Alaska/Japan LNG Opportunity Resources Energy, Inc. - A customer's view.

At long last an Alaska LNG customer's concept for a project.

At first read I noted something you rarely see in Alaska Gas Pipeline or Alaska LNG project proposals - as sense of urgency.

They also mention Royalty in Kind (RIK).  This is starting to sound like stakeholders like the State and Customers may bring resources to the project and start moving forward.

The $65,000,000,000 Question

Can we build a pipeline project that will make all of Alaska's natural gas dreams come true for $65 Billion?  Dermot Cole doesn't think much of the recent letter sent to Governor Parnell, he says the letter doesn't show much enthusiasm.  To a certain degree Mr. Cole is right.

The $65 Billion price tag is a reality check.  If Alaskan LNG is priced to compete in the global market the project may move forward.  I estimate the base price of Alaskan North Slope gas LNG at around $12/MMBTU before operation cost and taxes are added. At current oil prices, oil indexed LNG trades in the $16/MMBTU range.  The global LNG consumer community want to de-link LNG from crude oil or discount LNG from crude. According to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Japan and Korea currently pay about $13.80/MMBTU for LNG - the highest rates in the world.

The reality check shows that there is no wiggle room for pricing in excessive profits or taxes.  The whole project is at the ragged edge of feasibility.

Having said that Alaskan LNG has huge benefits that few other projects offer:

• Short Stable Shipping lanes .  The shipping lanes between Alaska and Asia don't have a Strait of Hormuz to deal with.  Asian LNG buyers need the diversity of supply the Alaska LNG project offers.
• Political Stability.  LNG from second and third world sources is always at risk of political disruption, especially in the new world of tweeting community organizers.
• Jobs for Equity Partners. You don't hear much about this but a project of this size will generate a massive amount of commerce in the Asian countries that build modules and pipe for the project. It's possible that equity partners could spend 100% of their project cost within their own borders.
• Conventional Gas. I support shale gas development, but investing in a large, developed conventional gas resource is more predictable than investing in an undeveloped shale gas resource. 

Project alignment is good and it's good to get the scary reality check estimate out in the open. The Governor, Dan Sullivan and Senator Lisa Murkowski are all out in force saying the right things and engaging with potential LNG customers.

With a bit of luck, more will detail will develop and the project will move forward.

Almost There

After years of nattering nonsense we are starting to hear the right kind of stories about the Alaska Gasline project - stories about customers. All those cliches about "the customer is always right" are true.   LNG is not a commodity (yet) so Alaska must have a long term buyer lined up and participating in the LNG project.

The good news includes a piece in the Alaska Dispatch by Amada Coyne. Apparently a Japanese group called Resources Energy Inc is in Alaska with boots on the ground exploring a gas project.

The next bit of good news comes from the Asia Pacific Energy Research Centre LNG Producer - Consumer Conference recently held in Tokyo.  All of the presentation slides are worth reading, but its great to see Alaska Department of Resources Commissioner Dan Sullivan making the case for Alaska gas to a group of buyers (Dan's Slides).

A smart LNG buyer would negotiate to buy Alaskan gas at a tidewater and be a major equity partner in an LNG facility.  The good news is that there are some smart buyers out there and the stars may start aligning soon.

A Good Week

Good news #1.  Alaska Governor Sean Parnell is making the rounds in Korea and Japan doing what an Alaskan Governor should have been doing since the price of natural gas tanked four years ago.  The Governor's web site features a picture of the Governor smiling, standing next to the US Ambassador to South Korea. That's worth one cowbell, but no more.  Next time the photo op needs to include a living breathing smiling LNG customer.  LNG buyers are making a push to de-link LNG prices from crude oil prices (LINK).  This could be the right time to offer the first delinked LNG supply.  Imagine a long term contract based on cost plus a fixed fee with cost escalators to track inflation rather than the roller coaster linkage to crude oil prices.  Reduced risk for the buyers, producers, and transporters should make a project more appealing.  It's time to get creative Governor.  Buyers want to commoditize LNG - run with that.

Good news #2  Great Bear wants to accelerate their drilling program. Actions speak louder than words.  Keep it up!

September is drawing to a close - still hoping for some more good news.

Murkowski Markets Alaskan Gas

Lisa Murkowski is on the road marketing Alaskan Gas - (LINK) Quote:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, yesterday continued her efforts to develop new markets for Alaska’s 35 trillion cubic feet of natural gas on the North Slope by raising the potential of providing a long-term, stable supply of energy to Japan with Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda at a dinner hosted by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“Alaska’s gas is the perfect fit to meet Japan’s energy needs,” Murkowski said. “An LNG line from the North Slope could deliver long-term, stable energy supplies to Japan at a reasonable price. Such a project would be a win-win, both in terms of energy security and environmental policy for Alaska and Japan.”

Murkowski’s conversation with Prime Minister Noda follows a series of meetings she helped lead last week in Washington, D.C., with members of Japan’s Parliament. Murkowski, who is the vice-chair of the U.S. Japan Interparliamentary Group, discussed the benefits of Alaska natural gas to Japan with members of the Diet.

Good Job Keep it up -

Dan Sullivan Pitching Alaskan LNG?

According to this story by Steve Levine  (LINK) Dan Sullivan is visiting China and Japan pitching the security of LNG from Alaska.  There's also another related story by Levine (LINK).

