The stampede of would-be energy exporters to Canada’s west coast is potentially a headlong rush into folly, if the economics are considered. Never mind the ecological risks, there is an as-yet unmeasured cost to the robust eco-tourism, sport fisheries, and recreational travel industries that has not been adequately addressed in media or by the government of British Columbia.
But Canada’s eagerness to build using other people’s money might seem like a good idea, but what are the risks to Canada and British Columbia if the financial ability of the foreign National Oil Companies and Supermajors who are the driving forces behind these projects should run into difficulty?
The Globe and Mail reported in February this year that Apache Corp was already ‘sweating’ trying to find partners after Rich Coleman, Natural Gas Development minister for British Columbia stated that they should be prepared to spend “at least $1 billion just to get to a final investment decision”.
Sign the petition calling for a moratorium on LNG Infrastructure Development in BC
And there are indications from LNG projects around the world that the costs are routinely underestimated by a large degree, which has resulted in many project cancellations in Australia and the Middle East. Add to that mix the fact that future supply is already set to exceed future demand, and you have a recipe for financial disaster.
This table shows a potential total of 8 proposed LNG plants for western Canada. Each could mean up to 200 shipments per year, which would mean 1,600 ships laden with Liquid Natural gas navigating the treacherous waters of British Columbia’s storm-prone coast.
Rising Costs are Forcing Projects to Be Cancelled Around the World
Woodside Petroleum Ltd. (ASX:WPL), according to a story in the Wall Street Journal on April 14, 2014, “it has shelved an onshore gas-export project in Australia estimated to cost over US$40 billion to build, the strongest sign yet that the country’s energy construction boom may be peaking.”
So after spending $2 billion investigating the plant site, it has elected not to proceed. The company said “it “doesn’t meet the company’s commercial requirements for a positive final investment decision.”
According to the same article, that’s not the only LNG plant being rethought. Royal Dutch Shell (NYSE:RDS.A) has also raised doubts about the viability of its Arrow LNG joint venture with PetroChina Co. 601857.SH -0.80% in Queensland state, citing cost pressures.
But is that factoring into the public discourse in British Columbia?
On the contrary, BC Premier Chirsty Clark, having reversed her electoral platform opposing the Northern Gateway pipeline, is now the head cheerleader for the energy sector, and is wearing blinders when it comes to negative economic logic. In this Globe and Mail video, she makes sweeping and unsubstantiated grandiose claims such as “the LNG industry in BC will create 100,000 jobs” and be worth “$1 trillion in economic activity”, Ms. Clark’s promotional hubris would embarrass the most aggressive Howe Street shill.
And this is emblematic of the whole rush to build the LNG machine.
Sign the petition calling for a moratorium on LNG Infrastructure Development in BC
A thorough analysis of the economics of the various LNG export infrastructure plans, in fact, suggest that the whole complex is economically very risky on many fronts.
World NatGas Demand is Rising, but Supply is Rising Faster
According to the Energy Information Association’s International Energy Outlook 2013, world natural gas consumption is poised to increase from 113.0 trillion cubic feet in 2010 to 185.0 trillion cubic feet in 2040. Production of natural gas globally is expected to reach 187 trillion cubic feet by 2014, indicating a more or less match between supply and demand.
Global natural gas consumption is expected to rise to 183 trillion cubic feet by 2014.
That suggests, in pure supply and demand terms, a flatline price in that timeframe, even though the EIA predicts a rise in price to almost $8 be mbtu in that time frame. Historically, the EIA’s price forecasts, however, err toward the excessively bullish.
China’s Potential Shale Gas, and Japan’s Imminent Methane Hydrates Not Considered
Japan, China, and South Korea are the world’s largest importers of LNG. In fact, if you look at the projected sales channels in almost every economic assessment of proposed LNG plants, they uniformly anticipate the bulk if not all of their sales going to these regions.
However, in the case of China and Japan, there is much that is not being factored into the EIA’s projections, nor into the argument for building LNG export infrastructure in Canada.
