ODAC News

 

Wednesday 05 Sept

 

The Oil Depletion Analysis Centre

 

 

Food Prices in the UK

1/   Rising price of wheat signals end of low-cost food, warns Premier chief (The Independent, Wed 05 Sep)

 

Economy – Subprime Fallout

2a/  Credit woes hit bank lending rate      (BBC News, Tue 04 Sep)

2b/  Liars’ loans (BBC News [Peston’s Picks], Mon 20 Aug)

2c/  Mervyn’s muddle     (BBC News [Peston’s Picks], Mon 20 Aug)

2d/  Credit crunch gallery of guilt (The independent, Wed 05 Sep)

 

Russia – Sakhalin-1 Project

3/   Gazprom May Buy Sakhalin-1 Gas for Russian Far East (Update2)      (Bloomberg, Tue 04 Sep)

 

Resource Nationalism – Algeria and Kazakhstan

4a/  Algeria Shuns Repsol And Gas Natural         (Forbes, Tue 04 Sep)

4b/  Caspian lessons for oil giants [Kashagan update]       (onet.pl [Financial Times], Tue 04 Sep)

4c/  Kashagan Consortium Talks of Demobilizing  (Energy Intelligence [International Oil Daily], Wed 05 Sep)

 

Iran – Internal Politics and Oil

5/   Iran: An oil industry that lost its head (Asia Times, Tue 04 Sep)

 

Natural Gas – Argentina and Chile

6/   Argentinean natural gas cuts continue to curtail Chilean methanol production    (Petroleum World [Platts], Tue 04 Sep)

 

Natural Gas - China

7/   Policy on natural gas streamlined      (China View [Shanghai Daily], Tue 04 Sep)

 

 

**********************************************************************************************************

 

1/         Rising price of wheat signals end of low-cost food, warns Premier chief          (The Independent, Wed 05 Sep)

 

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article2927260.ece

 

Comment:    Peak oil and the squeeze on natural gas supplies have not really started to effect food prices, yet. It is mainly weather-related events, corn-to-ethanol in the USA (arguably an early Peak Oil phenomenon) and food demand from China. Here in the UK, the supermarkets may be suppressing real rises in costs for farmers from higher fuel and fertiliser costs. The farmers’ costs are going up, but the supermarkets are not necessarily paying more for the product, as implied in the article: “The National Farmers' Union said many farmers were reducing their stock or considering quitting livestock farming as they are unable to survive on the current prices they get for meat.”

 

Article:    Premier Foods, whose products range from Mr Kipling cakes and Quorn to Branston Pickle, warned yesterday that the days of super-low-cost food are coming to an end as global demand for wheat rises.

 

The UK's biggest food producer also announced an increase in the price of Hovis bread, and said one major retailer had pushed up the price of a white loaf by 8p, taking it to more than £1.

 

Wheat prices have almost doubled in the past 12 months, and the buying of wheat futures contracts has been fuelled by dry weather in Australia and fears that Russia may restrict exports. Premier's chief executive, Robert Schofield, said food inflation is not just restricted to wheat. The price of animal feed, milk products, glucose and by-products are rising, he said.

 

"It is not a blip," Mr Schofield said. "We are seeing some forces out there that are not going to go away in three months. The overall global demand for food products is up, fuelled by demand coming out of Asia." Mr Schofield added that the use of land to grow environmentally friendly fuels is partly to blame for rising prices. "In effect, we're going to see an environmental tax on food," he said. "A lot of grain is being used for fuel."

 

... The comments come a month after Deloitte consultancy warned that the price of meat will have to rise to protect the health of the livestock industry. The National Farmers' Union said many farmers were reducing their stock or considering quitting livestock farming as they are unable to survive on the current prices they get for meat...

 

**********************************************************************************************************

 

2a/        Credit woes hit bank lending rate          (BBC News, Tue 04 Sep)

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6977798.stm

 

Article:    Worries about credit problems in UK banking have risen after the rate at which banks lend to each other hit its highest level since December 1998. On Tuesday the rate, - known as the London Interbank Offered Rate or Libor - reached 6.7975% for a loan over a three-month period.

