Feds approve Cheniere’s plan to export natural gas

April 16, 2012 at 6:01 pm

by Jennifer A. Dlouhy

Houston-based Cheniere Energy on Monday cleared the final major hurdle to exporting natural gas when federal regulators approved the firm’s plan to build a plant in southwest Louisiana for liquefying the fuel.

The decision by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission puts Cheniere on track to convert its existing Sabine Pass terminal for receiving liquefied natural gas by 2015 — a timeline that would make it the first LNG export facility in the lower 48 states. One operates now in Alaska.

The company aims to export up to 3.5 million tons per year from the facility in Lake Charles, La. Cheniere plans to build the liquefaction plant in two stages, adding 191 acres to the existing terminal’s space. The facility would still be able to receive liquefied natural gas from tankers.

“Obtaining approval from the FERC is one more milestone for our liquefaction project,” said Cheniere CEO Charif Souki. “We will now finalize the financing arrangements in order to commence construction.”

About half a dozen other companies, including Texas-based Freeport LNG, also are pursuing exports to take advantage of the glut of natural gas produced in the U.S. using horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing techniques that free hydrocarbons from dense shale rock formations.

Exports would allow natural gas producers and processors to capitalize on higher prices globally compared to the United States. In the U.S. Monday, natural gas futures settled just over $2 per million British thermal units after hitting 10-year lows last week.

In Cheniere’s case, the strategy is a bid to put its receiving terminal to work. The Sabine Pass terminal went online in 2009, just as U.S. natural gas production surged and killed the need for LNG imports.

When natural gas is cooled to 256 degrees below zero it becomes a liquid that tanker ships can transport. At its destination it is converted back into gas. Cheniere’s Sabine Pass terminal is outfitted with regassification and storage equipment now.

In approving Cheniere’s liquefaction plant plans, FERC also could also give a boost to U.S. producers with big natural gas portfolios.

But a rise in natural gas prices would increase consumers’ monthly bills and also would be bad news for chemical manufacturers that use natural gas as a building block to create other products.

Congressional Democrats have proposed legislation that would ban new LNG exports. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who is pushing a ban, said the expert terminals would mean sending U.S. natural gas to China and Europe 00 and “exporting our manufacturing jobs abroad along with the fuel.”

“America should exploit her competitive advantage with lower natural gas prices to create jobs in the United States, not export natural gas to create more profits for oil and gas companies,” Markey said.

And environmentalists have asked top Obama administration officials to require a broader review of the consequences of the surge in natural gas drilling that probably would result from selling the fuel overseas.

Critics fear hydraulic fracturing can contaminate water supplies and cause localized earthquakes. Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said in a statement Monday that exports would increase production and hydraulic fracturing, “making a dirty fuel more dangerous and putting more American families in at risk.”

Source

Related articles

• USA: Cheniere to Raise Up to USD 4 Billion in Debt for Sabine Pass Liquefaction Project (mb50.wordpress.com)
• USA: Cheniere Urges FERC to Approve Sabine Pass Liquefaction Project (mb50.wordpress.com)
• Will the US Become the World’s Largest Exporter of LNG? (appliedagrotech.net)
• USA: Cheniere CEO Sees Domestic Gas Prices at USD 2/MMBtu (mb50.wordpress.com)
• Cheniere: Sabine 1,2 Train Construction Start in H1 2012 (USA) (mb50.wordpress.com)
• USA: Cheniere, KOGAS Ink Sabine Pass LNG Deal (mb50.wordpress.com)
• USA: Sabine Pass LNG Gets Cargo (mb50.wordpress.com)
• Cheniere sees summer application for Corpus plant (appliedagrotech.net)
• Why America’s Missing Out on the Billion-Dollar Global LNG Game (mb50.wordpress.com)

The Obama Administration Wants You to Stop Worrying and Love the Bailouts

By Nick Baumann

Mon Apr. 16, 2012 3:30 AM PDT

The Obama administration wants Americans to realize what a good job it and the Bush administration did saving the economy from a second Great Depression. But they’d prefer not to make this case directly. They want journalists to do it for them.

