HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted May 19, 2014, 4:07 AM
casper casper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 3,051
We will have to see if there are any major announcements this week.

The big International LNG Conference is being held in Vancouver. This include the senior management from the major projects, and around 200 local BC companies trying to get in on the action.

http://engage.gov.bc.ca/lnginbc/lng-conference/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted May 21, 2014, 2:59 PM
craneSpotter's Avatar
craneSpotter craneSpotter is offline
is watching.
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Santa Cruz de Nuca
Posts: 2,823
A bit of an announcement:

Proponent awards LNG plant-design contract on eve of B.C. industry conference

Decision to build facility ‘still some time away,’ CEO says


Vancouver Sun, May 20, 2014

Quote:
LNG Canada, the Shell-led proposal for a major liquid natural gas plant at Kitimat, has awarded a contract for the design of its $12-billion facility on the eve of the provincial government’s second annual international conference on LNG development.

While LNG Canada wouldn’t reveal the contract’s price tag, which will cover front-end design and “project execution,” the engineering bill for the similarly sized Shell Gorgon LNG project in Australia came in at $75 million when it was awarded in 2005.

The contract is with CFSW LNG Constructors, a partnership between Japanese engineering firm Chiyoda Corp., United Kingdom-based engineers Foster Wheeler AG, Australia’s Worley Parsons and Italian oil-and-gas contractor Saipem.
If the 3-4 BC LNG plants that are expected to, go ahead, it will create a lot of engineering jobs for many years...

Engineering contract work begins June 1, 2014 - link to industry source: http://www.lngindustry.com/news/liqu...x#.U3zARl4V9ZU
__________________
"compound interest is the 8th wonder of the world.."

Last edited by craneSpotter; May 21, 2014 at 3:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted May 22, 2014, 9:38 PM
craneSpotter's Avatar
craneSpotter craneSpotter is offline
is watching.
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Santa Cruz de Nuca
Posts: 2,823
Hmmm....

Petronas CEO warns BC against 'unrealistic expectations' on LNG

BIV May 21, 2014

Quote:
The B.C. government’s annual three-day LNG Conference opened May 21 in the shadow of an announcement that Russia had signed a $400 billion, 30-year deal to supply natural gas to China – one of B.C.’s hoped for long-term liquefied natural gas customers.

While Premier Christy Clark shrugged off the deal, saying there is plenty of opportunities to do business in China, the CEO of Petronas – now considered to be the frontrunner to build a liquefied natural gas plant in B.C. – warned against “unrealistic expectations” that could jeopardize B.C.’s plans to become a major LNG exporting nation.
haha BC plans to be a major LNG exporting nation! We should be r our own nation

China isn't the only planned destination for BC LNG. Regardless their domestic demand for gas is set to increase significantly over the next 20 years anyway!
__________________
"compound interest is the 8th wonder of the world.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2014, 5:50 PM
craneSpotter's Avatar
craneSpotter craneSpotter is offline
is watching.
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Santa Cruz de Nuca
Posts: 2,823
WesPac Midstream files bid to export B.C. LNG

VANCOUVER — The Globe and Mail - Monday, Jun. 23 2014

Quote:
An American energy company is backing a bid to obtain a Canadian licence to export liquefied natural gas from the Tilbury LNG plant in Delta, B.C.

WesPac Midstream LLC filed its application for a 25-year export licence to the National Energy Board, saying it wants to ship as much as 3 million tonnes a year of LNG to foreign customers in markets such as Asia, the United States, Central America and South America....

...Besides WesPac, the only other proposal in the Lower Mainland is targeted for the Squamish area. Woodfibre LNG, privately owned by Singapore-based RGE Pte. Ltd., received NEB approval in December for its 25-year licence to export 2.1 million tonnes annually of LNG from an industrial site near the community of Squamish...

...WesPac believes it will be able to find sufficient natural gas supplies in Western Canada to feed its LNG terminal. “Preliminary discussions indicate that sufficient pipeline capacity is currently available on the Spectra system from northern British Columbia to the Vancouver area,” WesPac said.
__________________
"compound interest is the 8th wonder of the world.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2014, 6:07 PM
craneSpotter's Avatar
craneSpotter craneSpotter is offline
is watching.
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Santa Cruz de Nuca
Posts: 2,823
and yet another LNG plant proposal.. the largest one yet , to be built on Vancouver Island.

Aboriginal group on Vancouver Island signs deal for LNG project

Link to article - http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle19507257/


Quote:
VANCOUVER — The Globe and Mail - Tuesday, Jul. 08 2014

A self-governing aboriginal group on Vancouver Island has signed a deal with a fledgling liquefied natural gas company in hopes of developing a massive project to export LNG to Asia.

Members of the Huu-ay-aht First Nations say they are eager to work with project leader Steelhead LNG Corp. to build an export terminal near Bamfield on the southwest side of Vancouver Island....

...Steelhead LNG is filing its export licence application Tuesday to the National Energy Board. The Vancouver-based firm is applying to export up to 30 million tonnes of LNG annually for 25 years, making it the largest project by capacity proposed so far in British Columbia.
__________________
"compound interest is the 8th wonder of the world.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2014, 7:21 PM
craneSpotter's Avatar
craneSpotter craneSpotter is offline
is watching.
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Santa Cruz de Nuca
Posts: 2,823
Apache Corp., under investor pressure, exiting Kitimat LNG project

Vancouver Sun, July 31, 2014

http://www.vancouversun.com/business...#ixzz394jLJptx

Quote:
Apache Corp. said in its second-quarter news release that it plans to ditch the Kitimat LNG project, which it was developing alongside Chevron Corp., as well as the Wheatstone LNG project in Australia.

The Houston-based company has been under pressure from activist hedge fund Jana Partners LLC to restructure.

"Consistent with the company's ongoing repositioning for profitable and repeatable North American onshore growth, Apache intends to completely exit the Wheatstone and Kitimat LNG projects," Apache said, adding it's also weighing its options when it comes to some of its other international operations.
Hmm, looks like the Asians are also squeezing the Americans out of Canada's LNG.
__________________
"compound interest is the 8th wonder of the world.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2014, 7:58 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by craneSpotter View Post
Apache Corp., under investor pressure, exiting Kitimat LNG project

Vancouver Sun, July 31, 2014

http://www.vancouversun.com/business...#ixzz394jLJptx



Hmm, looks like the Asians are also squeezing the Americans out of Canada's LNG.
Hmm?
Quote:
JANA Partners LLC is a New York based hedge fund managed by Barry Rosenstein. Mr. Rosenstein founded JANA Partners in 2001.
http://www.streetinsider.com/entities/JANA+Partners+LLC

LNG like the oil sands is a patient capital business.

Or do you mean if a project doesn't have integrated customers in the ownership structure they seem to be fading away?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2014, 8:54 PM
craneSpotter's Avatar
craneSpotter craneSpotter is offline
is watching.
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Santa Cruz de Nuca
Posts: 2,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker View Post
Or do you mean if a project doesn't have integrated customers in the ownership structure they seem to be fading away?
That one. Seems like these LNG facilities and purchase of gas reserves form parts of a national energy strategy/policy hedge. Canada is seen as about as safe and stable a region as can be in this world. Why deal with public US firms like Chevron or Apache? May help spread risk, but they will have no interest in your national energy policy. I feel the BC natives would though, so partnerships with BC native bands make sense to me, give them a vested interest and help secure access lands and keep the peace

Take Pacific Northwest LNG - attempting to finance $15 billion, the largest debt-financing deal in Canadian history. Petronas has Sinopec, Japex, Indian Oil Corporation and Petroleum Brunei as investors with long-term sales agreements. This one will be built if they can agree on a tax/royalty scheme. It is a poker game with the government right now, who is bluffing and who has the best hand??
__________________
"compound interest is the 8th wonder of the world.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2014, 9:04 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,730
Petronas could always source its gas from Alberta, and file for all its needed approvals in front of the National Energy Board if BC can't agree on tax terms. I am sure the government of BC knows this and will eventually fold on most additional LNG taxes, in exchange for a reasonable accounting of transfer pricing for income tax and royalty purposes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2014, 5:32 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,730
http://www.lngglobal.com/latest/u-s-...e-nations.html
Quote:
U.S. Energy Department conditionally authorizes Oregon LNG to export to non-free trade nations

Published on Thursday, 31 July 2014 11:22 The U.S. Energy Department announced today that it has conditionally authorized LNG Development Co., LLC (Oregon LNG) to export domestically produced LNG to countries that do not have a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the United States. LNG Development Company, LLC is a subsidiary of Leucadia National Corporation.

....


Oregon LNG anticipates that the gas feedstock for the project will be produced primarily from Canadian resources, with the remainder drawn from domestic resources produced from the U.S. Rocky Mountain supply basin. ...


According to Oregon LNG, the Williams system interconnects with the Spectra BC Pipeline system, and will provide access to both traditional basins and developing shale basins in British Columbia.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2014, 9:57 PM
Doug's Avatar
Doug Doug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 9,505
BC missed the window on LNG. Australia is already exporting and has many more projects in various stages of development.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2014, 10:04 PM
Doug's Avatar
Doug Doug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 9,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by craneSpotter View Post
That one. Seems like these LNG facilities and purchase of gas reserves form parts of a national energy strategy/policy hedge. Canada is seen as about as safe and stable a region as can be in this world. Why deal with public US firms like Chevron or Apache? May help spread risk, but they will have no interest in your national energy policy. I feel the BC natives would though, so partnerships with BC native bands make sense to me, give them a vested interest and help secure access lands and keep the peace
Chevron and Apache are far more known entities than First Nations bands. Next to no resource development will occur until the land claims stalemate resolves itself.

