07-08-2012, 07:18 PM
Let's talk about the size of our new Gulf LNG Plant in context of the leading bidders.
Allow me to digress for a moment first.
The original Project Agreement signed by the NEC on 10 December 2009 called for production of 7.6 Million tons LNG per annum with provision for expansion up to 10.6 Million tons per annum. Location to be in Napa Napa adjacent to the InterOil Refinery
Then we tried to jump-start the project with Modular LNG units from Siemens/Chart (via EWC) and a Floating LNG Project from Samsung (via FLEX), both to be located in Gulf Province. This idea did not conform to the Project Agreement because the capacity was too small and the location was changed.
Fast forward to the current situation.
We are told that bids from major LNG players are being evaluated. Speculation is that JKM Consortium, ExxonMobil and Shell are the three top contenders with others still on the field. We're led to believe that all three of the above are acceptable (JKM would probably bring in an operating partner; I've always felt their choice will be PETRONAS).
Furthermore, we hear that the change to the Gulf location will be accepted.
HERE'S MY QUESTION: What size will PNG Government accept?
The Exxon-led PNG LNG Project is 6.6 Million tons LNG per annum (two trains). If Exxon is the winning bidder they will most definitely want to duplicate the PNG LNG plant design at Gulf. Is this reduced size acceptable to PNG Government? I would venture to say that YES they would allow the first phase of the project to be 6.6 rather than 7.6, which enables XOM to build the plant sooner than the other bidders because all the engineering is completed and equipment can be ordered immediately.
My CONCLUSION: If 6.6 Million tons LNG per annum is allowed by the PNG Government then XOM will be the Partner due to the ability to get financing quickly (cost is known) and start up 12-24 months earlier than the others.
Any other thoughts???
Allow me to digress for a moment first.
The original Project Agreement signed by the NEC on 10 December 2009 called for production of 7.6 Million tons LNG per annum with provision for expansion up to 10.6 Million tons per annum. Location to be in Napa Napa adjacent to the InterOil Refinery
Then we tried to jump-start the project with Modular LNG units from Siemens/Chart (via EWC) and a Floating LNG Project from Samsung (via FLEX), both to be located in Gulf Province. This idea did not conform to the Project Agreement because the capacity was too small and the location was changed.
Fast forward to the current situation.
We are told that bids from major LNG players are being evaluated. Speculation is that JKM Consortium, ExxonMobil and Shell are the three top contenders with others still on the field. We're led to believe that all three of the above are acceptable (JKM would probably bring in an operating partner; I've always felt their choice will be PETRONAS).
Furthermore, we hear that the change to the Gulf location will be accepted.
HERE'S MY QUESTION: What size will PNG Government accept?
The Exxon-led PNG LNG Project is 6.6 Million tons LNG per annum (two trains). If Exxon is the winning bidder they will most definitely want to duplicate the PNG LNG plant design at Gulf. Is this reduced size acceptable to PNG Government? I would venture to say that YES they would allow the first phase of the project to be 6.6 rather than 7.6, which enables XOM to build the plant sooner than the other bidders because all the engineering is completed and equipment can be ordered immediately.
My CONCLUSION: If 6.6 Million tons LNG per annum is allowed by the PNG Government then XOM will be the Partner due to the ability to get financing quickly (cost is known) and start up 12-24 months earlier than the others.
Any other thoughts???

