Oil & Natural Gas: News & Discussion - VI

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 27 Sep 2004 04:33

SSRidhar: What, specifically, do you recommend?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36345
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 01 Oct 2004 01:43

http://www.hindu.com/2004/10/01/stories ... 790500.htm

Biofuel test on bus engine satisfactory

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4840
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Neshant » 01 Oct 2004 14:19

With oil hitting $50 a barrel, biofuel could be economically viable.

India being one of the few countries which is largely agrarian should consider running a pilot project. It would also cut pollution in the cities.

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Postby Suppiah » 01 Oct 2004 15:41

I am not sure why everyone should run tests on bio-fuel and waste time. Some Central govt. agency should test the buses/trucks (after all we only have two makers that cover 99% of such vehicles) and mandate usage

Sohum
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 02 Jul 2003 11:31

Postby Sohum » 01 Oct 2004 17:31

India Is Ready to Discuss Gas Pipeline
09.30.2004, 12:35 PM

http://www.forbes.com/work/feeds/ap/200 ... 68446.html
The Indian government is willing to discuss a US$3 billion (euro 2.4 billion) gas pipeline project from Iran through Pakistan as long as Islamabad considers other trade deals, an Indian energy expert said Thursday.

"Given the fact that oil has hit US$50 a barrel, there is somewhat greater urgency to explore this possibility," R.K. Pachauri, director-general of the privately run Energy and Resources Institute, told reporters after meeting India's Petroleum Minister Mani Shankar Aiyer.

Iran has been pursuing the pipeline proposal with India and Pakistan since 1996, but tensions between the two South Asian nations over the Himalayan region of Kashmir have blocked progress.

The previous Indian government of Atal Bihari Vajpayee even considered laying the pipeline under the sea to avoid Pakistani territory. However, that plan would cost three times more.

India's new government, which took office in May, appears to have softened its stance on the pipeline proposal.

"There has been a shift on this side. Now I think India is willing to talk about the pipeline as long as other trading opportunities are also considered," Pachauri said.

Iran says the proposed 2,600-kilometer (1,600-mile) pipeline would save India about US$300 million (euro 241 million) a year in energy costs.

Pakistan also would have access to the gas, and earn an estimated US$600 million (euro 483 million) a year in transit fees.

Pachauri, who is leaving for Islamabad on Friday to attend a meeting of South Asian experts, said he would discuss the matter with Pakistani officials.

India, he said, could also use the imported gas to produce electricity and export part of it to Pakistan.

"India also was keen to sell diesel to Pakistan," he said.

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Pakistan President Gen. Pervez Musharraf discussed the possibility of the gas pipeline during their first meeting in New York last week.

Bangladesh has so far refused to export gas to India despite its huge natural gas reserves, and Myanmar remains a potential supplier, Pachauri said.

"There is a possibility of tapping the gas reserves in Myanmar, which I hope the government will pursue seriously. But the most attractive option appears to be the southern gas fields in Iran," he said.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3229
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 02 Oct 2004 07:36

Sohum Desai wrote:India Is Ready to Discuss Gas Pipeline
09.30.2004, 12:35 PM

Iran says the proposed 2,600-kilometer (1,600-mile) pipeline would save India about US$300 million (euro 241 million) a year in energy costs.

Pakistan also would have access to the gas, and earn an estimated US$600 million (euro 483 million) a year in transit fees.



India saves $300m a year, whereas Pakistan makes $600m a year.

I say it is a bad bargain. An extra $300m a year in energy costs is a small price to pay IMHO, to keep our nuts out of a Paki vise.

Build the LNG import capacity, and go for bulk LNG imports. Strategically that seems to me the safest option.

Just my two cents.

And why is R.K. Pachauri plugging the pipeline so hard? Does being the TERI top honcho make him an expert on Pakis?

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Postby arun » 02 Oct 2004 13:22

Sohum Desai wrote:India Is Ready to Discuss Gas Pipeline
09.30.2004, 12:35 PM

http://www.forbes.com/work/feeds/ap/200 ... 68446.html
Pakistan also would have access to the gas, and earn an estimated US$600 million (euro 483 million) a year in transit fees.