On Friday, the Treasury Department convened one of its semi-regular, invitation-only background press briefings for journalists. Senior Treasury officials spoke to us, answered our questions, and showed us a “deck,” which is annoying industry jargon for a PowerPoint presentation. “I just know this is going to be a fucking waste of time—another dog-and-pony show,” another journalist told me on our way into the meeting. The central message of the dog-and-pony show was that the US response to the 2008 financial collapse was pretty effective, especially when compared to how other countries reacted to different crises. The PowerPoint presentation used terms like “bank investment programs,” but what the Treasury gang was talking about was the highly unpopular financial bailouts (as opposed to the auto bailouts, which the Obama team views as a political winner).

The Treasury officials said many true things. It’s certainly possible that if the government hadn’t acted quickly, the 2008 financial crisis could have been as disastrous as the Great Depression. Many of the bailouts—or “rescues,” as Treasury calls them—have resulted in net gains for the taxpayers. (The current value of the government’s shares in AIG, for example, exceed the amount of money it has yet to recover from that bailout.) The Treasury is right that countries confront major economic crises frequently and that the United States will probably face one again. And it’s legitimate for the Obama administration to worry that its successors will look at the interventions made in the markets in 2008 and fear that such action is not worth the immense political costs. Consequently, they discern the need to get good press for these bailouts.

The journalists in the room justifiably focused their questions on things that the Obama administration and the Treasury Department have not done well enough: helping struggling homeowners, lowering unemployment, and moving towards a financial order where these sorts of crises are no longer inevitable. The Treasury folks mostly wanted to talk about how successful the bailouts were. But they made that argument in a no-direct-quotes, no-television, you-can’t-even-say-our-names briefing for 20 or so journalists on a Friday afternoon. In other words, in a manner that would not associate them too closely with this argument. They did it in this fashion because they want to influence our future reporting (a fair-enough desire). But they don’t want to take on the political challenge of directly defending their massively unpopular actions in the public eye.

Senior Treasury officials clearly believe that the financial sector bailouts were a brave choice that worked out as well as anyone could have hoped, and they said as much on Friday. I’m bound by the agreement not to quote any of them directly.

But when asked about the bank bailouts in public, Obama and top administration officials usually mention that the Bush administration launched the bailouts, talk about them as something America “had” to do, and change the subject as quickly as possible. One example is Obama’s 2010 State of the Union address. “If there’s one thing that has unified Democrats and Republicans, and everybody in between, it’s that we all hated the bank bailout,” Obama said. “I hated it. I hated it. You hated it. It was about as popular as a root canal.” He went on to describe the bailout as a “necessary” step taken by “the last administration,” arguing that “if we had allowed the meltdown of the financial system, unemployment might be double what it is today,” with more businesses closed and more homes lost.

In that speech, the bailout was the equivalent of cutting off your hand when it’s caught under a bolder and you’re dying of thirst: a terrible thing to which there was no alternative. That’s a bit at odds with how senior Treasury officials spoke about the bailouts on Friday: a wise choice that worked out better than anyone could have anticipated, and a program that makes the administration proud. That appraisal is not on the record.

Source

Related articles

• Taxpayers to make money on TARP, Treasury says (bottomline.msnbc.msn.com)
• Treasury Dept. defends bailouts (politico.com)
• Taxpayers Set to Lose $30+ Billion on the Auto Bailout – Tea Party Nation (gds44.wordpress.com)
• Treasury points out bailout profits (upi.com)

IMF Exploits Euro-Crisis to Create Global Money Power

Monday, April 16, 201

by Staff Report

Euro Area Seeks Bigger IMF War Chest on Spanish Concerns … European officials travel to Washington this week seeking a bigger global war chest to combat the debt crisis as Spain’s government battles to quell renewed market turmoil over its finances. Three weeks after European leaders unveiled emergency euro- area funding exceeding the symbolic $1 trillion mark, concerns about Spain’s position have ratcheted the nation’s borrowing costs to the highest levels this year. Crisis-fighting resources will dominate talks at the International Monetary Fund’s spring meeting in Washington from April 20-22. – Bloomberg

Dominant Social Theme: Austerity would work if Europe would just cooperate.

Free-Market Analysis: Almost unnoticed, the world’s leaders now speak in terms of trillions rather than billions (or millions) as they used to, and the IMF and central banks are leaders in this trend (see above excerpt).

The goal of the elites running these facilities is world government and the European Union is a stepping-stone to this consolidation. Austerity, the program that is supposedly stabilizing European finances, is actually an elite dominant theme that does the opposite of its stated intent.