 

It suggests that banks are reluctant to lend money to each other.

 

It also means Libor is above the Bank of England's emergency lending rate to banks, which is 6.75%.

 

The last time Libor was this high was in the aftermath of the collapse of US hedge fund Long Term Capital Management, when banks worldwide feared a financial crisis.

 

Under such circumstances, banks do not want to lend out their spare liquidity because there is uncertainty - both about whether the bank will need the cash itself in coming months, and about the financial health of the borrowing bank.

 

At the moment, banks are worried about how much other banks may be exposed to the US sub-prime mortgage market.

 

Sub-prime mortgages are offered to people with poor credit histories, but default rates on these loans have been rising in the US as a result of rising mortgage rates.

 

It has gradually emerged that many European banks have bought portfolios of debt that included large amounts of the US sub-prime debt.

 

The Libor lending rates are calculated every day by the British Bankers Association.

 

 

2b/        Liars’ loans  (BBC News [Peston’s Picks], Mon 20 Aug)

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2007/08/liars_loans.html

 

Comment:    This article is a couple of weeks old but still well worth a read. Robert Preston, the BBC Business editor, thinks the big Wall Street investment banks will get damaged by the subprime scam: “Now if I worked for Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch or the other big US investment banks, I might be considering my career options at the moment. It is inconceivable that they will escape unscathed from this debacle. Whatever the financial cost to these banks, which will not be trivial, there will also be significant damage to their reputations.”

 

Article:    The underlying cause of the current global financial crisis is a system in which there’s little personal responsibility for lending decisions.

 

Here’s how it all works (or, as we now see, how it doesn’t work).

 

... Before we move on, it’s probably worth recapping the phoney assumptions made by the investment banks as they create these bonds:

 

1) That historic data on default rates is useful even though the market has exploded in size

 

2) That data of any sort is useful even though the system for originating the loans, with mortgage brokers paid by the volume of loans they make, actually encourages fraud.

 

So far, so disturbing. But it gets worse...

 

... Now if I worked for Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch or the other big US investment banks, I might be considering my career options at the moment. It is inconceivable that they will escape unscathed from this debacle. Whatever the financial cost to these banks, which will not be trivial, there will also be significant damage to their reputations.

 

Europe’s shame

 

But Europe’s banks are hardly blameless either. If the underlying cause of the global financial crisis is fraud and greed in the US home loans system – from mortgage broker to investment bank – the trigger of the crisis was chronic folly by big international lending banks, notably some in Europe.

 

I am talking about banks’ use of “conduits” and “structured investment vehicles” (SIVs).

 

... But that’s to treat the symptoms rather than the disease itself. To avoid a repeat of this kind of crisis, there needs to be a return to lenders taking some responsibility for the loans they make.

 

Most bankers now think it’s quaint and absurd that once-upon-a time a bank manager actually managed a loan book and even talked to the individuals to whom he or she lent.

 

Our brave new world – in which a Parisian or Frankfurt bank doesn’t even know whether it’s exposed to the US housing market through its Turkey Twizzler collateralised debt obligations – is neither healthy or sustainable.

 

 

2c/        Mervyn’s muddle    (BBC News [Peston’s Picks], Mon 20 Aug)

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2007/09/mervyns_muddle.html

 

Comment:    Robert Preston, the BBC Business editor, explains why bank lending/mortgage rates could go up by 1% or so in the UK, even although base interest rates may remain the same.

 

Article:    … But here’s the funny thing. The current base rate, which is supposed to be the reference point for the interest rates that affect all of us, is 5.75 per cent. But the benchmark commercial rate for lending between banks, three-month sterling LIBOR, is 6.74 per cent.

 

... So there is quite a risk that mortgage rates will rise and what businesses pay for finance will increase too.

