spring fever
Well-Known Member
I'm fishing for the next three days--I will give the points raised some deep contemplative thought and perhaps we might raise them again---after my fishing report!! I give you ---good day gentlemen!! LOL
- Status
ziggy
Well-Known Member
A tad condescending don't you think. But please share your definition of governance to the unwashed masses! Lol
Whole in the Water
Well-Known Member
X2. This is why it is good news. We need to protect our estuaries if we want healthy and abundant salmon populations. Salmon are renewable. Short term profits for mult-national corporations are not!
Earlier in this discussion, a question or two was asked about any scientific studies that showed any possible negative effects of the proposed LNG project, on Skeena salmon. One study that I remember reading about was the scientist who studied the sediments that make up Flora Bank, which is apparently an estuary area that's critical salmon habitat. He concluded that LNG port construction would change the bank, which he estimates has been stable for at least 8,000 years. He also stated that the company ignored some of their own data, in order to show the port construction would have no effect; he labelled this "scientific fraud."
If anyone's interested, here's the newspaper article on this:
http://vancouversun.com/business/en...gist-pans-data-behind-flora-bank-lng-approval
And here's the actual scientific paper: http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-15-00134.1?journalCode=coas
If anyone's interested, here's the newspaper article on this:
http://vancouversun.com/business/en...gist-pans-data-behind-flora-bank-lng-approval
And here's the actual scientific paper: http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-15-00134.1?journalCode=coas
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
We are on fishing forum where people complain on and on we have no fish. Even some of the anglers that commented go on and on about conservation. Now we are on here arguing about who gets a job or not. Come on guys really. Are you really fisherman? This is one of the biggest issues that I have faced with all these industrial projects from other anglers and it blows me away. How people are so passionate and to follow a forum but argue about keeping a project placed where it can harm the same fish they catch.
Even still the LNG project got cancelled because there isn't a demand for it. It has nothing to do about environmentalists etc., and yet that seems hard to understand. The demand isn't there, and we shouldn't have been trying to start this when we are simply too expensive and way too late to bring it to market.
Even still the LNG project got cancelled because there isn't a demand for it. It has nothing to do about environmentalists etc., and yet that seems hard to understand. The demand isn't there, and we shouldn't have been trying to start this when we are simply too expensive and way too late to bring it to market.
SpringVelocity, yes, it's dissapointing that anglers may put jobs ahead of the very fish that they love to catch, but it's understandable that people need income. But you're right about lack of demand for fossil fuels, and that's an irreversible trend. Some of the headlines lately about increased energy from renewables would be unheard of not long ago. Huge changes are happening now:
In 2016, almost 90% of new power in Europe came from renewables:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/09/new-energy-europe-renewable-sources-2016
In the U.S., over half of new electric power in 2016 came from renewables:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/wind-and-solar-growth-outpace-gas/
In the U.K., the sale of new gas and diesel cars will be banned, starting in 2014, leading to none on the road by 2050:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/uk-cars-ban-2040-1.4221944
In May 22nd of this year, 80% of California's energy came from renewables:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-methods-water-hydro-wind-solar-a7748956.html
Those are just four examples. Googling will find many, many more.
So it's a good thing that we don't invest so much in fossil fuels (especially at the expense of our rare and world famous environment). That would be like investing in typewriters a few decades ago, as computers were emerging. (Probably a lot of folks reading this don't know what a typewriter is! But it's the first analogy that popped into my old head.)
In 2016, almost 90% of new power in Europe came from renewables:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/09/new-energy-europe-renewable-sources-2016
In the U.S., over half of new electric power in 2016 came from renewables:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/wind-and-solar-growth-outpace-gas/
In the U.K., the sale of new gas and diesel cars will be banned, starting in 2014, leading to none on the road by 2050:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/uk-cars-ban-2040-1.4221944
In May 22nd of this year, 80% of California's energy came from renewables:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-methods-water-hydro-wind-solar-a7748956.html
Those are just four examples. Googling will find many, many more.