Fancy figures such as this the USD 600 Million per year figure for transit fees keep getting bandied about. I always wonder about their provenance.

Take the transit fees that Russia pays to Belarus for third country sales per this Jamestown Foundation, June 2004, article.

Where the pipeline is owned by Russia, the transit fee payable to Belarus is US 46 cents per 1000 Cu.m per 100 Km of pipeline.

Where the pipeline is owned by Belarus, the transit figure payable to Belarus is higher at US 75 cents per 1000 Cu.m per 100 Km of pipeline.

BHP-Billitonwho prepared the feasibility study for the online gas pipeline indicates that the pipeline length traversing Pakistan is 760 Km and throughput 1.5-3 BCFD.

Applying the Belarus-Russia transit fee rates :

At US 46 cents and 1.5 BCFD, transit fee payable per year USD 54.22 M.
At US 46 cents and 1.5 BCFD, transit fee payable per year USD 108.44 M.
At US 75 cents and 3.0 BCFD, transit fee payable per year USD 88.40 M.
At US 75 cents and 3.0 BCFD, transit fee payable per year USD 176.81 M.

The above figures are a long way away from USD 600 Million per year.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7022
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby JE Menon » 02 Oct 2004 16:40

>>And why is R.K. Pachauri plugging the pipeline so hard?

He claims to have conceived the scheme, together with Dr. Ali Shams Ardekani of Iran back in the late 1980s (1988, IIRC). Ardekani is now a Dy Foreign Minister in Iran. In those days (IIRC again) he was in charge of Qeshm Island or something - anyways, related to the oil and gas industry.

I am not sure whether he actually conceived it, but have no reason to doubt his claim. First I heard of it was in 1989 or 1990, when I happened to be on a conference panel when this subject was raised in a non-official public fora (for the first time, I think). A gentleman named Dr. Narsi Ghorban (last I heard, a high ranking official in Iran's oil industry) was speaking very favourably.

A very young and slightly nervous jingo (most particpants were at least twice my age), I had to intervene with a comment that it would not be feasible given the relations between India and Pak. At the time, the notion was that the pipeline would bring peace. As I recall Pachauri was not at the conference, but Ardekani was.

As I understand, Pachauri is not your typical candle-kisser nor the Pramoron Butwhy type. Sample a comment from an article written by him in Jan. 21, 2003, in the Indian Express:

"...to create a sense of reassurance, Pakistan needs to urgently change its rhetoric.

General Musharraf in a speech delivered on June 23, 2000 aired an inflated view of Pakistan’s strategic advantage due to its geographical position. He said, ‘‘Iran wants to send gas to India, it has to go through Pakistan... God has given us this strategic location, the importance of which is emerging fully now’’.

In the same speech, he referred to an earlier interview where he had stated: ‘‘We are a responsible country and when we reach an economic arrangement, we will abide by it’’.

In the same breath, when pressed on India’s fear that Pakistan would tamper with supply he said contemptuously ... ‘‘Well, then you can ask Indians to take out the gas by air. That is the only way left’’.

Over two years ago, the Tata Energy Research Institute launched a joint project with a Pakistani institute for drawing up the contractual and financing arrangements for an overland pipeline, which would provide adequate security to India.

When I mentioned this fact to Gen Musharraf during his visit to India in September 2000, he said he supported such a study and the establishment of the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline. However, none of his statements subsequently has deviated from the conceited view of his June 2000 speech quoted above.

If Pakistan is serious about the pipeline option and wants the economic benefits flowing from it, then the Pakistan leadership must signal a change in posture. "

As I said, not your typical candle-shover. Probably his friendship with Ardekani helped give momentum to the project. Not surprising. Dr. Ardekani is a good and very humane sort of chap with a great nationalistic feel for his own country. Very far from the religious nutcase most people would associate with Iran, in their ignorance.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3229
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 03 Oct 2004 07:37

JEM,

Thanks for the info that puts Pachauri's advocacy of the pipeline in context.

However, cross-posting from Seema Mustafa's latest piece that I posted earlier today in the "Pakistan News & Discussions" thread,

Peace Pipeline back in focus -- by Seema Mustafa

The TERI assessment suggests that the difference between the gas reaching India through the pipeline, once the government pays the $600 million transit fee to Pakistan, will equal the price of the liquefied gas from Iran, but that the gains will be in the vastly improved political relations as a result of this important CBM, which will be reflected in increased trade.