 

But to state the bloomin’ obvious, the system is not supposed to work that way…

 

 

2d/        Credit crunch gallery of guilt      (The independent, Wed 05 Sep)

 

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/analysis_and_features/article2927120.ece

 

Comment:    A useful summary of what might be described as the rogues’ gallery of the subprime crisis. Lists names, who they are and their involvement.

 

Article:    The causes of the present credit crisis are many and varied. From the Fed's policy of cheap money to the bonus-driven fee structure of the City and Wall Street, there are plenty of culprits in the debt market meltdown.Sean Farrell, Sean O'Grady and Stephen Foley identify some of the major dramatis personae…

 

[List includes:

 

Central bank - Alan Greenspan, chairman of the US Federal Reserve, 1987 to 2006

Politicians - George Bush, US President

Big UK banks - Bob Diamond, president of Barclays

Hedge funds - Jim Simons, founder, Renaissance Technologies

Regulators - Christopher Cox, chairman, Securities & Exchange Commission

Debt investors - Herbert Suess, former CEO of Saschen LB

Credit rating agencies - Kathleen Corbet, president of Standard & Poor's

Private equity - Henry Kravis, founder of Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts

Wall Street - James Cayne, chief executive, Bear Stearns

Mortgage lenders - Angelo Mozilo, chief executive, Countrywide Financial]

 

**********************************************************************************************************

 

3/         Gazprom May Buy Sakhalin-1 Gas for Russian Far East (Update2)        (Bloomberg, Tue 04 Sep)

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601207&sid=a5VfpWfqFJrw&refer=energy

 

Comment:    It seems that when Gazprom takes on foreign oil and gas companies in Russia, Shell and Sakhalin-2, TNK-BP and Kovykta for example, they win. Now the Gazprom aim is to get the ExxonMobil-lead Sakhalin-1 project to keep the natural gas in Russia, not export it which would presumably be more profitable for ExxonMobil et al.

 

Article:    OAO Gazprom, Russia's state-run natural-gas exporter, may buy gas from the Sakhalin-1 project to sell domestically, said Victor Timoshilov, eastern projects coordinator for the company.

 

Russian government officials told Exxon Mobil Corp. in August not to plan on exporting natural gas from the $17 billion Sakhalin-1 venture it operates and instead to work more closely with Gazprom to ensure domestic demand for the fuel is met.

 

``Gazprom can be instrumental to help that these priorities are met,'' Timoshilov said at the Sakhalin Oil and Gas Conference in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk. ``We can purchase the fuel and then sell it throughout the Russian Far East.''

 

Sakhalin-1 has escaped much of the pressure that Royal Dutch Shell's Sakhalin-2 oil and gas project faced from Russian environmental inspectors last year. Shell and its partners sold Gazprom a 50 percent stake plus one share for $7.45 billion in April.

 

Exxon is ``looking at all options'' for the sale of its natural gas, said James Taylor, executive vice president for Exxon Neftegaz Ltd., the subsidiary that operates Sakhalin-1, at the conference.

 

`Top Priority'

 

Sakhalin-1 will be the only source to supply gas to Russia's eastern regions until ``at least'' 2015, Gazprom said in an e- mailed statement today. Supplying domestic customers is a ``top priority'' of the government's plan approved in June to develop gas production and transportation in the Far East and eastern Siberia, the company said.

 

The Sakhalin-2 venture, which plans to start producing Russia's first liquefied natural gas next year, has contracts to sell almost all of its output to utilities in Japan and Korea.

 

Irving, Texas-based Exxon owns 30 percent Sakhalin-1, which began pumping oil in 2005 to reach production of 250,000 barrels a day in February. SODECO of Japan also owns 30 percent and OAO Rosneft and India's Oil & Natural Gas Corp. each own 20 percent.

 

The development is comprised of the Chayvo, Odoptu and Arkutun Dagi fields, which lie under seas choked with ice for half the year. The fields are estimated to hold up to 2.3 billion barrels of oil and 485 billion cubic meters of natural gas.