Japan’s first purpose built methane hydrate production vessel successfully produced commercial quantities of methane from hydrates in 2013. Mitsui expects commercial production by 2018.
For example, Japan announced last year that it had successfully produced commercial quantities of methane – the principal component of NatGas – for the first time in its territorial waters. That event’s significance has been uniformly discounted by the EIA and the hydrocarbon media.
Mitsui Engineering and Shipbuilding Co. (MES), who is driving the charge to identify offshore methane hydrate deposits, says that it could begin commercial production of natural gas from methane hydrates as early as 2018, according to a story in the Daily Telegraph.
“With studies estimating that as much as 39 trillion cubic ft of methane hydrate may exist in Japan’s offshore deposits, the government hopes to tap into such resources with production technologies in place by 2018.”
China’s Shale Gas Revolution
The EIA’s forecast states that “China held its first auction for shale gas exploration blocks in June 2011, awarding contracts for four blocks, and in December 2012 it awarded another 19 shale gas blocks in a second auction In addition, China is considering offering a subsidy of around $2 per million Btu for shale gas produced before 2015.”
China has more recoverable shale gas than the entire U.S.
China has more recoverable shale gas than the United States, but it is deeper and in far more challenging geology than the U.S. However, the EIA forecast discounts China’s ability to ramp up shale gas production, in view of the subsidies. There are technologies in development, such as by Cold Bore Technologies, for example, who is “designing communications & telemetry solutions to revolutionize drilling accuracy and speed in the oil and gas industry”.
Translation: Deeper and problematic geologies are being addressed by technologies.
Sign the petition calling for a moratorium on LNG Infrastructure Development in BC
What is important to note, that with every trillion cubic feet produced by Japan or China, that amount will not be sold in Japan or China, and both those nations will ultimately seek to add to the global export supply, should development of their resources succeed sufficiently.
New Supplies from Australia and East Africa Will Keep NatGas Prices Low
In Australia, nearly $200 billion worth of gas projects are nearing completion with seven LNG projects due to start exporting gas between late 2014 and 2017, set to push Australia ahead of Qatar as the world’s largest LNG producer.
The Middle East is ramping up and expanding new and existing LNG export capacity, and Russia, is adding to it’s inventory through exploitation of its vast Arctic resources.
And the recent discovery of the massive Rovuma Basin offshore Mozambique could make that country a new entrant into the LNG export game, with better proximity to China. According to Rigzone, “Mozambique could become the world’s third largest exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG), an Anadarko Petroleum Corp. executive told attendees at the Mayer Brown Seventh Annual Global Energy Conference in Houston”. The field is suspected to contain over 100 trillion cubic feet.
Industrializing the Northern Coast of B.C. is Inconsistent with BC Residents’ Values
The people making the decisions for British Columbia’s future, for the most part, do not live in B.C. British Columbia’s coastline, in particular is arguably the world’s most wild and rich in wildlife stretches of coastline anywhere in the world.
The Harper and Clarke governments’ permission of pre-construction activities in BC’s northern coastal communities is a transgression against the citizens of northern BC, and all British Columbians.
If the clumsy lunge toward LNG exports turns into an economic disaster, what will the northern BC Coastline look like, after all of the roads, towns, camps and infrastructure pre-development is abandoned? Who will be on the hook to clean it all up? What will the fisheries and tourism industries look like, with a coastline dotted with rusting hulks of failed LNG plants sloughing off contaminants into the Pacific Ocean year after year?
These are questions, that, in my opinion, need to be answered before the industrial development rush now underway moves another step forward. Future generations will be unlikely to forgive the current one if we destroy the natural and pristine coastline that is arguably every British Columbian’s birthright, and why those of us who emigrated here, stay.
At the very least, this LNG infrastructure build out will forever change the character of British Columbia’s north coast. And at the very least, Premier Christy Clark should be submitting the question of such a change to a referendum by the citizens of British Columbia.