Given that, I don't think there is that much of an economic benefit in importing gas thru the Pak pipeline as opposed to importing it as LNG in LNG tankers. And LNG technology is improving fast which will narrow the difference further. To me, importing gas thru Pak pipeloine is sheer lunacy.

Although Pachauri may not be a candle-kisser type, but he reminds me of the brilliant British Professor in the movie "Jurassic Park" who was so enamored of his own creation (the Jurassic Park) that he failed to recognize the dangers his creation posed.

The TSP pipeline, IMHO, will be the biggest blunder, among a long series of strategic blunders committed by the leaders of independent India.

Just my two cents.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4840
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Neshant » 03 Oct 2004 12:44

Many MNCs continue to avoid investing in Pak as there is no legitimate (read elected) govt. They don't know if an elected govt would honor agreements made with an unelected guy like musharaff. The guy hangs onto his own seat thru deceit and manipulation of the political and justice system.

If MNCs are themselves afraid of putting their monies in pakistan, there is no way GOI would blow billions on building such a line.

If at all such a pipeline emerges in pakistan it should be under a democratic regime. I personally think its a ploy just to see if they are capable of ending their addiction to spreading terrorism. That is being held out as a 'reward' if they do.

Another reason might be to use the mythical 'pipeline' to negotiate lower prices of LNG imports from countries other than Eyeran.

Finally talking about the pipeline might motivate the bidis to sell their gas (though i doubt it).

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7022
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby JE Menon » 03 Oct 2004 13:44

>>Although Pachauri may not be a candle-kisser type, but he reminds me of the brilliant British Professor in the movie "Jurassic Park" who was so enamored of his own creation (the Jurassic Park) that he failed to recognize the dangers his creation posed.

Yeah, that seems about right. Although right now I think it is Mani Shankar Aiyar who is more keen than anybody else - probably including the Paks, who know that sooner or later they are going to have to answer to Amritraj on the pipeline issue. The gas, after all, is coming from Iran.

What drives MSA? Publicity? A place in history? Who knows, unless, of course, he is playing to the gallery as well. Which is eminently possible, given his "I know and understand all the problems of the world and I can solve it before god does" attitude. Or it could be the Chankiyan expedient of setting a fire under the Bangladeshi butts.

I have no doubt that the pipeline will be a disaster - and should not be attempted until relations between India and Pakistan become like that between the US and Mexico.

I am also pretty sure that it will not materialise, so long as there are elections in India and so long as the above environment does not exist.

I will not be surprised, however, if the discussions get to a pretty advanced stage. I will be very surprised though, if any of the money for the project is pledged by India.

In the best case scenario, you might see the first phase of the project - i.e. to Karachi and Multan come to fruition. Even that I doubt.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Postby arun » 03 Oct 2004 16:54

MEA Press Briefing Oct 1 :

Question: On Bangladesh, there are reports that the Indian Petroleum Minister was prevented from going there. Does that mean that India is going back on the Myanmar pipeline project?
Answer: Let me say that as far as this issue of pipelines is concerned, in the context of continually rising international petroleum prices and growing demand in India a number of proposals have been mooted. Proposals for export of gas from Bangladesh and a pipeline to export gas from Myanmar to India are under discussion in the relevant ministries and department of Government of India. These are being considered taking into account all the aspects pertaining to these proposals.

Question: Was the Minister asked not to go?
Answer: It is not usual either for me to know or to divulge all the inter-ministerial correspondence that takes place. I am giving you the substantive kernel of the matter which is that there are several proposals which are being mooted. These include the ones about the pipeline from Myanmar to India. These are being considered and are under discussion keeping in view all aspects of the proposals.

Question: The Bangladesh Foreign Minister when he was here was quoted as saying that the Myanmar pipeline would be cleared after his meeting with the Petroleum Minister. Has Bangladesh gone back on that?
Answer: I do not want to guess on what Bangladesh’s present position is or could be. The fact is that this is a proposal which is very much under discussion – one of the several proposals under discussion and this is being considered in the Ministries and the Departments. Naturally, it will be considered in consultation with the other governments involved, keeping in view all the other aspects like economic, technical and so on.


Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3229
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 04 Oct 2004 00:00

JE Menon wrote:What drives MSA? Publicity? A place in history? Who knows, unless, of course, he is playing to the gallery as well. Which is eminently possible, given his "I know and understand all the problems of the world and I can solve it before god does" attitude. Or it could be the Chankiyan expedient of setting a fire under the Bangladeshi butts.


If Mani Aiyar has any Chankiyan-ness in him, he is capable of deploying it only in the cause(s) of:

1) Serve the Nehru-Gandhi family
2) Raise his own profile in the Cong ranks among others who serve the Nehru-Gandhi family, and
3) Diss the BJP

I don't think that Mani Aiyar is capable of any Chankiyan-ness vis-a-vis India's enemies, even though he is an ex-IFS man.

I have no doubt that the pipeline will be a disaster - and should not be attempted until relations between India and Pakistan become like that between the US and Mexico.


That can happen only after the Paki army is disbanded/ turned into a paramilitary force, so that Pakistan ceases to be a military threat to India.

I will not be surprised, however, if the discussions get to a pretty advanced stage. I will be very surprised though, if any of the money for the project is pledged by India.


IMHO it doesn't matter if India does not invest any money in the pipeline. Once it comes into operation, it will become an instrument of blackmail. And the Pakis are champions at blackmail and breaking agreeements. The foreign investors will be told off by the Pakis, and they will learn to live with it. But the economic disruption caused in Northwest India will put India's nuts in a vise.

Given all this, I have thought up some new descriptors for the TSP pipeline proposal:

1. "Pipeline for peace - or nutcracker for India's nuts?"
2. "Pipeline for peace - or the hangman's noose?"
3. "Pipeline for peace - or "Phaansi ka Phanda"?"

Can you guys think of any more? Maybe we should hold a BR contest, and then start a new thread on the Strategy Forum with the winning title. :wink:

Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Postby Alok_N » 04 Oct 2004 01:54

title for thread:

"Smoking the Peace Pipe(line)"

with some of the finest afghani charas :)
Last edited by Alok_N on 04 Oct 2004 05:37, edited 1 time in total.

Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Postby Rye » 04 Oct 2004 02:38

Luckily for us there are no terrorists in the Iran-India pipeline route via pakistan.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04277/388930.stm

Terrorists pick oil operations as easy targets

Sunday, October 03, 2004
By Justin Blum, The Washington Post

Terrorists and insurgents are stepping up attacks on oil and gas operations overseas in an effort to disrupt jittery energy markets, destabilize governments and scare off foreign workers, analysts say.

The attacks have been most intense in Iraq but also have occurred in recent months in Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Russia and Nigeria. In many cases, the attacks are orchestrated by terrorists or rebels, often Islamic extremists, seeking to cause economic disruption or to steal oil to finance their operations, analysts say. Their targets are sometimes pipelines, tankers and workers in areas with varying levels of security.

"You have motive and opportunity, so you're seeing more of this," said Anne Korin, director of policy and strategic planning for the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, a Maryland-based group that tracks attacks on oil targets. "It's a very effective strategy on their part. ... Oil is really a very target-rich area."

Korin said terrorists find it easier to go after energy, which she called "our soft underbelly," because the targets often are convenient and attacks have a high impact. Potential targets can be found near terrorists' home bases and in areas with less security than in the United States.

Al-Qaida has repeatedly noted the appeal of oil targets, intelligence analysts say. Documents from the terrorist organization, obtained and translated earlier this year by IntelCenter, a Virginia company that provides risk assessment and terrorism information to government and businesses, calls for "hitting wells and pipelines that will scare foreign companies from working there and stealing Muslim treasures."

Those documents also highlighted as a "practical example" a 2002 suicide bombing attack on a French-chartered oil tanker off the Yemeni coast, killing a crew member and spilling 90,000 barrels of oil into the Gulf of Aden. Last month, several militants were convicted in Yemen for their roles in the tanker attack.

The attacks come as the world's oil production is stretched close to its limit. Analysts view the persistence of the attacks as a factor that adds pressure on oil prices. High prices have been cited by the Federal Reserve Board as contributing to slow U.S. economic growth.

