Timing

[Getitrt2]

One way or another you are going to have to get property owners and regional politicians on your side. It isn't a bad estimate that the additional infrastructure to build the Gulf LNG project would take an extra year to design and build when compared to a third train at PNG LNG. Quite a bit of preliminary engineering and site selection has already been accomplished. Much of what needs to be built will have to be built whether it is CSP and pipeline or CSP, pipeline and LNG. Whichever way it goes though, what needs to be done will go considerably faster if everyone is on board and working together. The sooner the better. Let's hope Hession sees this and those drill bits will rapidly make the question of either/or irrelevant. The good news is of course the bits are finally working and (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong) with any luck around the first of the month we should hear about penetration of the top of a gas bearing formation. Best regards,

Train three at PNG LNG would cost the govt of PNG less than a greenfield project and offer a greater return on the investment in a shorter timeframe.  That's a powerful economic argument.

You don't think the PNG government want both?!  Give me a break!!  Why wouldn't they?