 |
LNG Digest: Sample
Articles
(Appeared
August, 2008)
On
Careful Scrutiny...
GAZPROM
BEING COURTED BY VENEZUELA
Venezuela would like to have Gazprom join in the Delta Caribe
Oriental
LNG project, which involves development of the Mariscal Sucre
and Deltana Platform blocks and construction of an LNG plant
in Venezuela. Venezuelan officials expressed their interest
in such a plan at a meeting with Gazprom representatives in
Moscow, the Russian gas firm said.
Gazprom and Venezuelan state oil and gas company Petroleos
de Venezuela
S.A. (PdVSA) signed an agreement in July on joint exploration
of the Ayacucho 3 block in the Orinoco oil belt. Under the
agreement, which Gazprom Latin America B.V. and PdVSA will
complete the geological modeling, evaluation and calculation
of reserves at the block, after which the findings will be
certified by an international auditor.
They also discussed progress on the Rafael Urdaneta project
and opportunities for joint ventures in creating gas infrastructure
in Venezuela, the statement said.
Venezuela's proven gas reserves are 4.3 TCM, the largest in
Latin America, and 11.2 billion tons of oil, 7% of global
reserves. It produces about 30 BCM/Y of gas. Gas accounts
for 41% of Venezuela's energy production and consumption,
oil for 38% and hydroelectric for 21%. Venezuela consumes
all the gas produced domestically; it does not import or export
any gas.
PdVSA has sole rights to manufacture natural gas in the country.
Venezuela is taking part in development of the South American
trans-continental pipeline system, which will link Venezuela,
Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay and Bolivia into a single
complex network. Gazprom operations in Venezuela are governed
by the memorandum of understanding signed with PdVSA in January
2005. That document covers Gazprom's participation in certifying
reserves at the Ayacucho 3 block. PdVSA estimates that the
block contains 5 billion tons of oil reserves. Gazprom has
also signed contracts with Venezuela on development of a general
scheme for developing the nation's gas sector and for performing
work in the first phase of the South American gas pipeline.
[The announcement by PdVSA and Gazprom is seen in western
circles as an attempt by the two companies to intimidate the
U.S., which is determined to limit the global sphere of influence
by Gazprom, especially in the Western Hemisphere. An international
struggle is unfolding among the world's superpowers for control
of the world's rich hydrocarbon deposits and by proxy, increased
power in the realm of diplomacy, economics and military prowess.
President Bush is determined to limit Gazprom's power and
curtail the growing impact that Venezuela is enjoying in the
world. Bush rightly believes that the establishment of programs
for the production and distribution of vital energy resources
in the Western Hemisphere by countries not favorably inclined
to the U.S., is not in the long-term
interest of global stability. The president may feel emboldened
by his success in isolating Iran, but it will be much more
difficult to contain the designs of Russia.]
In a related note, the head of Gazprom Alexei Miller said
the world faces a large energy shortfall beginning in 2012
and has lost its opportunity to enjoy low energy prices by
investing too little in the development of new fields and
underspending for the maintenance of existing fields. Miller,
who had earlier predicted that oil prices would
rise to $250 per barrel, said consuming countries should now
accept a larger role for producers.
The head of the world's largest gas firm, which supplies over
one-quarter of Europe's gas, said the global energy imbalance
could be resolved if gas-exporting nations broadened their
cooperation, though he did not call for a "gas-based
OPEC. Within the framework of the Gas Exporting Countries
Forum, we will create a global gas balance," Miller said.
"This will provide us with answers to when, where and
how much gas should be produced.
He also said energy-consuming nations should be prepared to
create more cross-border joint ventures with producers to
improve global energy security.
"We believe that the success rests in organizing vertically
integrated chains that run from the point of production to
the end user, with each link in the chain representing a joint
business between energy resource producers and consumers,"
Miller said.
[It is somewhat disingenuous for Miller to lecture the industrialized
world on its obligation to maintain and expand the infrastructure
for producing natural gas supplies. Russia is without doubt
the country with the worst state of disrepair in its energy
sector, with a history of neglect and denial regarding its
capability to produce reliable volumes of gas and oil.
The disaster at Chernobyl and the subsequent unconscionable
denial of the nuclear reactor's meltdown haunts the memories
of industry observers. It is the arrogance of newly-found
power that allows Russia to don the ill-fitting mantle of
sage and lecturer to the world, when, in fact, Russia is the
prime example of central mismanagement and lack of foresight.]
Long-Term
Outlook for LNG in U.S. is Positive
Rising oil and gas prices, environmental concerns and the
possibility of domestic gas shortages have bolstered the long-term
demand outlook for LNG within the U.S. There are six active
U.S. LNG terminals, with over 20 additional marine LNG facilities
being seriously considered, to serve the U.S. market.
As the expected frequency of LNG arrivals in U.S. ports grows,
and new terminals are built, U.S. Coast Guard resources and
personnel are being overextended and are unable to balance
the demand of LNG security requirements against other critical,
and growing, Homeland Security responsibilities. The Coast
Guard's historic roles of search and rescue, law enforcement,
marine safety and environmental protection missions are being
compromised.
Congressional testimony delivered recently has shown there
is a widening gap between the extent of LNG missions that
the Coast Guard is called upon to perform and the budgets
and resources currently available. In many cases, the Coast
Guard is forced to fill these gaps by calling upon local law
enforcement agencies to provide additional waterside security
when LNG tankers deliver their shipments. In most cases, the
local police departments do not have the level of training
or legal authority that the Coast Guard has to conduct the
water-based security missions and interventions. Furthermore,
neither the Coast Guard nor the local law enforcement agencies
are adequately funded or staffed to perform this mission.
Recent federal legislation is seen addressing some of the
more critical issues involving security for LNG terminals
and tankers. While positive in intent, a house bill is seen
by many as incorrectly placing full responsibility for security
on government, state and local agencies. The U.S. Coast Guard
and the administration object to the outlines of
Coast Guard responsibility, as drafted. It does not provide
the Guard with adequate flexibility in adjusting resources
to address various threat levels. Furthermore, in most cases,
it is generally conceded that even if the Coast Guard were
to have access to the resources of local governments, those
entities are usually not trained for this sort of mission.
One must have specially trained personnel such as counterterrorist
agents to defeat a determined terrorist attack.
A partial solution may be to place more responsibility for
security on LNG terminal and tanker operators. Requirements
may be promulgated that LNG terminals and tanker operators
provide necessary surveillance, tanker escort and waterside
security to deal with maritime security threats.
The shift of security to terminal and tanker operators will
be costly and lengthy, requiring vast sums of money to be
spent on training and surveillance. The terminal operators
are not expected readily to accept the additional cost involved
to safely operate the terminal and incentives may have to
be provided. If the U.S. is to become a serious LNG importer,
a mechanism for apportioning the costs of security will have
to be developed.
| Subscription to LNG Digest: |
| |
U.S. and Canada
|
Elsewhere |
| PER
YEAR: |
$ 825
|
$ 850 airmail postpaid |
|
|
 |