 

Exxon signed a production sharing agreement with the Russian government for Sakhalin-1 in 1996, which allows it to export natural gas outside of Gazprom's monopoly.

 

**********************************************************************************************************

 

4a/        Algeria Shuns Repsol And Gas Natural           (Forbes, Tue 04 Sep)

 

http://www.forbes.com/markets/2007/09/04/repsol-algeria-sonetrach-markets-equity-cx_vr_0904markets05.html

 

Comment:    Whereas some oil companies have had to put up with national governments demanding more control/ownership of projects, or obtaining a larger percentage of the profits, Repsol of Spain have lost their Algerian LNG project completely.

 

Article:    The story of a state-owned energy company throwing its Western partners out of a multi-billion dollar gas field may have a familiar ring to it, but this time it's happening not in Russia, but Algeria. The state-owned Algerian oil company Sonatrach announced late Monday that it would be removing Spanish energy firms Repsol and Gas Natural from a 5 billion euro ($6.8 billion) natural gas project at the country's Gassi Touil plant. Repsol held a 48.0% stake in the project, while Gas Natural owned 32.0%, and Sonatrach the remaining share.

 

The decision was not unexpected and follows months of protracted negotiations between the Spanish and Algerian governments.

 

... Sonantrach has accused its two Spanish partners of causing delays and cost overruns to the construction of the gas terminal which was meant to start shipping liquefied natural gas in 2009.

 

Repsol said it would be appealing Algeria's decision to "illegally appropriate" the project through international arbitration. The companies have argued that the project has been held back by an excessively tight budget and that they have been hit by cost inflation in the oil and gas sector, including in the cost of building materials for the rigs.

 

Financially, the loss of the contract, which began in 2004, isn't a major blow to the companies, as the project is in its early stages. They have so far spent between 400 million euros ($543.7 million ) and 500 million euros ($679.6 million), a relatively small amount for Repsol and Gas Natural, which have market capitalizations of 32.3 billion euros ($43.9 billion) and 17.3 billion euros ($23.5 billion) respectively.

 

The loss of the project is far more concerning strategically. Both Repsol and Gas Natural have been hoping to top up their reserves and had been counting on the Gassi Touil project for future earnings.

 

... The development is also seen as a sign of where the Algerian energy sector is heading. The country boasts huge reserves that have had many a foreign energy company salivating. However the government recently passed a law requiring Sonatrach to have at least a 50% stake in all new ventures in the sector.

 

 

4b/        Caspian lessons for oil giants [Kashagan update]   (onet.pl [Financial Times], Tue 04 Sep)

 

http://gielda.onet.pl/14,1435509,,3255,ft.html

 

Comment:    An excellent summary of the Kashagan oil field saga offshore Kazakhstan, sourced from the Financial Times (which is pay-to-view). The FT suggests that Kazakhstan originally got a raw deal from the consortium developing Kashagan, back in the 1990s. But from the Kazakh point of view, things have gone from bad to worse. Costs of the project have doubled from about $10B to $19B (so far), and the original contract states the project costs to be paid off first before the Kazakhs get any money. Deja vu with Sakhalin 2. The FT also suggests the main problems lie with the project leader, Eni. See below for details. Bottom line – Kashagan is not going to be a very profitable project for the western oil companies involved (so the article states), and Kashagan will be adding nothing to world oil production prior to 2010.

 

Not related to this article at all, and no connection is implied, Leonardo Maugeri, senior vice president of strategies and development at Eni SpA, just happens to be one of the most outspoken Peak Oil critics. See Newsweek’s That Falling Feeling (Oct 2006) for more info: “But a bit farther out, between roughly 2010 and 2012, there is a good chance that supply trends will overtake demand, raising spare production capacity to a range between 7 to 10 percent of demand.” Maugeri quotes the IEA to support his claim, but it is now the IEA that is leading the increasing number of forecasters who think we will have an oil supply crunch 2010-2012…

 

Article:    When a delegation of executives from five of the world’s biggest oil companies led by Italy’s Eni went to Kazakhstan last week to seek to resolve a dispute at the giant Kashagan oilfield, they were met with news that the government had halted work on the development on environmental grounds and had launched a criminal inquiry into alleged tax evasion on equipment imports.

 

... The dispute erupted after Eni presented the central Asian country with a revised development plan for the Caspian Sea field – delaying the start of production by two years until late 2010 and doubling to $19bn (L9.4bn, €14bn) the cost of the first, 300,000-barrel-a-day stage of the project. Separately, Kazakhstan revealed that estimates for the full cost of the 40-year project had climbed from an earlier $57bn to reach $136bn – which could make Kashagan the most expensive industrial endeavour undertaken anywhere.

 

The revised plan will deprive Kazakhstan of substantial revenues and hold back its aim to treble oil production and enter the ranks of the world’s top 10 oil exporters. The dispute, coming at a time of growing resource nationalism worldwide, may provide Kazakhstan with a pretext to exert greater control over Kashagan, one of the few untapped fields in the world capable of producing 1.5m b/d.

 

... Analysts say Eni, which has staked its future growth on Kashagan, carries the blame for promising more than it could deliver when it won the coveted operatorship of the field in 2001. Richard Gordon, president of Gordon Energy Solutions, an oil extraction consultancy, says: “Eni was excessively exuberant about costs and production schedules early on and created expectations that are coming back to bite it very hard.”

 

Other consortium members including ExxonMobil, Conoco-Phillips, Royal Dutch Shell, Total and Japan’s Inpex will also suffer as what Mr Gordon calls the “rolling thunder of cost inflation echoing high oil prices” forces up the cost of Kashagan, as at mega-oil projects elsewhere. “Kashagan is not going to yield the kind of stellar returns that that oil majors usually require,” he says. But the size of Kashagan’s reserves would ensure the companies “stay with the programme” despite the difficulties.

 

Kashagan, described by one geologist as “mad, bad and dangerous to know”, is one of the most difficult oil projects ever tackled. Its oil, laced with poisonous hydrogen sulphide, lies deep beneath the seabed under huge pressure, presenting the risk of explosion. The waters are shallow and difficult to navigate, particularly during winter ice.

 

... Terms at the field will almost certainly change. Kazakhstan, like Russia, is disenchanted with production-sharing contracts that allow investors to defer royalty payments until after the groups involved recover their costs – a model that is fiscally unattractive for host governments at a time when cost inflation is high.

 

... Karim Massimov, prime minister, who earlier pledged that Kazakhstan would respect all existing oil deals, interpreted the delay at Kashagan as a change to the contract itself, entitling Kazakhstan to renegotiate terms.

 

The perception that western groups squeezed the government too hard during negotiations in the 1990s, when the former Soviet republic was desperate for investment, underlies the dispute and may threaten other projects. Oraz Jandosov, co-leader of the opposition All National Social Democratic party, says contracts at the huge Tengiz and Karachaganak fields are more biased in favour of foreign investors than Kashagan, which “should not be the first to be singled out for contract change”.

 

Kazakhstan is being courted by others keen on Caspian acreage, particularly foreign state oil companies, driven by political as well as commercial concerns. China, having last month agreed to help Kazakh­stan build an oil export pipeline linking the Caspian with China, is expected to step up its search for opportunities.

 

 

4c/        Kashagan Consortium Talks of Demobilizing           (Energy Intelligence [International Oil Daily], Wed 05 Sep)

 

No link, newsletter.

 

Article:   Agip KCO, the beleaguered Eni-led consortium developing the troubled Kashagan oil field in Kazakhstan, said Tuesday that it might have to demobilize parts of the project, which would have a huge impact on the local economy, suppliers and employees.

 

**********************************************************************************************************

 

5/         Iran: An oil industry that lost its head   (Asia Times, Tue 04 Sep)

 

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/II05Ak03.html

 

Comment:    The article describes the background to the recent sacking of the Iranian oil minister Seyed Kazem Vaziri Hamaneh. It also gives the impression that the Iranian President, Mahmud Ahmadinejad, wants his appointees controlling the oil ministry (Hamaneh apparently refused to do this, one of the reasons he was sacked). Given Ahmadinejad’s previous candidates for posts, the impression is given that they are / will be rather inappropriate, lacking skills, qualifications and experience, and thus hardly likely to help speed up all the international oil and gas deals (imports/exports/field developments/LNG projects/pipelines) currently on the table. There are quite a few.

 

Article:    Iran's key oil industry could plunge into crisis, oil experts have warned, if President Mahmud Ahmadinejad does not urgently appoint a replacement for Seyed Kazem Vaziri Hamaneh, who was sacked as oil minister two weeks ago in a major cabinet reshuffle.

 

... Hamaneh and Alireza Tahmasbi, minister of industries and mines, were dismissed on August 12. The two ministers were followed on their way out of the cabinet by Mohammad Sheibani, governor of the Central Bank of Iran (CBI). The CBI governor had several times warned about careless expenditures of oil revenues and expressed his opposition to reductions in interest rates.

 

... "President Ahmadinejad's inability to solve economic problems had been predicted by experts early on ... the effects of his failure are now apparent in spite of the Parliament's relatively high coordination with him after two years of carrying out his visions in the economy," the Kargozaran reformist daily, which is close to former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, said in an editorial that followed the sackings.

 

By sacking the ministers in question, "the president can relate certain economic failures of the government to the inefficiency of the sacked ministers ... The two ministers had never taken any steps against the policies of the government and the president. Altering policies may be a more resourceful step [by the president] than replacing individuals," the editorial said.

 

The Majlis (parliament) gave Hamaneh its vote of confidence as oil minister in December 2005 after the generally sympathetic and supportive hardline legislative body refused to vote for the other two candidates proposed for the post by Ahmadinejad, and another candidate, a close associate and adviser of the president, withdrew just a day prior to the Majlis vote, fearing rejection.

 

... "Ahmadinejad needs someone from outside the ministry who has no reservations towards realizing the president's wish to purge the ministry of an allegedly corrupt group of executives connected with his political opponents," he said. "The group the president wants out consists mainly of technocrats with affiliations or sympathetic to Kargozaran Party and Rafsanjani."

 

... Majlis member Hasan Moradi, who is a member of its Energy Committee, told Aftab News Agency that the dismissal of the oil minister had nothing to do with a controversial deal signed recently to sell gas to India and Pakistan. Critics, including former deputy oil minister Nejad Hosseinian, considered the deal very detrimental to Iranian interests. Eighty-one Majlis members have signed a motion requiring the government to obtain parliament's approval on gas deals, including the deal already made with India and Pakistan.

 

The deputy chairman of the Energy Committee, Hossein Afarideh, told Aftab that the minister had refused to appoint two people from outside the Oil Ministry whom the president wanted as a ministry deputy and as managing director of one of the ministry's affiliated companies. The minister had insisted that the individuals lacked the required qualifications for the positions.

 

... He added that there was speculation Hamaneh was also sacked because he refused to sell oil and oil products at reduced prices to countries Ahmadinejad is trying to court as allies...

 

**********************************************************************************************************

 

6/         Argentinean natural gas cuts continue to curtail Chilean methanol production          (Petroleum World [Platts], Tue 04 Sep)

 

http://www.petroleumworld.com/story07090408.htm

 

Comment:    A detailed discussion of the effects of natural gas shortages in Argentina and Chile. It is worth reading because if the UK were to suffer a serious natural gas shortage in winter, as it nearly did winter of 2005-6, then this article probably sums up pretty well what might happen. Gas supplies will get cut off to industrial users.

