Situationer: Are more LNG terminals necessary

Situationer: Are more LNG terminals necessary if no one is selling? Let’s think about it: fuel shortages wouldn’t be as bad as they are now were it not for bureaucrats throwing at the wrong end of two LNG terminals which have been delayed for years.

It is tempting to use the recent defaults of LNG suppliers who have contracts with long-term duration along with record-high prices on the spot market to conclude that the need for additional LNG terminals is now irrelevant.

Before jumping to conclusions, think about the following: it’sn’t sovereign-backed Qatar Energy that’s been defaulting on contracts with a long term duration; it’s the international trading housesthe two major trading houses – Eni as well as Gunvor — who have defaulted on promises to ship cargo and damaged the power sector of Qatar.

One of the two proposed terminals is funded primarily by Qatar and is owned by three local industrial groups in minority ownership. Six years after trying to navigate the regulatory maze however, the terminal remains an inaccessible goal. If the terminal had been able to get the pipeline capacity promised from Sui companies on the timeframe, it could have already been imports Qatari gas in long-term contracts, for later sale to local industry without the need for assurances from the sovereign.

Situationer: Are more LNG terminals necessary

The second terminal that is planned is owned and operated of Mitsubishi Corporation, one of the biggest players in the energy market. There is no LNG trader around the globe would’ve been able to default on its cargoes since Mitsubishi Corporation, the Japanese company has more than half of the LNG that is imported each year by Japan which is one of the largest gas importers in the world.

Impact of Ukraine war

Pakistan began to import LNG in the year 2015, as its the gas reserves in its own country began to deplete in a more rapid manner. The country has already constructed two terminals at Port Qasim. Pakistan State Oil Company Ltd makes use of it’s Engro Elengy Terminal to import gas under contracts for long-term as well as Pakistan LNG Ltd brings spot purchases via GasPort LNG Terminal. GasPort LNG Terminal.

More than 50% of all annual LNG imports go via the spot market, which saw prices rise dramatically following the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the 24th of February. It’s no wonder that there was there was no response from bidders to the most recent tenders from Pakistan LNG Ltd for 10 cargoes. Prior to that, the state-owned corporation tried three times unsuccessfully to purchase LNG at the end of July.

For the four long-term contracts that are expected to provide more than half the country’s overall LNG imports at significantly less than spot rates and there has been a constant flow of defaults by suppliers around the world. From the start of 2021 Eni was in default for at the least four cargoes, while Gunvor was in default for a minimum of seven cargoes, as per data collected by the Institute of Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.

Do you think it’s a case of force majeure?

Pakistan reserves the possibility of imposing an amount of penalty for suppliers who fail to pay which is 30 percent of the freight cost. Suppliers may invoke force majeurewhich is a situation that cannot be predicted and prevents them from executing the contract — in order to avoid having to pay the penalty.

“Long-term contracts should always oblige the seller to disclose the source of the fuel and the name of the vessel. If not, what’s to stop that cargo from being sold in the spot market when it is priced at a level that is sufficient to justify defaulting on deliveries that are long-term?” said an energy specialist with decades of LNG procurement experience with European employers.

It’s not easy for a force majeure claim to be based using an excuse that isn’t true if the buyer who is long-term is aware of who is the supplier for LNG as well as the ship expected to transport it.

The companies behind both of the proposed terminals have repeatedly asked for the government to make available at minimum 300 millions cubic feet (mmcfd) of capacity for pipelines before they make the final decision on investment (FID) However there has been very little tangible progress made by the gas utility companies owned by the state on the allocation of pipeline capacity over the last few years.

The Energas LNG project, which is owned by Qatar, and Mitsubishi Tabeer LNG can handle between 750 and 1,000 mmcfd, respectively. With the capacity of the operational Engro Elengy (690mmcfd) and GasPort LNG (750mmcfd) and GasPort LNG (750mmcfd), the combination of the two “merchant” terminals can more than double the capacity of the country’s regasification. They will also enhance the capacity of the LNG storage capability, currently at 320,000 cubic meters.

Pakistan is among the most prominent seven LNG importers in the world, but it is ranked at the bottom of the list with regard to storage capacity. In actual Pakistan utilizes the existing Floating Storage and Re-gasification Units (FSRUs) of the two terminals that are in use as Re-gasification units. The system is based in large part on the line pack which is the quantity of gas that is stored within pipelines for scheduling reasons.

According to a report published on July 4 published by Reuters, Germany has leased up to four FSRUs in an effort to swiftly diversify away from Russian energy. “But here, foreign investors have been running from pillar to post for years just to get the promised pipeline capacity,” stated the expert in energy.

For more Details , visit our site Ofwpinoytv

Leave a Reply