So it's a good thing that we don't invest so much in fossil fuels (especially at the expense of our rare and world famous environment). That would be like investing in typewriters a few decades ago, as computers were emerging. (Probably a lot of folks reading this don't know what a typewriter is! But it's the first analogy that popped into my old head.)
What the Supreme Court rulings mean for pipeline proponents (it could be good news)
Trans Mountain stock price leaps after top court clarifies pipeline regulatory process
By John Paul Tasker, CBC News Posted: Jul 28, 2017 5:00 AM ET
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/supreme-court-pipeline-proponents-good-news-1.4224416
Trans Mountain stock price leaps after top court clarifies pipeline regulatory process
By John Paul Tasker, CBC News Posted: Jul 28, 2017 5:00 AM ET
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/supreme-court-pipeline-proponents-good-news-1.4224416
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
'Dithering' by B.C., Ottawa helped kill Pacific NorthWest LNG, energy CEO says
The 2 remaining planned projects face delays and uncertain futures
Lelu Island, near Prince Rupert, B.C., will no longer be home to the Pacific Northwest LNG project. Malaysia's Petronas backed out this week, to the dismay of the energy sector. (Robin Rowland/Canadian Press)
The CEO of one of Canada's biggest natural gas producers says "government dithering" played a role in the cancellation of a massive liquefied natural gas project in British Columbia.
"They [Petronas] kept getting held up … all levels of government were trying to squeeze more money out of them," said Mike Rose, head of Tourmaline, among the largest gas producers in Western Canada.
Tourmaline was among a slew of shale gas producers in B.C. and Alberta that stood to benefit from gas export through liquefaction. "We're disappointed," Rose said.
Malaysia's Petronas cancelled its $11.4-billion Pacific NorthWest plant on Tuesday, citing lower prices in recent years in export markets in Asia. But Rose said a "more effective, streamlined approval process," would have seen Petronas make a final investment decision on the project three years ago, when prices were much higher.
Other big producers in the region, including Seven Generations, were reluctant to comment on the Petronas decision.
'All levels of government were trying to squeeze more money out of them.' — Mike Rose, chief executive of Tourmaline
Canadian natural gas has traditionally been locked within the continental network of North American pipelines. But liquefaction allows gas to be transported around the world by tanker, and fetch a higher price.
The Petronas project was conceived when gas prices in Asia were significantly higher. They have fallen in recent years.
00:00 08:22
The Big Picture8:22
Only 2 large projects on the books
Five years ago, there were more than a dozen LNG projects proposed for the B.C. coast. Now, only two large plans remain, one spearheaded by Royal Dutch Shell, the other by Chevron. Both have been delayed and their futures remain uncertain.
Pacific NorthWest had been considered the project most likely to proceed. But it suffered federal government delays, including additional time granted to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency to review the project.
As well, the B.C. government announced a special LNG tax at seven per cent of net income in 2014. Later it cut that figure to 3.5 per cent after capital costs were recovered.
Analysts say many Canadian gas producers are now pinning their hopes on LNG development in the U.S., where one export plant is already up and running in Louisiana, and another is slated to begin shipping from Maryland by year-end.
"I think U.S. LNG is an opportunity for Canadian producers," said Martin King, director of institutional research, GMP FirstEnergy. But relative to building plants on the B.C. coast, he described that opportunity as "thin and distant."
The first shipments of U.S. shale gas left the Unites States in 2016 from Sabine Pass LNG terminal in Louisiana (cherniere.com)
Despite that, Canadian producers are looking south. Seven Generations confirmed it is already shipping as much as 100 million cubic feet per day to the U.S. Gulf Coast, where the Sabine Pass project has been in operation for more than a year.
Seven Generations spokesperson Alan Boras said the company has been shipping product into that market since late last year. "Any time there is an increase in sales opportunities, that is a good thing for the North American market."
In the longer run, U.S. plants are expected to help lift continental gas prices broadly.