Sign the petition calling for a moratorium on LNG Infrastructure Development in BC
List BC’s 15 LNG Projects and Status
Pacific NorthWest LNG
Final investment decision: 2014
Partners: Petronas, Japex, Petroleum Brunei, Indian Oil Corp
Price tag: $11 billion
Location: Land-based facility, Lelu Island, Prince Rupert
Capacity: 19.68 million tonnes per year of LNG
EA: Application submitted to EAO
In-service date: 2018
Export license: Approved by NEB
Pipeline: TransCanada’s Prince Rupert Gas Transmission Project
Pipeline details and status: 48″ diameter, 900 km, near Hudson’s Hope to Lelu Island. EA application submitted under BC EA.
Source of natural gas: Progress’ holdings in North Montney
The proposed Pacific NorthWest LNG project would liquefy and export natural gas produced by Progress Energy Canada Ltd. in Northeast B.C. The $11 billion facility would be fed by TransCanada’s Prince Rupert Gas Transmission Project pipeline.
Pacific NorthWest LNG has already arranged off-take agreements, making the project more economically feasible.
Petronas is still seeking off-take partners.
Latest On Feb. 28, 2014, Pacific NorthWest LNG filed its environmental impact statement with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and B.C. Assessment Office.
In March 2014, India’s state-run Indian Oil Corp. agreed to buy 1.2 million tonnes a year of LNG for at least 20 years, for a 10 per cent stake.
Sinopec, China’s state-owned energy company, is reportedly interested in joining the project in an off-take arrangement.
TransCanada is expected to file its Environmental Assessment application for the Prince Rupert Gas Transmission Project pipeline this month.
Final Investment Decision A final investment decision is on track to be made in 2014, provided Petronas has the partners in place.
Woodfibre LNG Export Pte. Ltd.
Final investment decision: Autumn 2014
Partners: Pacific Oil & Gas
Price tag: $1.7 billion
Location: Squamish, B.C.
Capacity: Export 2.1 million tonnes of LNG per year
EA: Woodfibre LNG filed a Project Description with the CEAA and BCEAO
In-service date: 2017
Export license: Received license last December
Pipeline: Existing FortisBC gas pipeline will be expanded
The Woodfibre LNG Project is a proposed small-scale LNG processing and export facility located near Squamish, B.C. The facility would be built at an existing industrial site, the former Woodfibre pulp mill, which the proponent says is suited for conversion into an LNG facility.
The site has access to power and an existing natural gas pipeline.
Woodfibre LNG is the Canadian subsidiary of Pacific Oil & Gas, an 11-year-old energy company based in Singapore and Jakarta that has the backing of Indonesian billionaire Sukanto Tanoto.
Latest On Dec. 16, 2013, Woodfibre LNG Export Pte. Ltd. earned a license to export 2.1 million tonnes of LNG per year for 25 years.
Currently Woodfibre LNG is acquiring a site from Western Forest Products that is subject to the completion of remediation of the site (e.g. dredging, removal of asbestos) and the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance from the Ministry of Environment.
In November 2013, Woodfibre LNG filed a Project Description with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and the B.C. Environmental Assessment Office to initiate the environmental assessment process. On Feb. 19, the BCEAO request for substitution of the environmental assessment process was accepted by the minister of the environment.
Final Investment Decision In March 2014, Pacific Oil & Gas president Ratnesh Bedi said a “soft” FID is coming in the fall of 2014.
Stewart Energy LNG
Final investment decision: 2014
Partners: Canada Stewart Energy Group Ltd.
Location: Floating and land-based facilities, Stewart
Capacity: Targeting annual capacity of five million tonnes
EA: N/A
In-service date: 2017
Export license: application submitted March
Pipeline: N/A
Stewart is a small community about 300 km north of Prince Rupert that was put on the LNG map when Canada Stewart Energy Group Ltd. proposed establishing an LNG liquefaction and export facility there in March 2014.
