Lil:
(Just for the record, there is a GCA resource report floating around published Jan. 2012. They know us.) :-)
Yes you're correct; that's what I listed in Number 1
JFT:
Stavros I assume you mean 12 T's connected ?..one needs to define the question sir !!\
My question is "Who might TOTAL select out of the five choices in an attempt to provide a Certification that is as low as possible while still being credible."
I'm not really qualified to say how much is in E/A, not including Antelope South or other zones that run into PRL 15. If pressed to give my opinion, I'd say 12 tcfe in E/A ALONE, WITHOUT ANYTHING ELSE. ie, GLJ's old High Case. My guess is that IOC will select Netherland Sewell and TOTAL will use their neighbor Beicip.
I'm a Chemical Engineer who knows how to plan, design and build a large plant such as LNG. Therefore I know which EPC Contractors are the best ones and which are the firms who make mistakes and try to cut corners.
PNG LNG was constructed by a consortium of Chiyoda/JGC who also used the APIC Liquefaction technology. Chiyoda and JGC are located near each other in Yokohama and have partnered on numerous successful LNG projects in the past. In PNG LNG they used Daewoo as a subcontractor as well. The plant was completed on-time, started up without any problems and is operating at higher-than-design capacity.
A JV of Technip, JGC and KBR built the Balhaf LNG plant for TOTAL starting up in October 2009, several years before PNG LNG. It's a bit smaller than PNG LNG and also uses APIC technology. The cost of the plant was "advertised" as being quite low, but was probably somewhat higher in cost when the final price was tabulated. I doubt the plant can run at above capacity. In addition, there have been safety incidents in the plant that caused minor damage.
CBI, who built the PNG LNG Gas Conditioning Plant and the two large LNG Tanks, is also a very qualified LNG EPC Contractor that will be considered by TOTAL/IOC/OSH.
In my career I once did a detailed study to see what it costs to build a large complex using ExxonMobil specifications, Shell specifications and standard EPC Contractor specifications. With EPC Contractor as the "Base Cost" a plant using Shell specs costs over 10% more and a plant using XOM specs costs nearly 30%. Both Shell and XOM are convinced that their specs are worth the extra costs required to use them. These differences are still very real but are never considered when Analysts compare costs of various plants. I'm not aware of what TOTAL's specifications include and how much additional cost they add to a project.
(Just for the record, there is a GCA resource report floating around published Jan. 2012. They know us.) :-)
Yes you're correct; that's what I listed in Number 1
JFT:
Stavros I assume you mean 12 T's connected ?..one needs to define the question sir !!\
My question is "Who might TOTAL select out of the five choices in an attempt to provide a Certification that is as low as possible while still being credible."
I'm not really qualified to say how much is in E/A, not including Antelope South or other zones that run into PRL 15. If pressed to give my opinion, I'd say 12 tcfe in E/A ALONE, WITHOUT ANYTHING ELSE. ie, GLJ's old High Case. My guess is that IOC will select Netherland Sewell and TOTAL will use their neighbor Beicip.
I'm a Chemical Engineer who knows how to plan, design and build a large plant such as LNG. Therefore I know which EPC Contractors are the best ones and which are the firms who make mistakes and try to cut corners.
PNG LNG was constructed by a consortium of Chiyoda/JGC who also used the APIC Liquefaction technology. Chiyoda and JGC are located near each other in Yokohama and have partnered on numerous successful LNG projects in the past. In PNG LNG they used Daewoo as a subcontractor as well. The plant was completed on-time, started up without any problems and is operating at higher-than-design capacity.
A JV of Technip, JGC and KBR built the Balhaf LNG plant for TOTAL starting up in October 2009, several years before PNG LNG. It's a bit smaller than PNG LNG and also uses APIC technology. The cost of the plant was "advertised" as being quite low, but was probably somewhat higher in cost when the final price was tabulated. I doubt the plant can run at above capacity. In addition, there have been safety incidents in the plant that caused minor damage.
CBI, who built the PNG LNG Gas Conditioning Plant and the two large LNG Tanks, is also a very qualified LNG EPC Contractor that will be considered by TOTAL/IOC/OSH.
In my career I once did a detailed study to see what it costs to build a large complex using ExxonMobil specifications, Shell specifications and standard EPC Contractor specifications. With EPC Contractor as the "Base Cost" a plant using Shell specs costs over 10% more and a plant using XOM specs costs nearly 30%. Both Shell and XOM are convinced that their specs are worth the extra costs required to use them. These differences are still very real but are never considered when Analysts compare costs of various plants. I'm not aware of what TOTAL's specifications include and how much additional cost they add to a project.
Drivel Maven with Personality