As part of this globalist thrust, the power elite seeks to empower certain international facilities with additional funding and authority. Out of chaos … order, as the article excerpted above once again illustrates:

Bowing to international pressure to do more while stopping short of a bolder proposal, European governments agreed last month that 500 billion euros ($654 billion) in fresh money would be placed aside 300 billion euros already committed to create an 800 billion-euro defense against contagion.

By also offering to give the IMF 150 billion euros, “European governments have done their part,” ECB Executive Board Member Joerg Asmussen said April 13. “I would now expect our non-European friends and partners to contribute their part to IMF resources.”

This kind of problem/solution formula is easy to understand for anyone who wants to look. The elites pursue their goals via dominant social themes, fear-based promotions that frighten people into giving up power and wealth to globalist facilities. In this case the mechanism is the “sovereign debt crisis” and the solution is to puff up the IMF with more resources.

The longer the so-called sovereign debt crisis goes on, the more the globalists utilize it to expand the power of their chosen institutions. We wrote about this phenomenon just the other day in an article entitled, “Debt Crisis Plotted to Deliver the Euro to the IMF?” Here’s how we explained the genesis:

One has to keep in mind the artificiality of the current economic construct. The economy of the world is run via monopoly fiat/paper money printed by central banks. It is this system that has seemingly crashed half of the world’s economy and is well on the way to delivering China into the same situation …

The EU crisis itself, as we have often pointed out, started when certain poorer countries were given large amounts of money by Brussels to “equalize” the economy. These funds were supposed to allow the bureaucracies to address native imbalances and create fiscal health.

Of course, this money was nothing but a kind of bribe. The elites of the given nation pocketed the funds and then made sure their countries entered the EU. After this occurred, further lending took place via the elite’s top, European commercial banks.

After the 2008 crash, it became clear that the EU’s PIGS couldn’t repay the loans. This was likely the plan all along. After this realization set in, the power elite that orchestrates this sort of thing ensured that the solution to this manipulated dilemma was “austerity.”

The idea is evidently and obviously to make people so miserable that they will eventually welcome world government and world money. The power elite orchestrating this has been using what we call directed history for at least a century and probably closer to three – within the context of the modern globalist conspiracy.

The article we are analyzing today from Bloomberg suggests an expanded IMF based on the Euro crisis. But the IMF is also promoting a US$500 billion expansion via developing countries.

The justification is that the European crisis might spill over into other continents and nations. The IMF has to be prepared for via a half billion-dollar transfer from the very countries it claims to be protecting. Reuters reports the following:

Euro Area Seeks Bigger IMF War Chest on Spanish Concerns … International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Christine Lagarde said that she is hoping to make “real progress” at this week’s meetings …

In January, the IMF said it would need $600 billion in new resources to help “innocent bystanders” who might be affected by economic and financial spillovers from Europe … On Friday, officials from the Group of 20 nations told Reuters the world’s major economies were likely to agree to provide the IMF with somewhere between $400 billion and $500 billion.

A G20 official said the fundraising effort would likely raise about $50 billion from Japan and a similar amount from China and Saudi Arabia, in addition to the $250-300 billion already committed by EU countries. Smaller amounts will likely come from countries such as Russia, Mexico and Brazil.

Thus it is that the IMF expands. It is receiving at least US$150 billion from Europe and hundreds of billions from mostly “developing” countries. It is interesting that the Reuters article and the Bloomberg article don’t quite match up on the European contributions. What’s a few hundred billion among friends?

In fact, nobody REALLY knows how much money is flowing at the top, or where it is headed. The point of the reports is promotional and has little to do with accuracy. The idea is to throw vast sums around as to imbue government officials with godlike powers.

Often, we discover the announcements made about funds prove not to be true. The European sovereign debt crisis was supposed to have been solved years ago, when the first announcements were made that funds had been delegated to “fix” the problem by leading European sponsors.

In fact, we have come to realize this crisis – like other crises around the world – are often manufactured ones. This is no doubt why they often last so long. The longer the crisis lasts, the more possibilities for a transformative effect.

In this case it seems obvious to us that the intent is to make citizens of the West so miserable (via “austerity”) that they will welcome virtually any change, even globalism, that promises to make their lives better.

Seen through this admittedly cynical lens, the 20th century with all its “isms” and arguments for expanding government via socialism, etc., was the first part of a promotion that is now nearing its latter stages. Having successfully made people dependent on government, the powers-that-be are now removing those props in order to further their internationalist aims.