Also, doesn't BC's carbon tax make LNG unattractive? Liquefying natural gas consumes ~20% of the energy in the gas, which is far worse than oil sands production.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Aug 29, 2014, 8:56 PM
craneSpotter's Avatar
craneSpotter craneSpotter is offline
is watching.
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Santa Cruz de Nuca
Posts: 2,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker View Post
Petronas could always source its gas from Alberta, and file for all its needed approvals in front of the National Energy Board if BC can't agree on tax terms. I am sure the government of BC knows this and will eventually fold on most additional LNG taxes, in exchange for a reasonable accounting of transfer pricing for income tax and royalty purposes.
Could and likely will. I think the deal with BC is close.
__________________
"compound interest is the 8th wonder of the world.."

Last edited by craneSpotter; Aug 29, 2014 at 10:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Aug 29, 2014, 11:10 PM
craneSpotter's Avatar
craneSpotter craneSpotter is offline
is watching.
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Santa Cruz de Nuca
Posts: 2,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug View Post
Also, doesn't BC's carbon tax make LNG unattractive? Liquefying natural gas consumes ~20% of the energy in the gas, which is far worse than oil sands production.
I think the BC carbon tax is good and creates an incentive to be more efficient and cut carbon emissions. Currently it sits at $30/t of emissions, which I have read will result in a carbon tax bill of ~$200 million per year for a typical two-train LNG terminal using natural gas-fired compression. It will be less if they are more efficient (or use Hydro).

The carbon tax collected of course results in a corresponding income/corporate tax cut (the BC carbon tax is revenue neutral and cannot be used to fund government programs).

As far as ERoEI for LNG vs Oil Sands - I doubt the oil sands are any better, they certainly consume massive amounts of natural gas (1.4 to 1.6 bcf/day by 2015 and rising), require a large amount of heavy mining and processing equipment and use lots of water. I think in the end, after being mined, extracted and refined to a usable fuel, oil sands are around 3:1 (energy returned on energy invested) on average for all production. No?
__________________
"compound interest is the 8th wonder of the world.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Aug 30, 2014, 6:18 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,730
eroei is interesting, but in isolation I don't think provides useful data. It doesn't really tell you anything as an environmental measure or economic measure. Otherwise environmentalists would be pushing for coal use to fuel electric cars!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2014, 6:49 PM
lubicon's Avatar
lubicon lubicon is offline
Suburban dweller
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Calgary - our road planners are as bad as yours Edmonton
Posts: 4,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by craneSpotter View Post
I think the BC carbon tax is good and creates an incentive to be more efficient and cut carbon emissions. Currently it sits at $30/t of emissions, which I have read will result in a carbon tax bill of ~$200 million per year for a typical two-train LNG terminal using natural gas-fired compression. It will be less if they are more efficient (or use Hydro).

The carbon tax collected of course results in a corresponding income/corporate tax cut (the BC carbon tax is revenue neutral and cannot be used to fund government programs).

As far as ERoEI for LNG vs Oil Sands - I doubt the oil sands are any better, they certainly consume massive amounts of natural gas (1.4 to 1.6 bcf/day by 2015 and rising), require a large amount of heavy mining and processing equipment and use lots of water. I think in the end, after being mined, extracted and refined to a usable fuel, oil sands are around 3:1 (energy returned on energy invested) on average for all production. No?
That is assuming the companies will pay BC tax. If they are HQ'd in Alberta then presumably there would be no BC tax to pay and thus no corresponding adjustment. The carbon tax would be a direct cost on the project.
__________________
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe.

Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2014, 7:14 PM
Denscity Denscity is online now
Suburbs Suck
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Castlegar BC
Posts: 7,136
Interesting that Albertans are starting to post quite a bit in this thread now. I wonder why now.
__________________
Daily 1 hour flights from YCG to YVR & YYC on ACX
British Columbia is named after the Columbia River, a 4 minute walk from my house
Exactly halfway between Vancouver and Calgary
castlegar.ca
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2014, 9:37 PM
lubicon's Avatar
lubicon lubicon is offline
Suburban dweller
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Calgary - our road planners are as bad as yours Edmonton
Posts: 4,821
Speaking personally it is because some of these projects appear to actually be moving ahead. For me there wasn't much point in posting on speculation or what if's.
__________________
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe.

Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2014, 2:49 AM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by lubicon View Post
That is assuming the companies will pay BC tax. If they are HQ'd in Alberta then presumably there would be no BC tax to pay and thus no corresponding adjustment. The carbon tax would be a direct cost on the project.
Accountants might tell you something different. Canada Revenue agency would have a bulletin on how to account for compliance costs like carbon taxes, fees, or cap and trade.

I believe the tax goes to the jurisdiction the profit is earned in, but that can be impacted with franchise fees and transfer pricing. BC LNG corp could be paying a lot to head office corp in another province or country as management fees, financing, etc.

Transfer pricing is what matters most for the tax take on LNG in Canada. How do you count profit if someone owns the gas through the entire process within Canada? Royalties and taxes based on well head prices or on LNG minus processing and transport prices?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2014, 3:24 AM
Xelebes's Avatar
Xelebes Xelebes is online now
Sawmill Billowtoker
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Rockin' in Edmonton
Posts: 13,128
I would most certainly assume that the carbon tax operates like the sales tax and not the income tax. It is most certainly based on the location of emission, not where the mind and management is located. Phew! Those four tax courses were fun.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:03 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.