S. at Kingsgate, B.C. to service eastern WA State, Idaho, etc.

Stingray2004 Oct 17, 2012 1:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stingray2004 (Post 5832392)
5. News reports from the U.S. have confirmed that Exxon is looking at constructiing an lng terminal on BC's west coast as well.

---------------------

BC Energy Minister Rich Coleman also identified global energy giant Exxon Mobil as one of these companies.

Further confirmation that ExxonMobil is now in on the westcoast lng game with its $3.1 billion friendly takeover offer of natural gas junior Celtic Exploration today with upstream assets in BC's Montney and Alberta's Duvernay basins that would bolster ExxonMobil's plan for an lng terminal:

Quote:

Exxon bids $3.1-billion to buy Canada’s Celtic Exploration

CALGARY — The Canadian Press

Published Wednesday, Oct. 17 2012, 7:58 AM EDT

Celtic Exploration Ltd. has received a friendly takeover offer valued at $3.1-billion from Canadian affiliates of U.S. energy giant ExxonMobil Corp., which will expand its natural gas holdings in western Canada through the deal.

The Calgary-based company is mainly focused the Montney and Duvernay gas plays.

Celtic’s shareholders are being offered $24.50 per share and a half-share of a new company, code-named Spinco – well above recent market prices.

Celtic’s stock closed Tuesday at $18.12 on the Toronto Stock Exchange before the announcement.

The offer, excluding the value of Spinco shares, is 25 per cent over the Oct. 16 closing price and 34 per cent over a 30-day volume-weighted average price of $18.28 per Celtic share.

The new company will have about 49,000 acres of undeveloped lands and produce the equivalent of about 3,300 barrels per day, about 90 per cent in the form of gas.

The board of Celtic unanimously supports the proposal and has agreed not to seek a better offer but is entitled to consider rival offers brought to it. ExxonMobil Canada will have a right to match any superior proposal.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...rticle4617626/

Stingray2004 Oct 20, 2012 7:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stingray2004 (Post 5828232)
4. Malaysian giant Petronas purchased a $1 billion interest in a NE BC field from Progress Energy and a few months back purchased Progress Energy for $6 billion. Interestingly enough, another unnamed bidder (speculated to be Exxon, Shell, or BG) came in with a higher offer, which Petronas met.

Petronas already has a site lined up in Prince Rupert albeit they have not disclosed their plans yet.

Just read that the federal government has blocked this transaction within the last few hours. What a stupid decision! The "NET BENEFIT" criteria for Canada, and BC in particular, would have been financially enormous considering the $billions$ for the westcoast lng terminal, Petronas' international lng profile and connections, and the annual $billions required for ng field development to support the west coast lng terminal ng feed-stock.

Did I mention the additional huge chunk of annual change into BC's provincial coffers as well as the few thousand in employment opportunities for this contemplated project alone?

Energy junior Progress Energy just doesn't have those deep, deep pockets and international lng connections to develop same.

If Petronas has been turned down by Ottawa, China's CNOOC's $15 billion bid for Nexen is all but finished, utilizing the same criteria.

There might still be a light at the end of the tunnel for Petronas' takeover of Progress Energy though:

Quote:

Ottawa Blocks Petronas Bid for Progress Energy

Carrie Tait

CALGARY — The Globe and Mail

Published Saturday, Oct. 20 2012, 1:25 AM EDT

The federal government has blocked a Malaysian state-owned company's attempt to take over a Canadian oil and gas firm, although the Tories hinted they could still be convinced to give their blessing.

Petronas offered $6-billion to buy Progress Energy Resources Corp. and the deal had to be considered a “net benefit” for Canada in order to get approval. The Canadian government, however, said it is not satisfied with the deal and will not approve it as it is. Ottawa has never blocked an oil and gas takeover.

The decision comes as the Harper government, which has gone to enormous lengths to show outsiders Canada is open to foreign investment, is also reviewing CNOOC Ltd.’s proposed takeover of Nexen Inc. The stakes are much higher in that $15.1-billion deal. Nexen has assets all over the world, but its oil sands assets are attractive to the state-controlled company.