No doubt global governance will be sold the same way as were the initial governmental solutions of the 20th century – as a panacea that will somehow reduce the world’s afflictions and rectify the wrongs of the “market.”

Conclusion: We are not yet sure the IMF is destined to become the world’s central bank – complete with an SDR global currency – but the IMF is continually showing up at the center of things as world economic chaos blossoms. More that the Bank for International Settlements or even the World Bank, it appears to be the Chosen One.

Source

Related articles

• IMF funds drive caught in global power shift (jhaines6.wordpress.com)
• Spain again to test investors’ nerves (donny-wise.com)
• Japan mulls $60 bil. contribution to IMF resource boost (english.kyodonews.jp)
• Daily US Opening News And Market Re-Cap: April 16 (zerohedge.com)
• S. Africa pushing for more World Bank, IMF reform (seattlepi.com)

Cuban well progressing slowly

News Wires ,

16 April 2012 01:36 GMT

Drilling of the first well in the long-awaited exploration of Cuba‘s offshore oilfields has gone slower than expected, but should be completed by mid-May, according to reports.

Reuters quoted sources close to the project as saying drillers had encountered harder rock beneath the sea bed than expected, which combined with other minor problems, had slowed progress.

When drilling began on 1 February Spanish oil giant Repsol YPF said drilling of the deep-water well was anticipated to take about 60 days to complete.

A Repsol spokesman could not confirm on Friday the projected mid-May completion date, when contacted by Reuters.

This well, which is in 1706 metres of water off the communist-run island’s north-west coast, is the first of five currently planned, Cuban officials say.

Cuba has said it could have 20 billion barrels in its offshore fields. It needs the oil to end its dependence on Venezuela, which ships it 114,000 barrels a day.

Cancer-stricken Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is Cuba’s top ally, but island leaders worry that the oil flow could stop if he dies or loses his bid for re-election later this year, Reuters reported.

The US Geological Survey estimated Cuba may have 5 billion barrels of oil and 10 trillion cubic feet of natural gas offshore, but its study covered only part of the Cuban zone.

Reuters cited various unnamed sources as saying Repsol had been encouraged by its findings thus far, but the company has said results will not be known until the well is finished and studies are conducted.

Oil experts say it will take three years or more to bring the Cuban oil on line, if enough is found to justify production, according to Reuters.

After Repsol completes its well, it will hand the Scarabeo 9 drilling rig over to Malaysia’s state-owned Petronas and its Russian partner Gazprom Neft for a second well.

Then it will go back to Repsol, which has a consortium with Norway’s Statoil and ONGC Videsh, a unit of India’s ONGC, for another well, Reuters reported.

The massive Chinese-built rig, which is more than 32 kilometres offshore but visible from Havana, is being leased from owner Saipem, a unit of Italian oil company Eni.

Due to the longstanding US trade embargo against Cuba, no American oil companies are involved in the project.

Repsol drilled a well in Cuban waters in 2004 and found oil, but said it was not commercially viable. Technological limitations imposed by the embargo made it difficult to find another rig for work in Cuba, industry sources have said.

The project has raised environmental concerns in the US, particularly in Florida, which is 145 kilometres north of Cuba and fears its shores could be damaged if there is an accident similar to the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010.

Source

Related articles

• Rig Hired by Spain’s Repsol Arrives off Cuba (mb50.wordpress.com)
• Repsol YPF ups Argentine shale potential (mb50.wordpress.com)
• What if… Is The US Prepared For Cuban Oil Rigs? (mb50.wordpress.com)

USA: Cheniere to Raise Up to USD 4 Billion in Debt for Sabine Pass Liquefaction Project

Cheniere Energy Partners said today that it has engaged eight financial institutions to act as Joint Lead Arrangers to assist in the structuring and arranging of up to $4 billion of debt facilities.

The proceeds will be used to pay for costs of development and construction of the liquefaction project at the Sabine Pass LNG terminal, to fund the acquisition of the Creole Trail Pipeline from Cheniere Energy, and for general business purposes. As previously disclosed, estimated capital costs before financing for the first two trains of the liquefaction project of $4.5 billion to $5.0 billion are expected to be funded from a combination of debt and equity financings.

The eight Arrangers are The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, HSBC, J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Morgan Stanley, RBC Capital Markets, and SG Americas Securities, LLC.

“Obtaining financing is one of the last steps to complete before proceeding with the construction of the first two liquefaction trains being developed at the Sabine Pass LNG terminal,” said Charif Souki, Chairman and CEO. “We have engaged an experienced group of financial institutions as our core banking group and look forward to completing the financing for the project in due course.”