Without providing details, Stewart Energy said in a regulatory filing that it has signed off-take agreements with energy groups in two major Chinese cities. It also said there are plans for an 800-kilometre pipeline to transport natural gas to Stewart, although no details have been announced.
Latest On March 5, 2014, Canada Stewart Energy Group Ltd. applied for a permit to export 30 MMt of natural gas per month for a period of 25 years from a liquefaction terminal.
Final Investment Decision Stewart Energy LNG says it hopes to be in service in 2017, and will make a Final Investment Decision in 2014.
Oregon LNG
Final investment decision: Q1 2015
Partners: Backed 80% by Leucadia National Corp.
Location: Warrenton, Oregon
Price tag: $6 billion
Capacity: Up to 9 million metric tons of LNG per year
EA: Draft Environmental Impact Statement to be issued in 2014
In-service date: Early 2019
Export license: Applied to Canada’s NEB, seeks approval from DOE in U.S.
This project began in 2004 as an LNG import facility. Changing economics has allowed it to change gears to become an export and liquefaction facility. Most of the gas would be produced in Canada.
Latest On Jan. 13, 2014, Oregon LNG Marketing Company applied for a 25-year license to export 473 Bcf of natural gas to the U.S. per year, where it will be liquefied and shipped to Asia.
The two proposed LNG terminals in Oregon are next in line to be vetted by federal regulators.
Oregon LNG is on schedule to export Canadian supplies through its terminal by 2019, said its CEO.
Final Investment Decision With construction slated to begin in 2015, a Final Investment Decision is due by the end of 2014 or early 2015.
Jordan Cove Energy Project
Final investment decision: Q1 2015
Partners: Jordan Cove Energy Project L.P., Veresen Inc.
Price tag: $6.8 billion
Location: Coose Bay, Oregon
Capacity: Liquefaction capacity of 6 million metric tons per year
EA: FERC permit expected in Q3 2014
Export license: Has permits from Canada’s NEB, DOE in U.S.
Pipeline: Alberta Ethane Gathering System, Alliance Pipeline, Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline (450 km, proposed)
Source of natural gas: Aux Sable Canada (owned by Enbridge and Veresen), via Encana and Phoenix Duvernay Gas (JV participant of Encana)
Located in Coos Bay, Oregon, the facility will produce up to six million tons of LNG per year for export. The facility is owned and will be operated by Veresen Inc.
Jordan Cove has proposed building a 400 km Pacific Connector pipeline through southern Oregon.
Latest On Feb. 20, 2014 Jordan Cove LNG L.P. was granted approval by the NEB to export 9 million tonnes of gas per year from Western Canada to the United States for a term of 25 years.
In August 2013, Black & Veatch and Kiewit completed the front-end engineering and design (FEED) work and pre-construction planning activities for the Jordan Cove Liquefaction Project.
The U.S. Department of Energy gave export approval in March 2014.
In June 2013, the Oregon International Port of Coose Bay and Jordan Cove Energy Project L.P. (JCEP) submitted applications for permits required to construct the marine facilities and LNG liquefaction facilities. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) application was submitted by JCEP earlier. FERC permit approval is expected in the 3rd quarter of 2014.
The Financial Post reported it has secured heads of agreements with three unnamed Asian buyers.
Final Investment Decision
Veresen is expected to make a Final Investment Decision by the first quarter of 2015, a vice president told PNN.
LNG Canada Gas
Final investment decision: 2015
Partners: Joint venture Shell Canada Ltd., Korea Gas Corporation
(KOGAS), Mitsubishi Corporation and PetroChina Company Limited
Location: Land-based facility, Kitimat
EA: Application Information Requirements approved by BCEAO
In-service date: 2018
Export license: Approved by NEB for 24 million tonnes of LNG per year
Pipeline: TransCanada’s Coastal GasLink Pipeline Ltd.
Pipeline details and status: 48″ diameter, 650 km, near Dawson Creek to Kitimat. EA application submitted
Announced in 2012, LNG Canada proposes building an LNG export terminal, including marine facilities, facilities for storage and a gas liquefaction plant. This project is has the support of backers with deep pockets.