"Between greater gas exports going to Mexico from the U.S., the greater pull of LNG out of the U.S. and just general improvement of the market next year, I think all these factors come together to improve the overall price of natural gas and that will feed back to a better price of natural gas in Canada," King said.
By the end of the year he expects LNG exports to reach as much a three billion cubic feet, approaching five per cent of total U.S. supply.
King predicts an average 2018 natural gas price, at the benchmark Henry Hub, of $3.75 US per 1,000 cubic feet. That price is currently hovering around $3 US.
The 2 remaining planned projects face delays and uncertain futures
Lelu Island, near Prince Rupert, B.C., will no longer be home to the Pacific Northwest LNG project. Malaysia's Petronas backed out this week, to the dismay of the energy sector. (Robin Rowland/Canadian Press)
The CEO of one of Canada's biggest natural gas producers says "government dithering" played a role in the cancellation of a massive liquefied natural gas project in British Columbia.
"They [Petronas] kept getting held up … all levels of government were trying to squeeze more money out of them," said Mike Rose, head of Tourmaline, among the largest gas producers in Western Canada.
Tourmaline was among a slew of shale gas producers in B.C. and Alberta that stood to benefit from gas export through liquefaction. "We're disappointed," Rose said.
Malaysia's Petronas cancelled its $11.4-billion Pacific NorthWest plant on Tuesday, citing lower prices in recent years in export markets in Asia. But Rose said a "more effective, streamlined approval process," would have seen Petronas make a final investment decision on the project three years ago, when prices were much higher.
Other big producers in the region, including Seven Generations, were reluctant to comment on the Petronas decision.
'All levels of government were trying to squeeze more money out of them.' — Mike Rose, chief executive of Tourmaline
Canadian natural gas has traditionally been locked within the continental network of North American pipelines. But liquefaction allows gas to be transported around the world by tanker, and fetch a higher price.
The Petronas project was conceived when gas prices in Asia were significantly higher. They have fallen in recent years.
00:00 08:22
The Big Picture8:22
Only 2 large projects on the books
Five years ago, there were more than a dozen LNG projects proposed for the B.C. coast. Now, only two large plans remain, one spearheaded by Royal Dutch Shell, the other by Chevron. Both have been delayed and their futures remain uncertain.
Pacific NorthWest had been considered the project most likely to proceed. But it suffered federal government delays, including additional time granted to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency to review the project.
As well, the B.C. government announced a special LNG tax at seven per cent of net income in 2014. Later it cut that figure to 3.5 per cent after capital costs were recovered.
Analysts say many Canadian gas producers are now pinning their hopes on LNG development in the U.S., where one export plant is already up and running in Louisiana, and another is slated to begin shipping from Maryland by year-end.
"I think U.S. LNG is an opportunity for Canadian producers," said Martin King, director of institutional research, GMP FirstEnergy. But relative to building plants on the B.C. coast, he described that opportunity as "thin and distant."
The first shipments of U.S. shale gas left the Unites States in 2016 from Sabine Pass LNG terminal in Louisiana (cherniere.com)
Despite that, Canadian producers are looking south. Seven Generations confirmed it is already shipping as much as 100 million cubic feet per day to the U.S. Gulf Coast, where the Sabine Pass project has been in operation for more than a year.
Seven Generations spokesperson Alan Boras said the company has been shipping product into that market since late last year. "Any time there is an increase in sales opportunities, that is a good thing for the North American market."
In the longer run, U.S. plants are expected to help lift continental gas prices broadly.
"Between greater gas exports going to Mexico from the U.S., the greater pull of LNG out of the U.S. and just general improvement of the market next year, I think all these factors come together to improve the overall price of natural gas and that will feed back to a better price of natural gas in Canada," King said.
By the end of the year he expects LNG exports to reach as much a three billion cubic feet, approaching five per cent of total U.S. supply.
King predicts an average 2018 natural gas price, at the benchmark Henry Hub, of $3.75 US per 1,000 cubic feet. That price is currently hovering around $3 US.