Source

Related articles

• USA: Cheniere CEO Sees Domestic Gas Prices at USD 2/MMBtu (mb50.wordpress.com)
• Cheniere: Sabine 1,2 Train Construction Start in H1 2012 (USA) (mb50.wordpress.com)
• USA: Cheniere, KOGAS Ink Sabine Pass LNG Deal (mb50.wordpress.com)
• USA (Sabine Pass): BG Ups Sabine Pass LNG Volumes to 5.5 MTPA (mb50.wordpress.com)
• Why America’s Missing Out on the Billion-Dollar Global LNG Game (mb50.wordpress.com)
• USA: ETE Units File with FERC for Proposed Lake Charles Liquefaction Project (mb50.wordpress.com)

On Misreading Sunstein

Monday, April 16, 2012

by Tibor Machan

A while back The New York Times Magazine ran what amounts to a puff piece about Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein, President Obama‘s long-time friend, former colleague and one of America‘s regulation czars. It was penned by Benjamin Wallace-Wells, who is identified as “a contributing writer for the magazine and a contributing editor for Rolling Stone” magazine.

The essay was a decent enough account of Sunstein’s career and personal life but it focused only upon one of his significant and controversial ideas, namely “nudging” or “libertarian paternalism.” This is the belief in a system of government regulations that amount to creating incentives for people to do the right thing (as per how the government or Professor Sunstein see it, of course). Instead of coming down on what government considers objectionable or undesired human conduct with a sledgehammer, nudging works by setting up various tricks with which people are led to act in the way the government people intend for them to act.

Call it behavior modification or libertarian paternalism, the gist of Sunstein’s type of government meddling in people’s lives is to use a not very subtle program of Skinnerian stimulus-response (after the late Harvard behaviorist psychologist, B. F. Skinner), whereby what government officials want the citizens to do isn’t commanded but made the result of various prompters. Although Sunstein and his collaborators prefer the term “nudging,” it is a misleading idea since if it involved no more than that, one could just sidestep it.

Suppose my neighbor wants his guests to stop wearing shoes in his home, so he leaves bits and pieces of suggestions to them as they enter it that lead them to take off their shoes and proceed into the home only in socks. OK, but they need not visit him in the first place. So when they realize they’re being manipulated into doing stuff they don’t want to do – say, showing people the condition of their socks – they can just not visit at all or take some evasive action. There are numerous such situations in our lives, when those with whom we interact desire for us and try to induce us to act in certain ways and we can either comply or opt out.

With governmental nudging, however, we are ultimately being forced to comply with how the government wants us to behave. There is no escape. If we don’t go along, we could end up fined or even sent to jail. That is why it is called paternalism, since the government acts as would parents act toward their children over whom they have full authority. The “libertarian” part is a ruse – it comes from the fact that government tries to keep the citizenry in the dark about what it is doing, making it appear that one is making one’s own choices when one isn’t really.

Anyway, this idea is almost the only one associated with Cass Sunstein and with what he is supposed to be contributing to the Obama regime. The article does mention that he has urged government to go to court in support of animal rights but what it failed to do is mention Professor Sunstein’s most dangerous and vile idea, namely, that government is the source of our basic rights.

In the American tradition of law and politics, the foundation of these come from human nature. That is what the Declaration of Independence points out, namely, that we have equal rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness – among others – because of our human nature. They are unalienable so long as we remain human!

What Professor Sunstein and his co-author Stephen Holmes claimed, in their 1999 book, The Cost of Rights: Why Liberty Depends on Taxes, is that “individual rights and freedoms depend fundamentally on vigorous state action” and “Statelessness means rightlessness.” This is the pre-revolutionary, pre-Lockean – and pre-Jeffersonian – idea that governments grant us rights; that there are no natural rights but mere privileges we obtain from a government – i.e., a group of politicians and bureaucrats – that can also promptly take them away. As Sunstein & Co. see things, it isn’t just for the protection of our rights that a government is desirable but the very existence of our basic rights is due to government! Instead of the citizens having rights that government is instituted to secure, all governments, like monarchs, czars, dictators and such, give people rights, which they can promptly take away at their discretion. By what right they do this is left entirely unaddressed!

That such a reactionary view should be held by the foremost legal mind in the Obama administration is worth full disclosure and exploration, something The New York Times Magazine essay failed to do. Never mind nudging or animal “rights” – those are small potatoes. What matters far more is that Sunstein and Co. believe the thoroughly anti-libertarian and indeed anti-American notion that government is the source of law and rights, not their administrator and protector, respectively.

Source

Related articles

• | Regulatory Czar wants to use copyright protection mechanisms to shut down rumors and conspiracy theories! (truthaholics.wordpress.com)
• America The Land of the Free? What Constitution? (conservativesonfire.wordpress.com)

The Chinese Yuan May Become A World Currency

By Eliot Elwar

Apr 15, 2012

China seeks to replace the diminishing U.S. dollar as the world reserve and trade currency, and efforts are underway in Beijing to set up the Chinese yuan for global currency.

Global economic analysis shows that China’s yuan inches closer to global currency, dollar tumbles as jobs data disappoints many, dollar falls after fed comments, disappointing Italy bond auction weighs on European stocks, and China’s central bank governor suggests creating super-sovereign reserve currency.

According to Forbes, China’s yuan may be two years away from becoming a global trade currency. By 2014, an economic system may be created to settle cross-border yuan transactions, which could increase currency convertibility in Beijing and elsewhere. When this economic system is developed, it will permit nations to settle expenses with Chinese merchandises or in yuans rather than dollars. Over time, the yuan usage, mainly in Asian trade markets, would take demand away from the dollar along with its status as world’s reserve and trade currency.

According to Business Week, the dollar fell among its major peers as data showed the number of Americans filing for jobless benefits since January, making the argument for monetary policy. Additionally, In China, Australia’s largest trading partner, local- currency-denominated loans were 1.01 trillion yuan ($160.1 billion) in March, the People’s Bank of China. This exceeded all 28 estimates in a Bloomberg News survey, reassuring investors the nation may avoid a deep slowdown.

According to Market Watch, the U.S. dollar declined after a second Federal Reserve official emphasized dangers to U.S. financial development, remaining lower against the euro after Italy managed to trade benchmark three-year bonds and other debt. The Australian dollar performed very well after stronger-than-expected Australian jobs data. The euro grew to $1.3199, from the lower $1.3102 during North American trading. The 17-nation shared currency also advanced on the Japanese yen up 0.3% to ¥106.58.

According to Xinhua, Zhou Xiaochuan, China’s central bank governor, has propositioned to make a super-sovereign backup currency to support the international monetary system reform. He said the international monetary system seeks to fashion an international reserve exchange that is disengaged from distinct nations with ability to remain unwavering in overtime, thus eliminating the characteristic insufficiencies produced by operating credit-based national currencies.

Finally, although a super sovereign currency is not currently on the horizon, China still has high objectives for the yuan. China’s ability to internationalize the yuan would give it another way to inflict damage on the US economy and begin gradually replacing the shaky U.S. dollar with the Chinese yuan.

Read more: Source

Related articles

• Japan welcomes Chinese move on yuan (thehimalayantimes.com)
• US urges China to make ‘more movement’ over yuan (business.inquirer.net)
• China gives yuan more freedom with widened trading band (theglobeandmail.com)
• US, IMF welcome China’s move on yuan trading band (business.financialpost.com)
• China Takes More Small Steps Towards Yuan Convertability. (chinabystander.wordpress.com)

USA: Freeport LNG to Buy Land for Gas Pretreatment Facility

Freeport LNG announced that it had entered into an option agreement to purchase approximately 400 acres of land located about one mile southeast of the city of Oyster Creek near County Road 690 and State Highway 332 in order to relocate the future site of a natural gas pretreatment facility, which is part of Freeport LNG’s overall natural gas liquefaction project.

Freeport LNG originally purchased 500 acres of land located off of CR 792 to use as the site for its natural gas pretreatment facility. However, this property had only one point of ingress and egress (which was shared by a few neighboring communities), was closer to a greater number of residents, and was not behind the surge protection levee (which would have resulted in needing to elevate the site). These limitations led to concerns being raised by nearby residents regarding the aesthetic impact as well as safety concerns regarding ingress and egress, and the limitations of the site presented significant, additional development hurdles to Freeport LNG. Freeport LNG continued to search for other available properties that could alleviate the community’s concerns and the limitations of the CR 792 site. When the new site near County Road 690 and State Highway 332 recently became available, Freeport LNG was able to obtain an option on the property.