No complete statistics exist on the number of oil and gas targets hit worldwide. In Iraq, the attacks have steadily increased this year from two in January to 18 in September, as of last week, according to the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security in Washington, D.C. In a recent high-profile incident, gunmen killed a top Iraqi oil official in Mosul and attacked a pipeline in the south and a well near Baghdad. The Iraq attacks have caused huge disruptions in the country's oil production and have resulted in millions in losses to the government.

Outside Iraq, armed men stormed a gas tanker anchored in Indonesia in July. The same month, attackers blew up oil and gas pipelines in India. Oil and gas pipelines were blown up in Russia in June and August.

"Oil is just very much in the cross hairs around the world," said John Kilduff, senior vice president for energy risk management at Fimat USA in New York, a brokerage unit of Societe Generale. "There's no country, there's no production that can come to the rescue of any kind of terrorist attack."

Kilduff said oil markets are most concerned about attacks in Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil exporter. Those fears have heightened since May when a group associated with al-Qaida claimed responsibility for an attack on foreign oil workers that left 22 dead in the Persian Gulf city of Khobar. In the first day of trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange after the attack, U.S. benchmark crude futures jumped $2.45, or 6 percent.

Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Postby Rye » 04 Oct 2004 02:41

http://www.payvand.com/news/04/oct/1012.html

10/2/04
Mitsui Banking Corp keen to finance Indo-Iranian gas pipeline project

New Delhi, Oct 2, IRNA -- The Japanese banking giant, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, has evinced interest in financing the proposed Iran, Pakistan and India gas pipeline project provided there is equitable allocation of risks between the sponsors, contractors and project company, according to Corporation India's country head and head of its South Asia International Finance Department, Bharat Kaushal.

According to a press release of The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM), a copy of which was received by IRNA on Saturday, Kaushal in his presentation on 'Financing of Energy Projects in South Asia' at the Energy Summit organized under the aegis of ASSOCHAM here, said that the project seems to be financially viable from the banking perspective provided talks among the highest level of polity of Iran, Pakistan and India on the proposed 1800-km gas pipeline proves to be conclusive and a final feasibility study on the project is favorably conducted.

Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation is willing to finance such projects in South Asia region keeping in view the growing demand of energy in the region, said Kaushal on Wednesday.

He agreed with the view expressed by other experts present during the summit, saying that his corportation can also consider financing such mega pipeline projects under the regional cooperation head of the South-East Asia region.

Kaushal also indicated that on similar lines, his bank can also consider the gas pipeline project being talked about between Bangladesh and India.

According to him, gas consumption worldwide will increase by 2.8 percent per annum from 2004 to 2025 compared with 1.8 percent for oil and 1.5 percent for coal.

Natural gas consumption will also double from 90 tcf per annum at the present level to 176 tcf in 2025 and the natural gas share of total energy consumption will increase from 23 percent to 28 percent by 2025, he said.

Speaking on the occasion, Projects General Manager of the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., K.G. Gupta, also supported the Iran, Pakistan and India gas pipeline project, regretting that 11 years have passed but the proposed project is still on paper.

He lent support to the idea of connecting the Iran, Pakistan and India proposed gas pipeline with the water treaty agreement between India and Pakistan in case of any eventuality arising out of any misunderstanding between the two countries.

Gupta hoped that the feasibility study on the project would be completed by October 2004 in view of the success of talks held recently betweem the Indian prime minister and Pakistani president on intensifying political and business ties between the two nations.


SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36345
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 04 Oct 2004 06:02

its better we invest into more oil tankers than routing anything thru pakistan.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 12790
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Postby Suraj » 04 Oct 2004 09:55

GAIL draws up mega 22-city piped gas plan

The total investment for the 22 projects will be around Rs 11,000 crore ($2.4 billion).

Vasu
BRFite
Posts: 866
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31

Postby Vasu » 04 Oct 2004 21:13

Liberalization? Not a word in the Oil ministry's dictionary.

Oil firms hit out at subsidies

The government’s refusal to allow domestic oil companies to hike the retail prices of petroleum products was pushing them into bankruptcy, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) Chairman and Managing Director Subir Raha said in Mumbai today.