Latest On Feb. 24, 2014, the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office approved LNG Canada’s Application Information Requirements. The document identifies the information required in its application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate under the BC Environmental Assessment Act.
By the end of 2014, LNG Canada is scheduled to submit its application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate. It will also select the Engineering Procurement Construction Management
contractor.
Final Investment Decision Shell has expressed concern over B.C.’s LNG Income Tax rate of 7 per cent, while Japan has also expressed disproval. Officially the target is still 2015 for an FID.
Sign the petition calling for a moratorium on LNG Infrastructure Development in BC
Triton LNG
Final investment decision: 2015
Partners: AltaGas Ltd, Idemitsu Kosan
Location: Floating facility, Kitimat or Prince Rupert
Capacity: 2.3 million tonnes of LNG per year
In-service date: 2017
Export license: Approved in April 2014
for 2.3 million tons of LNG per year
Pipeline: PNG’s Looping Project
Pipeline details and status: 24″ diameter, 525 km, Summit Lake to Kitimat. Pre-application under BC EA.
AltaGas Ltd. and Idemitsu Kosan are doing preliminary work for the design and construction of a floating LNG facility that would either be placed in the vicinity of Kitimat or Prince Rupert. “The LNG production will be offloaded from the FLSO vessel through a loading arm to LNG carriers for transport to export markets,” according to the application to the NEB.
Latest On April 17, 2014 Triton LNG Limited Partnership (Triton LNG), a subsidiary of AIJVLP, received permission from the National Energy Board to export up to 2.3 million tonnes of LNG per year.
Triton LNG has also said that it is preparing preliminary engineering designs for the construction of the liquefaction facilities and is considering potential locations.
Final Investment Decision To meet the target in-service date of 2017, a final investment decision would have to be made sometime in 2015.
Kitsault Energy
Final investment decision: 2015
Partners: N/A
Location: Floating and possibly
land-based facilities, Kitsault
EA: N/A
In-service date: 2018
Export license: Applied December 2013 for 20 MTA
Pipeline: N/A
The Kitsault Energy project is unique in that it proposes turning an abandoned village near British Columbia’s border with Alaska into a massive LNG export hub. The company says an export terminal at Kitsault will require the shortest natural gas pipeline for the projects currently proposed in the region, saving 100 to 300 kilometers for a cost savings of up to $3 billion.
Kitsault also has infrastructure ready: About 90 empty houses, 150 condos for some 1,000 residents, along with a recreation center, medical clinic, shopping center, post office, bank, restaurants and a supermarket.
Latest On Dec. 18, 2013 Kitsault Energy Ltd. applied for a permit to export up to 20 million tons of liquefied natural gas per year for a term of 25 years.
Kitsault Energy has begun contacting engineering firms, energy producers, First Nations communities as well as local, regional, provincial and federal government officials.
Final Investment Decision Sales contracts and regulatory work has to be completed. No environmental assessments have been conducted, although the site was once home to a major mining operation, meaning an EA process might not take as long.
It’s too early to put a timeline on a Final Investment Decision, although company officials have said they want an in-service date of 2018. An FID would have to be made in 2015.
Sign the petition calling for a moratorium on LNG Infrastructure Development in BC
Aurora LNG
Final investment decision: About 2016
Partners: Nexen (CNOOC), INPEX, JGC Corporation
Location: Land-based facility, Grassy Point, near Kitimat
Capacity: Applied to ship 24 million tonnes of LNG per year
EA: Responded to Request for Expression of Interest from province in 2013
In-service date: 2021, according to Chinese newspaper Caixin
Export license: Applied to ship 24 million tonnes of LNG per year
Pipeline: N/A
Source of natural gas: Nexen assets in Horn River and Cordova basins
Nexen (CNOOC) controls 60 percent of a venture, while its Japanese partners, Inpex Corp and JGC Corp., control the rest.