 

Article:    ... Argentine gas has been in short supply since 2004 as demand has risen faster than production and the replacement of reserves. During the winter months (late May to mid-August), the country ran a deficit of 2,000 MW, or 10% of peak demand, and 40 million cu m/d, or 30% of average demand, on cold days.

 

The effect that the shortage has had on petrochemical production in Argentina and neighboring countries has been widespread. One of the most visible examples was Methanex and its production issues at its Cabo Negro facility in Chile.

 

In late April, Methanex was forced to shut one of its four plants in southern Chile due to limited feedstock supplies that resulted from constrained natural gas shipments out of Argentina.

 

... By the second week of June, the gas crunch worsened. Methanex was operating only one of its four plants at Cabo Negro. At the time, the company anticipated improved natural gas supplies within a week and sought to have a total of three plants online. However the plan did not come to fruition.

 

Production from the Chilean operations from April 1, 2007 to June 10, 2007 was 520,000 tons compared to production capacity of 740,000 tons, or roughly 70% of the total capacity.

 

As of August 22, Methanex was heard to be producing at only 30% capacity, sources said. By time of press, the three units at Cabo Negro remained down.

 

... As expected, the gas shortages have had an effect on [Argentinean] domestic production as well. According to the Argentinean government statistics office Indec, overall chemical production fell 20.2% from June to July of this year.

 

... The country's total chemical production for the month of July dropped by 38.5% when compared to the same period in 2006.

 

... Indec said that the production of polymers and synthetic rubber dropped 38.3% in July from a year earlier. Compared with June, production was down 26.1% in July. Output of urea and other chemicals for fertilizers also plummeted 25.2% in July compared to a year earlier.

 

... As the crisis wore on into August, Argentina President Nestor Kirchner called on natural gas producers in Bolivia to step up exploration and production to supply a planned pipeline that would increase deliveries to Argentina.

 

Although the gas crisis was reportedly easing with warmer temperatures, the future outlook was tight gas supply/winter shortages for the next few years as production has not increasing and reserves were falling. In response, Argentina planned to import gas to compensate for the shortfall.

 

**********************************************************************************************************

 

7/         Policy on natural gas streamlined         (China View [Shanghai Daily], Tue 04 Sep)

 

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-09/04/content_6661083.htm

 

Comment:    China takes action to ease its shortage of natural gas supplies. Residential customers good, petrochemical plants and gas-fired power stations bad.

 

Article:    China has enacted a new industry policy on natural gas use to address the supply shortage and optimize usage, the nation's planning agency said yesterday.

 

The guideline says residential gas use is a top priority, while usage in petrochemical plants is discouraged, the National Development and Reform Commission said on its Website.

 

The policy, described by the NDRC as of "strategic importance," became effective on Aug. 30 after approval by the State Council.

 

New methanol projects that use gas as a base will be barred. Methanol, which can also be derived from coal or crude oil, is an industrial chemical and a fuel that can be mixed with gasoline and diesel to cut pollution.

 

The use of natural gas in other petrochemical projects and power-generation plants will also be limited or outlawed. For example, gas-fired power plants will be banned in certain coal-rich regions.

 

The guideline said urban residential gas use is the most favored option.

 

... Existing gas-based petrochemical projects, especially fertilizers, will remain in operation. Those approved and under-construction projects, which have signed long-term gas-purchase contracts, also won't be affected, the NDRC said.

 

China wants cleaner-burning natural gas to account for 5.3 percent of total primary energy consumption by 2010, up from 2.8 percent in 2005. But supply may not catch up with the strong demand, typically in booming coastal regions.

 

Several major gas-transport projects have lately been announced or launched. Sinopec Corp on Friday started building a 1,702-kilometer pipeline to transmit gas from the Puguang field in Sichuan Province to Shanghai. China National Petroleum Corp announced early last week the route for a mega cross-country gas pipeline, at more than 7,000 kilometers long, to transport Turkmenistan gas via far northwestern Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region to Shanghai in the east and Guangzhou in the south.

 

**********************************************************************************************************