|
Appraisal of the Macquarie report
|
|
08-06-2014, 08:50 PM
Till now M. did not react on my email. It is not easy to admit errors.
08-06-2014, 09:27 PM
They may have information that we do not have access to that's enables them to draw different conclusions than those without the knowledge. Everything involves assumptions. This is the best body of research published on current Interoil info.
08-06-2014, 09:27 PM
By my calculation, 4 TCF gas in place is more than enough to feed a 3.6 million ton per annum plant for 20 years.
Drivel Maven with Personality
08-06-2014, 09:41 PM
That's a one train plant. Bet we certify enough for a 2 train.
08-07-2014, 03:01 AM
'jft310' pid='48174' datel Wrote:That's a one train plant. Bet we certify enough for a 2 train. I definitely agree on the two trains, JFT, but I do not see how anyone gets to $1.20 per mcf average price for E/A certified gas. I would probably be ecstatic about $1.00 for an average on certification.
08-07-2014, 03:21 AM
Instead of posting go to the source. Not that hard to check.
08-07-2014, 04:52 AM
[quote='jft310' pid='48173' dateline='1407324465'] They may have information that we do not have access to that's enables them to draw different conclusions than those without the knowledge. Everything involves assumptions. This is the best body of research published on current Interoil info. [/quote M. did a comprehensive study and explained the assumptions used in the calculation. I do not challenge their assumption regarding the 7 TCF resource. However, a 7 mmtpa will not yield the highest NPV. Even IOC used other capacity numbers in the past.
08-07-2014, 05:06 AM
'Relker' pid='48169' datel Wrote:Till now M. did not react on my email. It is not easy to admit errors. I would not expect them to respond either way, so that you should not assume anything from that, imo.
08-10-2014, 04:55 AM
'Getitrt2' pid='48192' datel Wrote: The question is not the number of trains but the total annual capacity. There are single trains with capacities upto 10 mmtpa.
08-12-2014, 01:53 AM
There must be some reason why Exxon did not go that route.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