Raha said oil companies were in a bind as input costs were going up and the government was not allowing them to pass on the costs to retail consumers.

Oil companies were facing a serious financial crunch as they were being forced to fund the increased subsidy on products such as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and kerosene, he added.

Indian Oil Corporation, the country’s largest state-owned refining and marketing company, had lost Rs 948 crore on selling petrol and diesel in this financial year, the company’s Chairman MS Ramachandran said in New Delhi today.

“During the April-September period, the oil industry lost Rs 2,100 crore on petrol and diesel,” Ramachandran said.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23684
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Myanmar block

Postby SSridhar » 05 Oct 2004 21:00


Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Postby Vick » 05 Oct 2004 21:48


Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 06 Oct 2004 16:36

SSridhar: ANy comments about my post above, as regards your posited recommendations?

Sohum
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 02 Jul 2003 11:31

Postby Sohum » 06 Oct 2004 20:45

Govt. to allow private players to lay gas pipelines

http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/holn ... 061862.htm
New Delhi, Oct. 6 (PTI): The Government will end the monopoly of Gail (India) Ltd in setting up natural gas pipelines and allow private gas producers to lay lines for transporting the fuel to consumers, Petroleum Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar, said today.

Producers like Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) would be allowed to lay pipelines from gas fields to consuming centres after keeping 25 per cent of the carrying capacity for third party use.

Aiyar also said the Government might raise natural gas prices, currently capped at half the world rates. The Government might increase gas prices by Rs 350 per thousand cubic metres from the current price cap of Rs 2850 per thousand cubic metres.

"I would not like to see one company having a monopoly over the proposed National Gas Grid (that would connect new gas fields and import points with consumption centres)," he said at a CII round table here.

Reliance, for one, wants to lay a 1400-km pipeline from Kakinada on the Andhra Pradesh coast, the landfall point of its gigantic gas field in Krishna Godavari basin, to Ahmedabad in Gujarat to transport gas to NTPC's power plants. It, however, has not been able to sign a gas sales agreement with NTPC in the absence of permission to lay a pipeline to transport the gas.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23684
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Postby SSridhar » 06 Oct 2004 23:33

Calvin wrote:SSridhar: ANy comments about my post above, as regards your posited recommendations?


Calvin, IMHO, the landline is a no go.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3229
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 09 Oct 2004 04:18

Indo-Pak gas line gathers steam

http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story ... t_id=56669

But as the Ministry of External Affairs has conveyed to the Petroleum Ministry this is an issue which will have to be adequately addressed in detail given the ‘‘volatility of India-Pakistan relations’’.

To that end, the MEA has suggested that the World Bank—on which Islamabad is banking for security—should not be given a leading role. ‘‘India needs to be cautious about the involvement of World Bank, much less give it a leading role, in any Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project,’’ it said.

Instead, the suggestion is that it might be better to look for commercial support and guarantees for any financial investments in the non-Indian sections of the pipeline.

Sources further pointed out that the Pakistani position on the pipeline has gradually evolved. The September 24 joint statement at New York states that project ‘‘should be considered in the larger context of expanding trade and economic relations between India and Pakistan’’.

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 10 Oct 2004 05:59

SSridhar: I know you think the landline is a no-go. THe question to you is what you advocate as the alternative.

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

PM raises an eyebrow, Aiyar's daughter dropped from Dabhol p

Postby geeth » 11 Oct 2004 12:40

Aiye! Ayyayye!! Aiyare!


NEW DELHI: Just last week, the Government sheepishly asked for a two-month extension in the ongoing arbitration proceedings in London in the $5.2-billion Dabhol case. Reason: it disbanded the legal team from the previous regime and wasn't able to put a new one in place.

The new team now just lost a member. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is said to have expressed his ``reservations'' over the inclusion of a Union Minister's daughter in the panel of lawyers constituted by Attorney General Milon Banerjee.

The presence of Suranya Aiyar, daughter of Union Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Mani Shanker Aiyar, in the legal team was brought to Singh's notice after a Cabinet Meeting which discussed the London arbitration. The Attorney General was informed about the ``objection'' and Suranya's name was taken off the panel.