The Harper government had to make a call on the Petronas/Progress deal Friday, made it three minutes before midnight.

Minister of Industry Christian Paradis left Petronas an opportunity to bolster its argument and win the government over.

"I can confirm that I have sent a notice letter to Petronas indicating that I am not satisfied that the proposed investment is likely to be of net benefit to Canada,” he said in a statement. "I came to this decision after a careful and thorough review of the proposed transaction.

“Under the Investment Canada Act, Petronas now has up to 30 days to make any additional representations and submit any further undertakings, which can be extended with my agreement and that of the investor. Subsequently, I will either confirm this initial decision or approve the acquisition.

"Due to the strict confidentiality provisions of the Act, I cannot comment further on this investment at this time,” Mr. Paradis said. "Canada has a long standing reputation for welcoming foreign investment. The government of Canada remains committed to maintaining an open climate for investment."

It will cost billions to develop Canada’s oil sands, and industry supporters argue foreign investment will be necessary to make that happen. Critics, however, worry foreigners, especially state-controlled companies, will soon control too much of the west’s resources unless the government intervenes. The CNOOC/Nexen deal was expected to be a key litmus test, but by blocking the Petronas/Progress deal, the government is signaling acquirers must make strong case in order to gain approval.

Petronas had previously sweetened its bid for Progress without a competing bid being made public. In July it offered investors $22 per share, up from the $20.45 it offered when the friendly deal was disclosed in late June. Shareholders have approved the deal.

Nexen’s shareholders have also approved the CNOOC deal.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle4626063/

Quote:

The Wall Street Journal
U.S. Edition
Saturday, October 20, 2012
As of 3:41 AM EDT

Canada Not Satisfied with Petronas Offer for Progress Energy

.....

The deal would give Petronas control over Progress Energy's 1.9 trillion cubic feet of proved and probable gas reserves in the Montney shale-gas basin, thought to be one of the richest reserves of shale gas in North America. It's also far from major markets, making it ideal for LNG, which is gas that is chilled and shipped by tankers.

Demand for gas in Malaysia is growing by between 6% and 7% a year. Gas shipped from Canada would help fire power plants run by state-controlled Tenaga Nasional Bhd and help keep several industries humming in an economy that is expected to grow 4.5%-5% this year and expand 4.5%-5.5% next year.

The potential blocking of the Petronas deal, which had been widely expected to be approved...
....

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...062952262.html

Stingray2004 Dec 1, 2012 7:58 PM

Looks like Imperial Oil will take a 50% stake in ExxonMobil's takeover of Celtic Exploration, which has large land holdings in BC's Montney natural gas basin. Exxon's westcoast lng plans are also starting to become clearer with a future contemplated capacity in excess of BC's current ng production:

Quote:

But this may not be the last we hear of Celtic from Imperial or Exxon. There's a possibility that something larger is in the works. Analyst Peter Ogden at Bank of America Merrill Lynch noted in November that should Imperial exercise its acquisition rights, he expects the two buyers "to communicate a west coast LNG strategy at some time in the future."

During his meeting with [Exxon] management, they were "reasonably clear that LNG was an attractive proposition" but it would require a minimum plant size of 2.5 to 3 billion cubic feet per day and would have to come on stream between 2020 and 2025. Ogden added that management "would not indicate whether a site had been purchased for future development."
http://community.nasdaq.com/News/201...storyid=193873

Norway's Statoil is also contemplating getting into the westcoast lng game:

Quote:

Statoil ASA (STL), Norway’s biggest oil and natural gas producer, may consider a liquified natural gas exporting business for its Canadian operations.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...l-gas-business

And of course the Japanese Inpex/Nexen partnership are exploring lng export opportunities as well as is Talisman Energy. Likely to be alot of consolidation and further jv's here down the road.

craneSpotter Dec 4, 2012 9:03 PM

Petronas and Progress announce go-ahead for $9-billion LNG plant at Prince Rupert

Much larger facility to be built if Ottawa approves Malaysian giant's purchase of Canadian company

GORDON HAMILTON, VANCOUVER SUN DECEMBER 4, 2012

Quote:

VANCOUVER — Malaysian Energy giant Petronas and Canadian natural gas company Progress Energy say they are going ahead with plans to develop a $9 billion-plus liquefied natural gas plant at Prince Rupert despite a decision by Ottawa to reject the Malaysian company’s $5.9 billion bid to buy Progress...