While certain requirements must be met before Freeport LNG can utilize the new location, the new site provides Freeport LNG with several benefits over its previously announced site for the pretreatment facility, including: (1) the new location is currently being used for industrial purposes as a fill dirt excavation site (so fewer acres of native ground will be impacted by the development), (2) the new location will be accessible by multiple routes, allowing for more efficient development and operation of the facilities while minimizing the impact of traffic on neighboring homes and businesses, (3) the new location is more remote from current residences and (4) the new site is located behind the surge protection levee, so the elevation will not need to be raised to the same extent as the prior site. In addition, because the facilities would be built at a lower elevation behind the levee, and in an area bordered by substantial woodland and foliage barriers, noise, lighting or other aesthetic impacts of the facilities will be significantly reduced as compared to the prior location.

“The new site is a ‘win-win’ for us to be able to find a location that addresses the concerns of the residents in the area near the prior site, and alleviate certain development limitations with the prior site.” said Mark Mallett, FLNG’s Vice President of Operations and Engineering. “This is a solution to an issue that benefits both the surrounding communities and Freeport LNG.” Freeport LNG’s natural gas liquefaction project is an important investment in the Brazoria County community, involving over $4 billion of direct capital investment in the area, adding over 2,000 local jobs during the project’s four year construction, and adding approximately 180-190 full time positions to Freeport LNG’s operations.

With the proposed relocation of the pretreatment facilities, Mr. Mallett had this to say regarding the prior location of the facilities: “We do not have any permanent plans for the property on County Road 792 at this time. However, we do not plan to build any facilities on it. For now, we plan to retain it as we progress through the permitting process, potentially using it as part of our overall wetland mitigation plan.”

The Freeport LNG natural gas pretreatment facility is necessary to process and treat the incoming natural gas so that it can be transported to Freeport LNG’s Quintana Island Terminal for liquefaction. When the natural gas arrives at the pretreatment facility, it is the same quality natural gas that is used every day by consumers and burned in furnaces, gas stoves and hot water heaters in private homes. However, all natural gas contains very small or trace quantities of impurities that, while unnoticeable and safe in the gas burned in private homes, negatively affect the natural gas liquefaction processes. The purpose of the pretreatment facility is to remove the trace impurities from the natural gas that will be delivered to the LNG Terminal on Quintana Island.

Freeport LNG points out that the natural gas coming into the facility is of the same quality as that delivered to nearby homes but the gas must be further purified before it can be liquefied at its Quintana Island facilities. No liquefied natural gas (LNG) will be present at the pretreatment plant. The types of processes utilized at Freeport LNG’s pretreatment facility are very similar to those processes utilized in numerous gas processing plants in and around Brazoria County.

Pending approval of the liquefaction project by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and other permitting agencies, construction of the Liquefaction Plant and support facilities will begin in mid-2013. “Local residents will continue to have opportunities to be part of the permitting process.” said Mallett. “FERC will be scheduling a public scoping meeting within the next couple of months to discuss the project and provide an opportunity for comments.”

Freeport LNG will continue its work during the upcoming facility design and development phases to prevent or reduce impacts on nearby residents. Environmental stewardship is a hallmark of Freeport LNG’s operations and will be at the center of planning, designing, and decision-making during all phases of the liquefaction project. The company is committed to operating safe and efficient facilities at the pretreatment plant site and will continue to communicate with nearby residents and engage local, state and federal officials as the Project moves forward.

In particular, Freeport LNG is in the preliminary stages of creating a community outreach program for the liquefaction project in order to provide a forum for citizens to meet with Freeport LNG on a regular basis as it progresses the project through the design phase and into construction and operation. Through the permitting processes and its community outreach efforts, Freeport LNG seeks to collaborate with neighbors and local stakeholders in a positive and constructive manner to design and construct the pretreatment facilities while minimizing negative impacts to the local community. If successful, Freeport LNG’s liquefaction project will not only grow Freeport LNG’s business and employee base but will also bring thousands of quality jobs and significant economic benefits to Brazoria County.

Source

Related articles

• Japan: Osaka Gas Eyes U.S. LNG (mb50.wordpress.com)
• USA: ETE Units File with FERC for Proposed Lake Charles Liquefaction Project (mb50.wordpress.com)
• Macquarie Vies To Sell U.S. LNG To India (mb50.wordpress.com)
• Why America’s Missing Out on the Billion-Dollar Global LNG Game (mb50.wordpress.com)