In fact, in a written communication sent to the Committee of Secretaries by the Inter-Ministerial Group (IMG) constituted by the Government to monitor the Dabhol cases, Suranya's name figures in the list of five legal counsel appointed by the Attorney General.

The list showed her as one of the two independent lawyers on the Dabhol panel, along with the Attorney General and law firm Fox & Mandal.

When contacted by this website's newspaper, Mani Shankar Aiyar claimed he knew ``nothing'' about the episode and said that an unneccessary controversy was being created. ``Nobody has spoken to me about this matter and I know nothing about it. I don't understand why being related to me should become a burden for anyone.''

Said Suranya Aiyar: ``I got a job offer because of which I had to give up my other assignments including this one. I don't know if anyone had any other sort of objections.''

Som Mandal, the Managing Partner of Fox & Mandal, the firm picked to be the new solicitors for the Dabhol litigation in India, said: ``Suranya worked for a month on Dabhol but we were subsequently informed she would not be able to continue. We were told she had too many other cases to handle and would not be able to spend the kind of time the matter needed.''

Mandal said that although she wasn't in the panel any more, other things were now falling into place. A new solicitor firm, Watson Farley and Williams, has been appointed in London and has since taken over all documentation from M/S DLA, the firm appointed when the NDA government was in power.

A team of solicitors from Watson Farley and Williams is, at present, in New Delhi for consultations with the Government.

Other changes have been made as well. Given the importance of the case, Cabinet Secretary B K Chaturvedi has formally been asked to oversee the progress of the litigation. He will be assisted by Anup Mishra, a Joint Secretary in the Cabinet Secretariat.

IMG sources said this was necessary since coordination at a ``high level'' was needed and Finance Minister P Chidambaram has already recused himself in the matter citing conflict of interest.

In another related development, former Chief Justice of India Justice A M Ahmadi has been picked to depose as a key witness before the arbitration tribunal in London. It is understood he will give evidence on the independence of the Indian judiciary.

Along with the panel of lawyers and solicitors, changes have also been made in the list of some 15 witnesses who will travel to London to give evidence.

http://www.newindpress.com/Newsitems.as ... ~regime....

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Postby geeth » 11 Oct 2004 12:53

>>>THe question to you is what you advocate as the alternative.

I would say start with LNG ships.. a couple of them would cost about $300 Mill. They can ship between 2~3 Mill Tons of LNG per annum. Source of energy (gas) is so near, viablity of these ships will never be in question. Pipe or no pipe these ships can continue.

If you don't want to invest in them, then take them on long term charter..

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23684
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Postby SSridhar » 14 Oct 2004 15:56

THe question to you is what you advocate as the alternative


Calvin, I prefer a combination of LNG and deep-sea pipeline. Kochi, Ennore and Haldia must setup LNG terminals. The deep-sea line may have spurs to Qatar and possibly Oman with a landfall in Gujarat.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23684
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Postby SSridhar » 14 Oct 2004 16:01

Work on oilfield and pipeline stopped after the friendly tribes take a liking to the workers and properties of the Engineering company.

Work on the Gurguri oilfield in Banda Daud Shah tehsil of Karak district and the laying of a pipeline in Aman Kot was stopped on Tuesday following a warning by a grand jirga of 50 villages held under the auspices of the Khattak Grand Ittehad and Action Committee to attack and destroy the site if their demands were not met. Mr Pervez said that in an attack on Sunday one of their drivers Shahnawaz was injured and property worth Rs5 million was damaged by hundreds of armed protesters.

The attack was led by local chief of Taliban Tehrik Nasrullah Jan. Mr Vegh was forced to hide in a container and later taken to a safe place via Hangu when some miscreants spread the news that the Taliban leader wanted to kill him.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23684
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Postby SSridhar » 14 Oct 2004 23:25

Iran's Peace Pipe for South Asia.

Pakistan would gain from the royalties and may even be able to export some of its own gas through the pipeline.


No, it wouldn't be. One of the reasons for TSP to opt for this pipeline, apart from its desire to control a significant chunk of Indian economic activities, is to get gas from Iran as it will be in deficit in a couple of years' time. There is no possibility of TSP exporting any gas to India.

According to Pachauri, India could even generate power for Pakistan using the Iranian gas and create an "interlocking" measure.