The two companies have agreed to go ahead with the LNG plant independently of the takeover bid, Progress president Michael Culbert said Tuesday. But the joint venture partners also offered a tempting carrot if Ottawa reconsiders its decision to block the takeover bid: a much larger investment in B.C.’s northeastern gas fields and in its proposed LNG plant....British Columbia would benefit through the development of a new industry capable of creating investment, jobs and tax revenues....

...The joint venture partners have named the company that is to develop the LNG plant - Pacific Northwest LNG. Culbert said the new company is to establish an office in Vancouver early in 2013, around the same time it submits its plans to Canadian regulators. Pacific Northwest LNG’s target start-up date is 2018.

craneSpotter Dec 7, 2012 10:57 PM

Nexen, Progress foreign takeover deals approved by Canadian government

SHAWN MCCARTHY AND STEVEN CHASE
OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Dec. 07 2012


Quote:

Ottawa has also given the green light to a bid by Malaysia’s Petronas to acquire Progress Energy, a Calgary producer with significant natural gas holdings in shale gas fields of northeastern British Columbia. Petronas is proposing to build an $11-billion plant in Prince Rupert, B.C., to liquefy gas and export to Asia.
This is great news for BC! The new Pacific Northwest LNG terminal (which was given the green light to enter the design phase a few days ago) should be larger due to the approval of the Progress takeover.

Interesting that Nexen sold the Japanese nearly half of their NG holdings in northeastern BC in 2011, while forming joint ventures with CNOOC. I believe the US still has to approve CNOOCs takeover of Nexen Gulf of Mexico holdings. I assume CNOOCs takeover of Nexens UK/North Sea holdings is done.

I think the asians mostly just want Canadian LNG for export, as the demand for LNG in Japan and China is increasing fast. CNOOC can sell the oil it produces in Canada to US refiners, but more importantly gains Nexen's oil producing/exploration assets in the Gulf of Mexico and North Sea...

lubicon Dec 7, 2012 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by craneSpotter (Post 5929674)
Nexen, Progress foreign takeover deals approved by Canadian government

SHAWN MCCARTHY AND STEVEN CHASE
OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Dec. 07 2012




This is great news for BC! The new Pacific Northwest LNG terminal (which was given the green light to enter the design phase a few days ago) should be larger due to the approval of the Progress takeover.

Interesting that Nexen sold the Japanese nearly half of their NG holdings in northeastern BC in 2011, while forming joint ventures with CNOOC. I believe the US still has to approve CNOOCs takeover of Nexen Gulf of Mexico holdings. I assume CNOOCs takeover of Nexens UK/North Sea holdings is done.

I think the asians mostly just want Canadian LNG for export, as the demand for LNG in Japan and China is increasing fast. CNOOC can sell the oil it produces in Canada to US refiners, but more importantly gains Nexen's oil producing assets in the Gulf of Mexico and North Sea...

Only if there is pipeline capacity. Which there is not at the moment.

Stingray2004 Dec 8, 2012 1:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by craneSpotter (Post 5929674)
Nexen, Progress foreign takeover deals approved by Canadian government

SHAWN MCCARTHY AND STEVEN CHASE
OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Dec. 07 2012


This is great news for BC! The new Pacific Northwest LNG terminal (which was given the green light to enter the design phase a few days ago) should be larger due to the approval of the Progress takeover.

Yeah. I always knew that the Petronas take-over of Progress Energy would be approved. Good news indeed.

Petronas is looking at an 18 million ton/annum facility comprising 3 liquefaction trains with 2 initial liquefaction trains. While the proposed project is estimated at $11 billion, figures compiled by engineering and construction firm Bechtel suggest the numbers could be much higher, ranging as high as $22.5-billion. Makes sense from the current Australian lng perspective.