GLG
Well-Known Member
Interesting article on this website. Can you spot the axe grinders?
Supporters, critics sound off on Pacific NorthWest LNG cancellation
ALASKA HIGHWAY NEWS
JULY 25, 2017 04:52 PM
The decision by Petronas to abandon plans for its Pacific NorthWest LNG project has generated discussion across the country.
Anuar Taib, executive vice-president of Petronas, told reporters there was no connection between the company’s decision and the rise to power last week of a NDP government led by Premier John Horgan.
“We don’t take that into consideration,” he said, adding that the company looks forward to working with the NDP as it develops its vast gas assets in B.C.
“I think (for) the review for projects as complex as our Pacific NorthWest LNG project — every factor has to be considered.
“We took time, but at the end of the day, it really boils down to whether or not the project could be competitive in the market conditions of the day. That is how we arrived at the decision we took.”
The federal government approved plans for the $36-billion project in September 2016, attaching 190 conditions as part of the deal. The National Energy Board followed suit a few weeks later by granting PNW LNG 40-year licence to export 34.62 billion cubic metres of natural gas annually.
Still, federal government approval came years after the company filed its project description with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency in February 2013, and its environmental impact statement in February 2014, leading to frustrations over bureaucratic delay.
The company had made a conditional final investment decision to proceed in summer 2015, dependent on federal approval and approval of a project development agreement with the province of B.C. Both of those conditions were met.
Here's a look at what people are saying about the news:
"There's a lot of people in the northeast who have worked extremely hard to advocate for this project to go forward, which I had a part in—the truck rally, the people rally, a lot of people working hard on seeing this project move ahead … They (the NDP) need to be now, more than ever, reaching out these proponents and working to get a deal, period."
— Dan Davies, BC Liberal MLA, Peace River North
"My understanding at this time is that Petronas is committed to developing their natural gas assets in Canada. As well they will continue to explore all options as part of its long-term investment strategy moving forward. That does provide some comfort. What is important to note is the significant length of time that it took for Canada and BC to get these projects approved. If that continues, we will see a lot more investments not moving forward."
—Lori Ackerman, Mayor, Fort St. John
"I am deeply disappointed with the decision by Pacific Northwest, my office worked extremely hard with our former Prime Minister in attempting to make this project a success.
"We streamlined the National Energy Board with our One-Project-One-Review mandate that would allow proponents of these types of projects, as well as communities involved, a manageable timeline to work within. The 24-month period would give adequate time for everyone involved to voice their opinions and at the same time give viable projects a real chance to succeed.
"This, along with the Accelerated Capital Cost Allowance and the extension of export licenses were, unfortunately, not enough to overcome the current market forces and it appears that will not be the only obstacle in front of these types of projects in BC."
—Bob Zimmer, Conservative MP, Prince George-Peace River-Northern Rockies
“After all the hard work that FSJ for LNG has done working towards a federal approval, this happens. The timing of this statement gives us a hint of the reason behind this decision. Coming after an NDP takeover of the province, PNW sees the NDP as not the ideal partners to risk a multi-billion investment in.”
—Alan Yu, Founder, Fort St. John For LNG
“The company was very clear. This was a decision they are making because of the economic challenges in the global energy marketplace. The Pacific NorthWest LNG project, as proposed in its current state, was uneconomical to move forward.
"B.C. remains a player in the LNG sector… I'll be talking to other LNG stakeholders to ensure we are ready to work with them moving forward, that we have a road map to get them to a full realization of their projects."
—Michelle Mungall, B.C. Minister of Energy, Mines & Petroleum Resources
"Since the beginning, it has been clear that the global marketplace does not support the LNG industry that the BC Liberals promised in their 2013 election campaign. Rather than doing the hard work required to strengthen and secure the economic opportunities already available in other sectors, the BC Liberals recklessly went all in on a single industry. They let opportunities for innovation and economic development in clean technology, the resource sector, and other major B.C. industries fall by the wayside."
—Andrew Weaver, Leader, BC Greens
“Petronas and its partners cited shifts in the energy sector as key to their decision. Indeed, LNG demand and prices have fallen as the world transitions to renewable sources of energy. We now have an important opportunity to ensure B.C. is not left behind as the global economy shifts and the costs of a changing climate begin to mount."
—Karen Tam Wu, Acting B.C. Director, Pembina Institute
"Today's decision represents a generational opportunity that's been lost, especially for northern British Columbians. The First Nations who were looking to LNG to support economic growth and a sustainable future in their communities are facing some tough decisions now that resource benefits are being pulled off the table. It's time for John Horgan and the NDP to start paying attention to the rest of the province. Responsible resource development is essential to maintaining B.C.'s thriving economy and support ing families."
—Ellis Ross, BC Liberal MLA, Skeena
"NDP comes to office in B.C., Petronas immediately cancels it's $30B LNG investment, 1 of the largest planned foreign investments in CDN history… NDP politicians want huge, endless increase in government spending, but oppose & drive away the industries that can help pay for it."
—Jason Kenney, United Conservative Party of Alberta via Twitter
“We are deeply disappointed that PNW will not go forward, as it means thousands of construction jobs will not materialize. No jurisdiction does energy extraction in a better, cleaner, more socially responsible way than Canada. This is a significant lost opportunity that would have brought many benefits. Canada has to act faster to seize the opportunities that our responsible resource development industries can deliver.”
—Chris Gardner, President, Independent Contractors and Businesses Association
"We have been very much aware of the low commodity prices over the last number of years and well understand that in the current market many of the projects still face significant challenges. We have worked closely with a number of the development team at PNW LNG and feel badly for them as they will not see the project they worked and supported for many years come to fruition.
"We remain hopeful that BC will develop an LNG industry providing work opportunities for our members and training opportunities for our apprentices. We hope on a go forward basis that the promotion and development of the industry will be more realistic in terms of what British Columbians might actually realize from the establishment of LNG in our province."
—Tom Sigurdson, Executive Director, BC Building Trades
editor@ahnfsj.ca
Supporters, critics sound off on Pacific NorthWest LNG cancellation
ALASKA HIGHWAY NEWS
JULY 25, 2017 04:52 PM
The decision by Petronas to abandon plans for its Pacific NorthWest LNG project has generated discussion across the country.
Anuar Taib, executive vice-president of Petronas, told reporters there was no connection between the company’s decision and the rise to power last week of a NDP government led by Premier John Horgan.
“We don’t take that into consideration,” he said, adding that the company looks forward to working with the NDP as it develops its vast gas assets in B.C.
“I think (for) the review for projects as complex as our Pacific NorthWest LNG project — every factor has to be considered.
“We took time, but at the end of the day, it really boils down to whether or not the project could be competitive in the market conditions of the day. That is how we arrived at the decision we took.”
The federal government approved plans for the $36-billion project in September 2016, attaching 190 conditions as part of the deal. The National Energy Board followed suit a few weeks later by granting PNW LNG 40-year licence to export 34.62 billion cubic metres of natural gas annually.
Still, federal government approval came years after the company filed its project description with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency in February 2013, and its environmental impact statement in February 2014, leading to frustrations over bureaucratic delay.
The company had made a conditional final investment decision to proceed in summer 2015, dependent on federal approval and approval of a project development agreement with the province of B.C. Both of those conditions were met.
Here's a look at what people are saying about the news:
"There's a lot of people in the northeast who have worked extremely hard to advocate for this project to go forward, which I had a part in—the truck rally, the people rally, a lot of people working hard on seeing this project move ahead … They (the NDP) need to be now, more than ever, reaching out these proponents and working to get a deal, period."