Having a major international investor like CNOOC is seen as a major advantage for Aurora LNG.
CNOOC controls most of China’s LNG imports — 70 percent in 2012.
Nexen says that third-party evaluators estimated its joint venture lands in Horn River and Cordova basins near Fort Nelson hold between four trillion and 15 trillion cubic feet of recoverable contingent resources, and that the Liard joint venture lands contain an estimated five to 23 trillion cubic feet of prospective resources.
CNOOC has set a production goal of 40 million tonnes annually by 2020, meaning Nexen’s resources in Northeast B.C. could play a key role in meeting its targets.
So far nine coastal LNG receiving stations have been built in China and another 11, including six controlled by CNOOC, are either planned or are under construction.
CNOOC bought Nexen in 2013 for $15.1 billion.
Latest In November 2013, Aurora LNG agreed to pay $12 million to the province and another $12 million one year later for the exclusive right to develop 614.9 hectares of land on the northern part of Grassy Point, near Kitimat.
On Nov. 29, 2013 Aurora Liquefied Natural Gas Ltd. applied to the National Energy Board to ship 24 million tonnes of LNG per year from the coast of British Columbia for a term of 25 years.
The project is undergoing an environmental impact assessment.
Nexen says it expects to engage in “comprehensive consultation” with First Nations and stakeholders in the next few years.
Final Investment Decision A Final Investment Decision can’t be made until the proponent secures more off-take agreements and acquires the requisite environmental permits. Post-2015 is a reasonable timeframe for an FID.
Kitimat LNG (KM LNG)
Final investment decision: Later this decade
Partners: Chevron/Apache 50/50 equity
Location: Land-based facility, Bish Cove, Kitimat
EA: Complete under BC EA (2008)
Export license: Approved by NEB for 10 MTA
Pipeline: Pacific Trails Pipeline
Pipeline details and status: 42″ diameter, 462 km, Summit Lake to Kitimat, public comment period held on EA certificate amendment: Feb 21-Mar 22, 2014
Source of natural gas: Chevron/Apache holdings in Horn River, Liard gas basins
Latest Kitimat LNG is currently in the Front End Engineering and Design (FEED) phase. In January 2014, JGC/ Fluor was awarded the engineering, procurement and construction contract.
Apache is looking to sell a stake in the project because it doesn’t want to spend up to $1 billion in 2014 related to front-end engineering and design for the LNG export terminal.
The project has all major provincial and federal environmental approvals in place.
Fifteen First Nations have signed on to the project.
The proposed facility would be built on land leased from the Haisla Nation. The facility will include two liquefaction trains to cool gas to a liquid state.
Final Investment Decision The companies say an FID will require firm LNG sales contracts and more agreements with First Nations.
Prince Rupert LNG
Final investment decision: About 2017
Price tag: $16 billion
Partners: BG Group
Location: Land-based facility, Ridley Island, Prince Rupert
Capacity: 21.6 million tones per year of LNG
EA: Comments collected on Draft Application Information Requirements
In-service date: Had planned 2020, but moved to “about 2022″
Export license: Approved by NEB for 21.6 MTA
Pipeline: Spectra/BG Group’s Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission Project
Pipeline details and status: 36″- 48″ diameter, 870 km, up to 2 pipelines.Cypress to Ridley Island. Application Information Requirements approved by BCEAO in Sept. 2013. Proponent must provide info by Sept/2016.
BG Group’s LNG facility on Ridley Island will be one of the biggest on the West Coast if it is built. The plan so far is to construct the facility overseas in modules and ship it to Prince Rupert for assembly.
The facility will be supplied by gas produced in Northeast B.C., and piped to the facility via Spectra’s Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission Project.
Latest On March 7, 2014 the draft Application Information Requirements (AIR) was submitted to the BCEAO. It will identify the information that is required in its application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate. Public comments were collected March 24 to April 22.
On March 21, 2014 Spectra filed for its environmental assessment certificate for the 850km pipeline.