BTW, here's the location of Petronas proposed Prince Rupert lng facility on Lelu Island, just south of Ridley Island (island in light green):

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IHE3DioaQ2...tronas+LNG.jpg

And here's a schematical of the proposed facility:

http://investnorthwestbc.ca/uploads/...ronas%20SB.jpg

Finally here's a link to the Pacific Northwest LNG website:

http://pacificnorthwestlng.com

Stingray2004 Dec 10, 2012 10:58 PM

Some further corroboration today about Imperial Oil's future intentions with its parent ExxonMobil about westcoast lng plans:

Quote:

Imperial Oil Planning LNG Export Business From West Coast

Claudia Cattaneo
Financial Post
Dec 10, 2012 2:59 PM ET

TORONTO • Imperial Oil Ltd. and its parent, Exxon Mobil Corp., are in the early stages of planning a liquefied natural gas export business from Canada’s West Coast, Imperial president and CEO Bruce March said Monday.

The new business would build on the $3.1-billion acquisition by the two companies of natural gas producer Celtic Exploration Ltd., as well as gas holdings they already own in Western Alberta and in the Horn River shale gas play in British Columbia.

“Celtic has done a wonderful job of acquiring those leases and putting together production. We are anxious to scale up operations … to develop resources faster than Celtic,” Mr. March said at an investment conference here organized by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

“We are in the very early stages of looking at LNG off the B.C. coast and Celtic reserves would be underpinning a potential LNG strategy,” he said.

Mr. March said the two companies are not in a rush and are still “looking at what is available” to put together the strategy as well as how much it would cost.

Still, they are competing with a growing number of global players that have picked the British Columbia coast to build integrated businesses involving producing gas from large gas deposits in Western Canada, piping it to the coast, liquefying it so it can be loaded onto tankers, and exporting it to markets in Asia.

The federal government approved last Friday the $6-billion takeover of Progress Energy Resources Corp. by Malaysia’s Petronas, which is working on a competing plan involving building an $11-billion LNG plant near Prince Rupert.

Exxon was rumored to have bid for Progress, but was outbid by Petronas, Malaysia’s state-owned company.

A consortium led by Royal Dutch Shell PLC, and others are also working on West Coast LNG strategies.

Mr. March said Exxon Mobil is a big player in the global LNG business and knows who the customers are.

But Western Canada presents some “built in challenges” and “at this stage we are working through all these.”
http://business.financialpost.com/20...om-west-coast/

craneSpotter Dec 13, 2012 5:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lubicon (Post 5929711)
Only if there is pipeline capacity. Which there is not at the moment.


What. Is Keystone XL heading into stormy waters??

lubicon Dec 13, 2012 7:26 PM

It hasnt been approved yet to my knowledge. Hopefully will be but at this moment there is not enough pipeline capacity.

Stingray2004 Dec 17, 2012 7:56 PM

The scale of northwest BC coast lng proposals is potentially phenomenal:

Quote:

B.C. poised for global prominence as liquid natural gas exporter

Conference Board sees natural gas pumping $940 billion into Canadian economy

By Scott Simpson,
Vancouver Sun
December 17, 2012


British Columbia could emerge as the world's second largest exporter of liquid natural gas if all its proposed LNG projects are developed, a Conference Board of Canada report suggests.

The report's projections don't encompass all of the possible LNG projects that have been bruited about in B.C., including joint ventures involving Apache Resources, Encana, EOG Resources, Shell Canada, Petronas, and their respective partners, for export production by 2021.

Japan, Korea and Taiwan are the primary markets for LNG, with emerging demand in China and India expected to comprise a third of Asian demand by 2025.

"Although Canada does not currently export LNG, efforts to develop new markets for Canadian natural gas have provided new momentum for projects targeting LNG exports to Asian countries," the report said.

"This report does not assume that all projects will proceed. If that were to happen, Canada would go from no LNG exports to being the second largest LNG supplier in the world over a very short period."

Even if just 60 per cent of B.C.'s potential is realized, the natural gas industry will contribute a cumulative total of $940 billion to Canada's economy by 2035 through gas production and investment in new capacity - including $364 billion in real GDP growth.