— Dan Davies, BC Liberal MLA, Peace River North
"My understanding at this time is that Petronas is committed to developing their natural gas assets in Canada. As well they will continue to explore all options as part of its long-term investment strategy moving forward. That does provide some comfort. What is important to note is the significant length of time that it took for Canada and BC to get these projects approved. If that continues, we will see a lot more investments not moving forward."
—Lori Ackerman, Mayor, Fort St. John
"I am deeply disappointed with the decision by Pacific Northwest, my office worked extremely hard with our former Prime Minister in attempting to make this project a success.
"We streamlined the National Energy Board with our One-Project-One-Review mandate that would allow proponents of these types of projects, as well as communities involved, a manageable timeline to work within. The 24-month period would give adequate time for everyone involved to voice their opinions and at the same time give viable projects a real chance to succeed.
"This, along with the Accelerated Capital Cost Allowance and the extension of export licenses were, unfortunately, not enough to overcome the current market forces and it appears that will not be the only obstacle in front of these types of projects in BC."
—Bob Zimmer, Conservative MP, Prince George-Peace River-Northern Rockies
“After all the hard work that FSJ for LNG has done working towards a federal approval, this happens. The timing of this statement gives us a hint of the reason behind this decision. Coming after an NDP takeover of the province, PNW sees the NDP as not the ideal partners to risk a multi-billion investment in.”
—Alan Yu, Founder, Fort St. John For LNG
“The company was very clear. This was a decision they are making because of the economic challenges in the global energy marketplace. The Pacific NorthWest LNG project, as proposed in its current state, was uneconomical to move forward.
"B.C. remains a player in the LNG sector… I'll be talking to other LNG stakeholders to ensure we are ready to work with them moving forward, that we have a road map to get them to a full realization of their projects."
—Michelle Mungall, B.C. Minister of Energy, Mines & Petroleum Resources
"Since the beginning, it has been clear that the global marketplace does not support the LNG industry that the BC Liberals promised in their 2013 election campaign. Rather than doing the hard work required to strengthen and secure the economic opportunities already available in other sectors, the BC Liberals recklessly went all in on a single industry. They let opportunities for innovation and economic development in clean technology, the resource sector, and other major B.C. industries fall by the wayside."
—Andrew Weaver, Leader, BC Greens
“Petronas and its partners cited shifts in the energy sector as key to their decision. Indeed, LNG demand and prices have fallen as the world transitions to renewable sources of energy. We now have an important opportunity to ensure B.C. is not left behind as the global economy shifts and the costs of a changing climate begin to mount."
—Karen Tam Wu, Acting B.C. Director, Pembina Institute
"Today's decision represents a generational opportunity that's been lost, especially for northern British Columbians. The First Nations who were looking to LNG to support economic growth and a sustainable future in their communities are facing some tough decisions now that resource benefits are being pulled off the table. It's time for John Horgan and the NDP to start paying attention to the rest of the province. Responsible resource development is essential to maintaining B.C.'s thriving economy and support ing families."
—Ellis Ross, BC Liberal MLA, Skeena
"NDP comes to office in B.C., Petronas immediately cancels it's $30B LNG investment, 1 of the largest planned foreign investments in CDN history… NDP politicians want huge, endless increase in government spending, but oppose & drive away the industries that can help pay for it."
—Jason Kenney, United Conservative Party of Alberta via Twitter
“We are deeply disappointed that PNW will not go forward, as it means thousands of construction jobs will not materialize. No jurisdiction does energy extraction in a better, cleaner, more socially responsible way than Canada. This is a significant lost opportunity that would have brought many benefits. Canada has to act faster to seize the opportunities that our responsible resource development industries can deliver.”
—Chris Gardner, President, Independent Contractors and Businesses Association
"We have been very much aware of the low commodity prices over the last number of years and well understand that in the current market many of the projects still face significant challenges. We have worked closely with a number of the development team at PNW LNG and feel badly for them as they will not see the project they worked and supported for many years come to fruition.
"We remain hopeful that BC will develop an LNG industry providing work opportunities for our members and training opportunities for our apprentices. We hope on a go forward basis that the promotion and development of the industry will be more realistic in terms of what British Columbians might actually realize from the establishment of LNG in our province."
—Tom Sigurdson, Executive Director, BC Building Trades
editor@ahnfsj.ca
When people realize, once again, that a good economy running on its own merits provides sanctuary for people, human rights and environment, then when may keep what we have now. To live in a fantasy land that you can pick and choose winners, is to one day wonder where it all went wrong.
What we have now is by no means a given right, it was earned and can be lost.
What we have now is by no means a given right, it was earned and can be lost.
GLG
Well-Known Member
Just incase some missed my post at the beginning of this thread......
Qatar signals LNG price war for market share in Asia
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-qatar-lng-idUSKBN19Q0YX
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Qatar's plan to boost liquefied natural gas (LNG) output by 30 percent is the opening shot in a price war for customers in Asia pitting the Gulf state against competitors from the United States, Russia and Australia.
Qatar is the world's biggest player in lng and personally I think BC's green field projects are a huge risk to these companies when the first shot has been fired. Think of it this way.... would you built a tiny widget factory when the world's biggest widget factory announces that its going to increase production by 30% and the market is only growing by 1% per year?
have a look at this page also....
http://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/rngs/GULF-QATAR/010041SZ3XK/index.html
“We took time, but at the end of the day, it really boils down to whether or not the project could be competitive in the market conditions of the day. That is how we arrived at the decision we took.” Anuar Taib, executive vice-president of Petronas
Qatar signals LNG price war for market share in Asia
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-qatar-lng-idUSKBN19Q0YX
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Qatar's plan to boost liquefied natural gas (LNG) output by 30 percent is the opening shot in a price war for customers in Asia pitting the Gulf state against competitors from the United States, Russia and Australia.
Qatar is the world's biggest player in lng and personally I think BC's green field projects are a huge risk to these companies when the first shot has been fired. Think of it this way.... would you built a tiny widget factory when the world's biggest widget factory announces that its going to increase production by 30% and the market is only growing by 1% per year?
have a look at this page also....
http://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/rngs/GULF-QATAR/010041SZ3XK/index.html
“We took time, but at the end of the day, it really boils down to whether or not the project could be competitive in the market conditions of the day. That is how we arrived at the decision we took.” Anuar Taib, executive vice-president of Petronas
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
TransCanada plans $160M natural gas pipeline expansion to meet rising demand in Ontario
07.28.2017
Russ Girling, President and CEO of TransCanada Corp.
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Mike Ridewood / Financial Post
CALGARY — TransCanada Corp. announced plans to expand its Canadian Mainline pipeline in southern Ontario as it reported an improved second-quarter profit compared with a year ago.
The company says it plans to spend $160 million in increase capacity of the natural gas pipeline. The project will add compression and associated facilities to transport an additional 80 million cubic feet of natural gas per day.
“This expansion will help ensure Ontario customers receive the natural gas they need over the long-term and meet growing market demand in Atlantic Canada,” said Karl Johannson, TransCanada’s executive vice president and president, Canada and Mexico natural gas pipelines and energy.
Meanwhile, TransCanada said it earned $881 million attributable to common shareholders or $1.01 per diluted share for the quarter ended June 30.
That compared with a profit of $365 million or 52 cents per diluted share in the same quarter last year.
Revenue for the quarter totalled nearly $3.22 billion, up from $2.75 billion a year ago.
CEO Russ Girling said the improvement was due to the acquisition of the Columbia Pipeline Group last year, strong performance in its pipelines businesses and higher earnings from Bruce Power.
On Thursday, the company launched an open season for additional commitments for the transportation of crude oil on the Keystone pipeline system, according to a statement. The open season will close on Sept. 28.
The Keystone system, including the Keystone and Keystone XL pipelines, moves oil from Hardisty, Alberta, to markets in Cushing, Oklahoma, then onto the U.S. Gulf Coast.