Final investment decision Roger Ayton, director of investment appraisals at BG’s North American unit, told Financial Post in February that FID “may be slipping a bit. Realistically we’re looking at about 2017.”
Sign the petition calling for a moratorium on LNG Infrastructure Development in BC
WCC LNG
Final investment decision: N/A
Partners: Imperial Oil/Exxon Mobil
Location: N/A
EA: N/A
Export license: Approved by NEB for 30 MTA
Pipeline: N/A
Exxon, the world’s largest energy company, and its Canadian subsidiary, Imperial Oil, have proposed to develop an LNG project under a venture known as WCC LNG Ltd.
Judging by the export permit regulatory filings, this is a massive project. However, very little has been made public by the proponents.
Latest On Dec. 16, 2013, WCC LNG was granted a license to export 30 million tonnes of LNG per year for a term of 25 years. The permit was approved by the federal government in March 2014.
No environmental permits have been applied for as of March 2014 and no location has been secured.
Final Investment Decision There is no definitive timeline. An Imperial Oil spokesperson said: “We’re a fair ways away from an investment decision. We’ll make that decision after we get government regulatory approvals and determine contracts and relationships with customers and suppliers and a variety of other factors.”
Woodside Petroleum Project
Final investment decision: N/A
Partners: Woodside Petroleum Ltd.
Location: South site of Grassy Point, Kitimat
EA: N/A
In-service date: N/A
Export license: Has 1 year to obtain license
Pipeline: N/A
Not much is know about this project, its partners, the pipeline or where exactly the natural gas will be produced, although clearly it will come from Northeast B.C.
Woodside has until January 2015 to obtain an export license.
Latest On Jan. 16, 2014, Woodside Petroleum Ltd. of Australia won the right to acquire 693 hectares of land at the south site of Grassy Point, near Kitimat. Woodside agreed to pay the province $17 million as a potential down payment,
Final Investment Decision This project is barely off the ground and a Final Investment Decision won’t come until later this decade.
Steelhead LNG
Final investment decision: N/A
Partners: N/A
Location: N/A
Capacity: N/A
EA: N/A
In-service date: N/A
Export license: N/A
Pipeline: N/A
This Vancouver-headquartered LNG project was announced in March 2014, but not much else has been unveiled. They do not have a site and no official partners in Asia have been announced. The export license will be applied for “soon.”
Latest On March 18, Steelhead LNG appointed former B.C. Attorney General Geoff Plant as a member of its board of directors.
Also in March, the company’s executive went to Korea to participate in Gastech 2014, a natural gas conference and exhibition that is held every 18 months.
Final Investment Decision Steelhead LNG has no timeline when it will make public its Final Investment Decision. It will probably happen later this decade.
Douglas Channel LNG
Final investment decision: Was expected in 2014. Delayed.
Partners: BC LNG Export Cooperative, Haisla Nation, LNG Partners
Price tag: $500 million
Location: Floating facility, Kitimat
EA: Not required
In-service date: Was expected in 2015. Delayed.
Export license: approved by NEB for 1.8 MTA
Pipeline: PNG’s existing pipeline and proposed PNG Looping Project
Pipeline details: 10″ diameter, Summit Lake to Kitimat.
This small-scale, $500 million project was once thought to be the front-runner to make a Final Investment Decision and begin exporting LNG. However, insolvency filings in British Columbia by LNG Partners LLC last October put the project in limbo.
Original plans had construction beginning this year.
Latest In March, the Financial Post reported that the project could be split into two. A deal was in the works whereby Calgary-based AltaGas would partner with Antwerp, Belgium-based Exmar NV and EDF Trading Ltd., a gas marketer. The other project would be led by the Haisla First Nation and Golar LNG Ltd., a Bermuda-based LNG shipper. No further details have been publicly released.
Final Investment Decision Was expected in 2014. Delayed.
Sign the petition calling for a moratorium on LNG Infrastructure Development in BC