The sector will support 130,000 jobs and generate $24.5 billion in economic activity (in 2012 dollars) per year across Canada. B.C. will attract the single largest provincial share of investment in new capacity, according to the report.

Oilsands processing and gas-fired electricity generation will absorb an "increasing" share of the gas Alberta continues to produce.

Meanwhile, "British Columbia is expected to experience the most investment of any province in Canada as shale gas development proceeds and as LNG export projects are realized," the report said.

British Columbia (by 2035) stands to experience $140 billion in investment - more than $5.8 billion per year on average.
http://www.vancouversun.com/business...#ixzz2FLAcDfkk

Quote:

Investment in Canada’s natural gas sector set to rival the oil sands

By Yadullah Hussain,
Financial Post
December 17, 2012

Canada’s natural gas sector could emerge as an investor magnet surpassing interest in the oil sands over the next two decades, The Conference Board of Canada forecasts show.

Natural gas could attract as much as $386-billion in investments by 2035 and create 3.2 million person-years of employment (or an average of 131,460 jobs annually), says the Conference Board of Canada in a new report. This compares to $364-billion investments expected in the oil sands and equal job growth during the period, according to an earlier Board study.

The investment surge in natural gas will generate $940-billion in direct and indirect economic growth, including $364-billion directly to the country’s GDP over the forecast period, the Board said in a report published Monday.

British Columbia will lead the natural gas investment charge, attracting $181-billion, with Alberta garnering $154-billion from 2012-2035, the Board estimates.

While Alberta and B.C. will rake in majority of the natural gas royalties, taxes and revenues, Ontario and Quebec will also see their manufacturing industries benefit from the boom’s trickle-down effect.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/busines...#ixzz2FLBWrHAX

Metro-One Dec 17, 2012 9:22 PM

Dang, talk about exciting times for BC! No more industrial butt of the joke if this goes through.

Stingray2004 Dec 24, 2012 6:21 PM

The first west coast lng project that received approvals was Apache/Encana/EOG Resources proposed 10 million ton/annum facility in Kitimat. The facility has previoulsy received NEB approval as well as BC environmental assessment certificates.

The problem was that these 3 North American natural gas producers only had experience in their upstream assets but had no lng experience, no lng tankers, no marketing arm with relationships to end-users, were cash-strapped, etc.

Speculation was that a global energy giant with lng experience and deep pockets would eventually step in and that's what Chevron did today.

Chevron purchased a 50% interest in the facility buying out Encana's and EOG Resources positions. Apache retains its 50% position.

Chevron has also purchased 110,000 net acres in NE BC's Horn River basin from Encana and 212,000 net acres in NE BC's Liard basin from Apache.

This lng facility is now on solid footing. Other lng energy giants such as Shell, Petronas, ExxonMobil, and British Gas Group also have lng facilities lined up in Kitimat/Prince Rupert.

Quote:

Chevron’s 50% stake in Kitimat LNG boosts Canada’s natural gas prospects

Financial Post
Yadullah Hussain
Dec 24, 2012

Chevron Corp. has acquired a 50% stake in a liquefied natural gas project in Kitimat, B.C. boosting Canada’s prospects of shipping natural gas to Asian markets.

Chevron has a track record of building LNG infrastructure and has a number of projects proposed or under way in Australia, Angola, Nigeria and Asia.

Chevron Canada Ltd. will take on the assets of EOG Resources Canada Inc. and Encana Corp., which were struggling to market the project. Their divestment, valued by the Wall Street Journal at US$1.3-billion, makes Chevron an equal partner with Apache Corp., which led the initial project.

The project which was original valued at US$3-billion and has already secured approval, is set to export 10 million tons per year of LNG.

The deal also includes a 50% interest in approximately 644,000 acres of petroleum and natural gas rights in the Horn River and Liard Basins in B.C.

“This investment grows our global LNG portfolio and builds upon our LNG construction, operations and marketing capabilities,” said George Kirkland, vice chairman, Chevron.”It is ideally situated to meet rapidly growing demand for reliable, secure, and cleaner-burning fuels in Asia, which are projected to approximately double from current levels by 2025.”

Chevron Canada Ltd. also said it will buy around 110,000 net acres in the established Horn River Basin from Encana, EOG and Apache, and 212,000 net acres in the Liard Basin from Apache. Chevron and Apache will each hold a 50% interest and Apache will operate these two natural gas resource developments.
http://business.financialpost.com/20...t-lng-project/

Stingray2004 Jan 10, 2013 3:33 AM

Today Malaysian energy giant Petronas partnered up with TransCanada Pipelines for a $5 billion pipeline from NE BC gas fields to Petronas' proposed Prince Rupert lng terminal.

Previously Shell also partnered with TransCanada Pipelines for a $4 billion pipeline from NE BC to its proposed lng terminal in Kitimat. In addition, British Gas (BG) Group partnered with Spectra Energy for a $6 - $8 billion pipeline from NE BC to its proposed lng facility in Prince Rupert. Chevron/Apache will also be looping an existing pipeline at a capital cost of ~$2 billion to the west coast for its proposed lng facility in Kitimat.

These pipeline projects alone total ~$20 billion in capital investment.

Quote:

Petronas Taps TransCanada for Pipeline

Globe and Mail
Nathan Vanderklippe
Jan. 09 2013

Buttressing Canada’s position in the global race to export liquefied natural gas, TransCanada Corp. announced Wednesday that it plans to build a $5-billion pipeline to transport B.C. shale gas to the West Coast and onward to lucrative Asian markets.

The deal will see TransCanada build and operate a link to deliver natural gas to Lelu Island near Prince Rupert where Progress Energy Canada Ltd. – now a subsidiary of Malaysian state-owned firm Petronas – plans to build the massive Pacific Northwest LNG export facility.

The announcement shores up national efforts to catch up and compete with established LNG export projects in Australia and the Middle East, and will help Canada take advantage of strong natural gas prices in Asian markets versus depressed levels in North America.

“It’s a huge opportunity for Canada. But to capture that opportunity, we need to compete on a global basis,” TransCanada’s president and chief executive officer Russ Girling said in an interview Wednesday.

The proposed 750-kilometre pipeline will bring natural gas primarily from B.C.’s rich North Montney region to Pacific markets by late 2018, subject to regulatory and corporate approvals. Initial pipeline capacity is pegged at 2.0 billion cubic feet a day with the ability to expand to 3.6 billion. TransCanada estimates the pipeline project will create 2,500 construction jobs.

The announcement is the second recent B.C. victory for TransCanada. Last June, the company signed with Royal Dutch Shell PLC to build the $4-billion Coastal GasLink pipeline that would bring B.C. natural gas to the Kitimat area, where Shell and several Asian partners are planning another huge LNG terminal. Mr. Girling said his company’s pipeline building plans in B.C. are now in excess of $10 billion.

“This is in the sweet spot of our backyard in terms of an opportunity to grow earnings beyond the 2015 time frame,” he said.

And the avalanche of spending is unlikely to end at the many billions it will take to build pipelines and LNG facilities. Plans for additional investment are already under way as companies seek to buy reserves of natural gas that can be exported. Not far from the site selected by Petronas for its plant on the B.C. coast, Reading, England-based BG Group PLC has chosen its own plot of waterfront for LNG exports.

BG already has a deal in place with Spectra Energy Corp. to build a $6-billion to $8-billion pipeline to the water.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...rticle7095270/

Stingray2004 Apr 5, 2013 8:25 PM

Pretty big news by the Government of Japan considering that Japanese majors Mitsubishi, Inpex, and others are already heavily involved in Canadian west coast LNG projects.

Quote:

Japan Eyeing Billions In LNG Investments In Western Canada

Financial Post
Claudia Cattaneo | 13/04/04 6:04 PM ET

VANCOUVER • Japan is prepared to invest billions directly in natural gas infrastructure in Western Canada as part of a plan to secure massive supplies of liquefied natural gas to replace nuclear power, a top government advisor said Thursday.

Canada touts ‘energy superpower’ status to secure new customers in Asia

As the United States drags its feet on whether to approve the Keystone XL oil sands pipeline, Canada’s federal government is continuing its push to secure new energy customers in Asia.