Why should the gas come all the way to India for us to generate power and re-export to TSP ? It doesn't make economic sense for TSP to agree to this as the power supplied will be costlier than local generation in TSPland.

India always had the option of retaliating by stopping the waters of the Indus.


IMHO, this could be only a wet dream. The two treaties are not interlinked and do not provide legal mutual guarantees. It would be also a moot point if a democratic and stickler-for-rules India will retaliate in that fashion. There are also other imponderables like equating natural gas with water etc. This argument is a no go.

Sohum
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 02 Jul 2003 11:31

Postby Sohum » 15 Oct 2004 02:46

Please explain to me why LNG cannot be shipped via tanker instead of investing in pipeline? If economics is only concern, then I feel that cost of ship transportation is well worth security risk of running pipelines through TSP (that is unless its a really exorbiant amount)

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23684
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Postby SSridhar » 15 Oct 2004 08:02

cost of ship transportation is well worth security risk of running pipelines through TSP


IMO, no cost is greater than placing the economic security of our country in the hands of TSP as the singular aim of TSP is to destroy India.

Sohum
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 02 Jul 2003 11:31

Postby Sohum » 15 Oct 2004 08:15

Sorry I think that came out wrong. I meant to say that the cost of shipping it by boat (even if more expensive) is worth it opposed to running a gas line through TSP.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23684
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Russia and China

Postby SSridhar » 15 Oct 2004 08:28

Energy tops Putin's China visit

The last word is still not spoken in the slugfest between Japan and China for Russian hydrocarbon.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23684
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Postby SSridhar » 15 Oct 2004 10:17

Sohum Desai,

There are several studies. One that I have seen has the following figures.

Middle East to India LNG

CIF value $ 2.9 / MMBTU ( for 10 MMTY or 14 BCMY)

CIF value $ 2.5 / MMBTU ( for 20 MMTY or 28 BCMY)

Middle East to India Pipeline


$3.5 (10 MMTY)

$2.5 (20 MMTY)

By current estimates, we are expected to have a shortfall of 20 BCMY by next year-end.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3229
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Postby Kakkaji » 17 Oct 2004 08:14

SSridhar wrote:Sohum Desai,

There are several studies. One that I have seen has the following figures.

Middle East to India LNG

CIF value $ 2.9 / MMBTU ( for 10 MMTY or 14 BCMY)

CIF value $ 2.5 / MMBTU ( for 20 MMTY or 28 BCMY)

Middle East to India Pipeline


$3.5 (10 MMTY)

$2.5 (20 MMTY)

By current estimates, we are expected to have a shortfall of 20 BCMY by next year-end.


Looks like the LNG costs are lower, or at least in the ballpark.

Makes no sense to me why we should even consider the pipeline through TSP as opposed to LNG. :-?

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4840
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Neshant » 17 Oct 2004 14:41

> no cost is greater than placing the economic security of our country in
> the hands of TSP

I have a feeling at least some of India's energy requirement (a small percentage) will be met by imports through that country in the future. It may not be a huge amount and other options will be kept alive (tankers) I'm sure.

The bigger threat is US control over India's energy imports thru pakistan. It controls musharaff and has infiltrated the country with others like shaukat aziz, the new ISI chief..etc.

With the pacification of Afghanistan, they will want to control the trade of energy to India from CAR. Its one way of making all the money spent on military & economic aid to Pakistan & Afg pay for itself.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23684
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Ennore LNG terminal

Postby SSridhar » 19 Oct 2004 12:52

IOC to setup a 2.5 MMTPA LNG terminal at Ennore

"We have called for bids seeking 2.5 million tonnes per annum (130 trillion British thermal units) LNG for 20 years with a possibility of doubling the quantity," he said.

IOC has already entered into Heads of Agreement with some power companies in Tamil Nadu for sale of regasified LNG.

"Discussions are also in progress with Tata Group which has evinced keen interest for setting up an integrated power plant with LNG import terminal," the official said.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4840
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Neshant » 20 Oct 2004 12:41

it will happen eventually

---

India, Iran discuss gas pipeline project

http://www.dawn.com/2004/10/20/int9.htm


Return to “Strategic & Security Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest