Canadian Natural Gas

[Leondros]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

We've been terrible about shooting ourselves in the foot with LNG but the US does have one major advantage over Canada when it comes to exporting to Europe. Their facilities are on the Gulf Coast and relatively close to the product. We would need to build a pipeline across the country and export facilities on the East Coast or Gulf of St Lawrence which would take major investment. (and political capital)

Our major advantage was the Asian market access which would have alleviated demand on the gulf to go directly to Europe.

[Leondros]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

No - but doesn't it follow the same logic would apply to LNG and we'd be selling whatever we produced and wouldn't just gluts of it ready to go to send to Germany. Whatever we sent to Germany would come from something we had previously shipped to China or whoever was buying it before.

That just shows your fundamental lack of understanding of the industry in general and the egress issues companies in Canada are facing. If those facilities were around companies would be willing to produce natural gas at a higher rate and help alleviate the situation. As it stands, egress restricts us being able to balance of the global natural gas market.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Leondros

That just shows your fundamental lack of understanding of the industry in general and the egress issues companies in Canada are facing. If those facilities were around companies would be willing to produce natural gas at a higher rate and help alleviate the situation. As it stands, egress restricts us being able to balance of the global natural gas market.

I'm not saying anything about that issue. I'm sure that is a problem.

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by GGG

Was it regulatory challenges that killed the other two LNG plants or Investment decisions. I don’t remember anymore

Which plants? Energy Saguenay? None of the above. That one was approved by the Feds, but then nixed by Legault.

But the government also set out three criteria for approving the natural gas facility: it had to help with the transition toward greener forms of energy, lower greenhouse gas emissions and have sufficient public support.

Charette said an analysis by his ministry determined the Énergie Saguenay project couldn't meet the first two criteria. Ministry officials didn't bother analyzing the third.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montr...enay-1.6111248

10 million tonnes per year of LNG egress.

Oh well.

[Azure]

I mean, has anything ever kicked the environmental movement in the ass as much as what has happened the last few months in Europe?

We are literally back to coal. Not solar, not wind, not nuclear, not gas, but coal.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Leondros

Our major advantage was the Asian market access which would have alleviated demand on the gulf to go directly to Europe.

Asia, for sure is advantageous for Canada. My comment was in the context of exporting to Europe where we are at a disadvantage to the US.

[Leondros]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Asia, for sure is advantageous for Canada. My comment was in the context of exporting to Europe where we are at a disadvantage to the US.

Once you get to tide water you are in a global market. It truly is the exact same price less transportation costs. If you are a trader you are looking at all markets, east coast, west coast, Australia, etc. to fulfil your needs. If Canada came into the fold this effectively just increases supply in which gets traded and puts a downward price on all global natural gas. Its a win-win for the market and Canadian producers.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Asia, for sure is advantageous for Canada. My comment was in the context of exporting to Europe where we are at a disadvantage to the US.

Canadian west coast LNG would just displace cargoes that are currently going to Asia from either the middle east or the US Gulf Coast, and those cargoes would go to Europe instead.