The plan, a new model for Japan, could intensify the race by Asian countries to lock down Western Canada’s energy resources and infrastructure, which so far has been led by China.

Tokyo-based Tadashi Maeda, managing executive officer of the Japan Bank for International Cooperation, said Japan is ready to start discussions with private and government entities in Canada to support construction of pipelines and liquefied natural gas terminals to serve the Japanese market exclusively.

“The Japanese government is [prepared to make] a strategic investment for the purpose of developing a commodity market for natural gas, a more transparent and flexible market,” Mr. Maeda said on the sidelines of the Pacific Energy Summit, the platform picked by Japan to announce the plan. “So we are going to make some strategic investments to fill the gap of the infrastructure needs.

“The pipelines and export terminals are imperative. Therefore if it is needed, we are going to bring some capital to cover the cost of the infrastructure.”

While the plan is just now being rolled out, Japan hopes to nail it down “relatively quickly” so it can start importing Canadian LNG by 2020.

Japan found itself short of energy after the earthquake and nuclear disaster two years ago caused the country to back away from nuclear power because of safety concerns.

Mr. Maeda said only two of Japan’s 50 nuclear plants are still in operation. The energy gap has been filled by stringent energy conservation and a large increase in LNG imports.

Mr. Maeda said Japan is also looking at importing gas from the United States, but is keener to forge an energy partnership with Canada.

LNG transportation costs from Canada’s West Coast are lower because of its proximity to Asia and Japan believes LNG exports are more likely to move ahead from Canada than from the West Coast of the United States.

The Japanese government’s planned investment in Canada could take many forms, Mr. Maeda said. It could involve a consortium of Japanese energy companies benefitting from government loan guarantees or it could involve direct government investment. It could also mean financing for standalone pipelines and liquefaction plants that are not backed by supplies of natural gas.

Japanese companies are already participating in the nascent LNG industry in Western Canada. Six LNG export terminals are being planned for the northern British Columbia Coast. Japan’s Mitsubishi is a partner in the LNG Canada project led by Royal Dutch Shell PLC. Japan’s Inpex is a partner in a project planned by China’s CNOOC Ltd., which last year acquired Nexen Inc.

But the Japanese government wants to play a direct role because Japanese companies’ interests are not always aligned with those of the government, he said. For example, companies are free to sell the LNG to many markets, while Japan wants to be able to count on as much Canadian supplies as possible.

Japan is not worried that direct government investment will trigger a backlash in Canada similar to that stirred by the takeover of oil and gas producer Nexen by CNOOC because it doesn’t involve state-owned enterprises, he said.
http://business.financialpost.com/20..._lsa=9f1c-1059

Stingray2004 Apr 11, 2013 1:21 PM

Quote:

International interest remains high in Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)

Wednesday, April 10, 2013

VICTORIA - Four new, major international LNG project proposals have come forward following an Expression of Interest (EOI) by the provincial government on Crown land at Grassy Point near Prince Rupert.

Proponents who submitted an eligible EOI are:

1. Nexen Inc., an international upstream oil and gas company that develops energy resources in the UK North Sea, offshore West Africa, the United States and Western Canada. Joining Nexen in its submission are CNOOC, China's largest producer of oil and gas; INPEX Corporation, a petroleum company based out of Japan; and JGC, a leading global engineering company.

2. Woodside Petroleum Ltd., Australia's largest independent oil and gas company who now operates six of the seven LNG processing trains in Australia.

3. SK E&S, a multi-utility player in Northeast Asia's gas and electricity business, based in Korea.

4. Imperial Oil Resources Limited, one of Canada's largest corporations, and ExxonMobil Canada Ltd., the largest international oil and gas company in the world.

The new proposals join a growing list of major international proponents which have expressed interest in investing in British Columbia including, but not limited to, Shell Canada and partners PetroChina, Korea Gas and Mitsubishi; Chevron Canada with partner Apache Corporation; the BG Group; Progress Energy with partners PETRONAS and JAPEX and the BC LNG export Cooperative with Haisla Nation.

The EOI process was initiated in late February, following conversations with First Nations. The EOI was officially closed on March 18, 2013.
http://www.newsroom.gov.bc.ca/2013/0...l-gas-lng.html

libtard Apr 13, 2013 5:39 AM

I've seen a ton of commercials promoting tankers carrying oil/gas from our coast

With all these proposals in the pipeline there is some serious economic benefits for BC

We need to get the public on board so it can move past the proposal stage

Stingray2004 Oct 6, 2013 6:19 PM

Major international LNG giant Petronas of Malaysia has previously purchased Progress Energy for ~$6 billion, which has major natural gas upstream assets in NE BC's Montney basin. Petronas has also entered into a contractual arrangement with TransCanada Pipelines for a $6 billion natural gas pipeline from NE BC to Prince Rupert, the location of Petronas' proposed LNG facility.

Currently, the LNG facility and pipeline are in the BC Environmental Assessment Office stage with final certification expected by September, 2014. The Front End Engineering and Design has also been previously awarded to Bechtel/Samsung.

Ergo, a Final Investment Decision (FID) was expected in September, 2014 but after today's announcement that seems to be just a future formality. Today, Petronas announced that it will definitely be proceeding with the LNG facility (plus pipeline and upstream natural gas development) with a gargantuan capital cost of $36 billion!

Quote:

Harper Arrives at APEC Summit Greeted by $36-Billion Investment Pledge From Petronas

BRUCE CHEADLE
NUSA DUA, INDONESIA — The Canadian Press
Published Sunday, Oct. 06 2013, 9:32 AM EDT
Last updated Sunday, Oct. 06 2013, 11:12 AM EDT

Prime Minister Stephen Harper arrived in Bali for an Asia-Pacific leaders’ summit Sunday bearing what could be called a $36-billion vote of confidence from Malaysia’s state-owned oil and gas company.

Malaysian Prime Minister Mohd Najib sprung the “gargantuan” investment figure during a joint availability with Harper in Putrajaya, saying Malaysia’s state-owned oil and gas company Petronas has committed to construction of a liquid natural gas plant in British Columbia and the pipeline to feed it.

“I’m told that this is the largest direct foreign investment in Canada by any country,” Najib said, flanked by Harper following a formal welcoming ceremony at a sprawling new government precinct outside the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur.

Najib called it a “significant landmark decision” by Petronas, which last year spent more than $5 billion buying Alberta-based Progress Energy Inc.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...23/?cmpid=rss1

libtard Oct 6, 2013 6:23 PM

First Nations group is appealing to the UN to block the pipeline

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/fir...745/story.html

Stingray2004 Oct 6, 2013 6:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by libtard (Post 6292798)
First Nations group is appealing to the UN to block the pipeline

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/fir...745/story.html

That's in reference to Enbridge's Northern Gateway pipeline to carry bitumen to the west coast. A completely different animal.

OTOH, FN's are not only onside with LNG and accompanying natural gas pipelines but they also either have minor equity stakes or financial agreements with the pipeline operators as well as the LNG facility operators. BTW, at least 4 natural gas pipelines from NE BC are planned to proposed west coast LNG facilities by Chevron, Shell, BG Group, and ExxonMobil.

Canadian Mind Oct 6, 2013 7:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stingray2004 (Post 6292791)
Major international LNG giant Petronas of Malaysia has previously purchased Progress Energy for ~$6 billion, which has major natural gas upstream assets in NE BC's Montney basin. Petronas has also entered into a contractual arrangement with TransCanada Pipelines for a $6 billion natural gas pipeline from NE BC to Prince Rupert, the location of Petronas' proposed LNG facility.

Currently, the LNG facility and pipeline are in the BC Environmental Assessment Office stage with final certification expected by September, 2014. The Front End Engineering and Design has also been previously awarded to Bechtel/Samsung.

Ergo, a Final Investment Decision (FID) was expected in September, 2014 but after today's announcement that seems to be just a future formality. Today, Petronas announced that it will definitely be proceeding with the LNG facility (plus pipeline and upstream natural gas development) with a gargantuan capital cost of $36 billion!



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...23/?cmpid=rss1

Well that's big news. Looks like the 35 billion naval development plan just paid for itself.


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:15 AM.

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