shareholdersunite.com

“The ultimate capacity of the liquification facilities planned by Interoil and Partners including the third party expansions, are in line with the Project Agreement between LNGL and the State of Papua New Guinea and have a capacity between 7.6 and 10.6 million tonne per annum.”

That paragraph says it all. They have enough gas to meet the PA requirements. End of story; lets sell this thing down! Will be interesting to see who posted this thing

Can anyone clarify for me that the correct numbers to compare are:

from the GCA report “Estimated recovery raw gas”

and the GLJ report “Marketable sales gas”.

If so does anyone have any comments on the differences ie
Low P90 4.3TCF – 6.19TCF (approx 42% more)
Best P50 6.5TCF – 8.18TCF (approx 25% more)
High P10 10.3 – 9.94TCF (approx 0.03% less)

Or are we not comparing like for like?
How come the low estimate is so different from the high? Don’t they use the same data?

I was also suprised by how low the Elk resource was or in effect is The Elk resource being counted pretty much in The Antelope resource as it’s all one structure?

Any comments/thoughts much appreciated.

I now have a good copy and agree this is quite bullish for IOC and partners. They have enough NG for the LNG plants as proposed. Cool!!Blows away Tilson and friends.

I see that the link to the report no longer works on yahoo. Very fishy. Think Sam has a good response over there. Looks like maybe another failed attempt to cause doubt and confusion.

Is this just a difference in estimated recovery rates between the 2 reports. Both show about the same 8.5 Ts gross gas. IOC/Henry have maintained they were quite confident even GLJ’s recovery rate factor was lower than what they expect. This is good news and surely has been out prior to the pps climb and JP/SK reported buy in interest.
What it does in assure PNG and partners that there is minimally enough gas to merit the billions in investment and greenfield development in pristine Gulf Province. Throw in a little gas at T-2 and we have plenty of gas for ‘third-party expansion’ in the Gulf.
I’ve emailed STP the pdf of the report.

I really veal this is a last ditch effort by shorts. They probably were taken off guard by the KOGAS/JAPEX/Mitsui consortium leak. They will try and push this thing down; we’ll probably see an SA article or 3 claiming it is substantially less gas. But in the end, they have a boatload of gas and condensate in one location, close to the coast, and companies and countries want it.

Agree that could be the case tree, but the fact that the report states that the estimates “meet the requirements” of the PA of needing between 7.5 and 10.6 mtpa should be all the NEC needs. This (as you say) fulfills LNGL’s requirement of providing an estimate since they are the party to the PA, not IOC/Pac LNG. T2 will be used (I believe) for the “expansion by third parties” that GCA mentions in their report, but LNGL has enough gas to be sanctioned just at E/A.

Since GCA is a very conservative firm (which is good as it gives an almost worst case), NEC should feel very comfortable as well as those bidding on the project.

I have a working link of the report and I will send to STP.

Also, I would caution (which I’m sure he is already hesitant) STP on posting that GCA report without specific permission as stated in the report. Hard to believe some people aren’t pretty upset about its being posted. I downloaded a copy of it and saved it, but I’m not going to be spreading it around or posting it online unless I’m sure it’s OK.