While the original Keystone is already operating, the controversial Keystone XL was delayed for years before being rejected by the administration of former U.S. President Barack Obama.
In May, TransCanada’s chief executive said lower oil prices and alternative export routes were complicating negotiations for shipper commitments on the XL pipeline project. He said the company did not have a firm deadline for concluding those talks.
In March, President Donald Trump’s administration approved Keystone XL. The expansion increases the capacity of the current Keystone system from Canada’s oil-producing Alberta province to the Gulf of Mexico.
The Canadian Press with files from Thomson Reuters 2017
07.28.2017
Russ Girling, President and CEO of TransCanada Corp.
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Mike Ridewood / Financial Post
CALGARY — TransCanada Corp. announced plans to expand its Canadian Mainline pipeline in southern Ontario as it reported an improved second-quarter profit compared with a year ago.
The company says it plans to spend $160 million in increase capacity of the natural gas pipeline. The project will add compression and associated facilities to transport an additional 80 million cubic feet of natural gas per day.
“This expansion will help ensure Ontario customers receive the natural gas they need over the long-term and meet growing market demand in Atlantic Canada,” said Karl Johannson, TransCanada’s executive vice president and president, Canada and Mexico natural gas pipelines and energy.
Meanwhile, TransCanada said it earned $881 million attributable to common shareholders or $1.01 per diluted share for the quarter ended June 30.
That compared with a profit of $365 million or 52 cents per diluted share in the same quarter last year.
Revenue for the quarter totalled nearly $3.22 billion, up from $2.75 billion a year ago.
CEO Russ Girling said the improvement was due to the acquisition of the Columbia Pipeline Group last year, strong performance in its pipelines businesses and higher earnings from Bruce Power.
On Thursday, the company launched an open season for additional commitments for the transportation of crude oil on the Keystone pipeline system, according to a statement. The open season will close on Sept. 28.
The Keystone system, including the Keystone and Keystone XL pipelines, moves oil from Hardisty, Alberta, to markets in Cushing, Oklahoma, then onto the U.S. Gulf Coast.
While the original Keystone is already operating, the controversial Keystone XL was delayed for years before being rejected by the administration of former U.S. President Barack Obama.
In May, TransCanada’s chief executive said lower oil prices and alternative export routes were complicating negotiations for shipper commitments on the XL pipeline project. He said the company did not have a firm deadline for concluding those talks.
In March, President Donald Trump’s administration approved Keystone XL. The expansion increases the capacity of the current Keystone system from Canada’s oil-producing Alberta province to the Gulf of Mexico.
The Canadian Press with files from Thomson Reuters 2017
Yeah, quite a few. I often wonder how they can turn a profit with the safety/environmental rules in which they must operate. You really have to see it to believe it, no exaggeration. It's good though, because even with these regs the projects are still viable.
Without a doubt in my mind, the stuff that runs into the drains off our streets and the expansion of our cities would do a hell of a lot more damage. Heck, I'd like to see a comparison of the environmental footprint between these industries and say the Hotel/tourism industry.
Without a doubt in my mind, the stuff that runs into the drains off our streets and the expansion of our cities would do a hell of a lot more damage. Heck, I'd like to see a comparison of the environmental footprint between these industries and say the Hotel/tourism industry.
Clint r
Well-Known Member
Petronas says not really viable because worldwide LNG prices are low.
Environmental safeguards are there for a reason. If you can't afford to clean up the mess you make you shouldn't be allowed to build. Simple really.
BC libs lied to you. Can't help it if you fell for it but there you go, it's what happened.
The project being profitable is out of your and my pay grade, so I won't comment.
My point is these companies have environmental rules while operating that make even me, a green guy, wonder how they can be profitable. I don't know if your taking that into consideration. If so, ok. Have a nice day guys.
My point is these companies have environmental rules while operating that make even me, a green guy, wonder how they can be profitable. I don't know if your taking that into consideration. If so, ok. Have a nice day guys.
- Status
Similar threads