Apparently there's a 14 slide presentation he presents.  I've asked the DNR for a copy (can't find it on their website).

Quotes from the Steve Levine story:

When Dan Sullivan, Alaska's bare-knuckles natural resources chief, stands before a decisionmaker from China or Japan, he whips out a 14-slide PowerPoint and minces no words: You may be currently buying natural gas from Russia, Qatar or Australia, but take my advice. Get some security in your energy portfolio -- add Alaskan gas.
Perhaps, but Sullivan must also persuade the oil companies, which will have to spend an estimated $40 billion to develop the necessary pipeline and LNG infrastructure. Alaska's Parnell is pushing the companies for a serious draft working plan for LNG export, along with an aggressive construction timetable, by September. Given the level of planning and preparation required for such projects, a rapid effort would have the LNG facility completed in about 2019, Sullivan estimates. If the companies can promise all that, Sullivan says, the governor is prepared to put a reasonable long-term tax and royalty deal before the state Legislature for approval in its next session, which begins in January.

If true this is true then it's good news, but why isn't this story more widely reported and discussed?  I look forward to some more information on Dan's trip.  It's good to know someone is out pushing the project.

Alaska LNG for Japan?

ALASKA LNG For

This week the Alaska Dispatch ran a story about a Japanese delegation visiting Anchorage to discuss LNG from the North Slope (LINK). First comment - Hooray! It's about time.  I'm glad the Japanese include Alaska on their list of energy solutions.  I've always wondered why Alaskan leaders don't push Alaskan gas sales to Japan more vigorously.  Without customers for Alaskan gas no gas project will ever be built. Now that introductions are out of the way maybe Alaskan leaders can man up and get engaged with a paying customer who may be motivated to partially fund the project.

Having said that what would a Japanese-Alaskan LNG project look like? Japan needs long term politically stable supplies of LNG.  I can see Japan funding and building the LNG plant and terminal in Valdez that would equal about half the project cost.  The producers and the State of Alaska would build the North Slope gas treatment facility, various natural gas liquids (NGL) projects, and assorted sub-pipelines.  The Japanese will be focused on guaranteed delivery of specific gas volumes and the producers will seek take or pay options for delivery of the gas.Fairbanks, Anchorage, Delta Junction and lots of points in between can execute sub projects along the way.   Remote Alaskans may even benefit from propane extracted from North Slope gas.

Could this really happen?  Yes because a Japan-Alaska-LNG project ticks all the right boxes.

First and foremost is project economics.  A million BTUs (MMBTU) of energy from crude oil cost more than $18.75 today (WTI basis, $22/MMBTU Brent basis) and could exceed $20 in the near future as crude prices edge upward. Henry Hub gas prices may have found bottom in the $2.50/MMBTU range this winter.  At least that's the price that shuts down dry shale gas drilling rigs.  Converting gas to LNG cost about $2/MMBTU.  The resulting low end cost of delivered LNG could be less than $10/MMBTU (Henry Hub indexed) and over $20/MMBTU (crude indexed).

LNG is not a true commodity yet so we can expect a unique price for any North Slope Alaskan LNG sold to Japan.  I expect that the unit cost of Alaskan LNG will be higher than Gulf Coast LNG.  This price difference will enable the project and cover the higher construction cost in Alaska.

But what would drive Japan to sign up for an expensive project? The answer is that Alaskan LNG  is a long term, reliable, dedicated source of supply for Japan completely decoupled from the lower 48 market and lower 48 hazards. A bad lower 48 winter or a bad Gulf hurricane season will not disrupt the flow Alaskan LNG.Additionally Alaskan LNG is closer to Japan than Mid East or Gulf Coast LNG.  Alaskan LNG can be shipped in the largest most efficient tankers unlike Gulf Coast LNG tankers that must transit the Panama Canal. Alaskan LNG is also more reliable than LNG shipped through the Strait of Hormuz.

Japan and the North Slope producers share one vital common interest,  Both sides need a long term deal that works for decades.  To quote Steve Kirchhoff, Vice President – Americas, ExxonMobil Gas and Power Marketing Company "You can't dabble at LNG"

Of course the State of Alaska is behind the curve on LNG exports to Japan, or Asia in general. It's easy to imagine Canadian LNG projects shipping product before Alaskan leaders get their heads around the idea. On one hand I'd like to know what transpired when the Japanese met with Alaskan State government officials. On the other hand I'm afraid the Japanese may have heard very little encouraging news.

Japan pays $19/MMBTU for LNG

Mega Projects like the Alaska Gas Pipeline don't get funded on the basis of a sky high spot price, but $19/MMBTU LNG vs. $3.48/MMBTU gas in the lower 48 should stimulate a new long term LNG strategy by Japan and Alaska.  (LINK). The LNG price paid vs. lower 48 gas price leads to two conclusions. 1) Alaska gas is stranded indefinitely and 2) Either the Gulf Coast or Alaska have an opportunity to strike long term deals with Japan for LNG sales.

The chart above shows how the Japanese price paid for LNG diverged from other markets in late '08.  Here's a chart of Japan's LNG import volumes:

Japan's current LNG imports equal about two times Alaska's potential gas production.  I've crunched and few numbers and it looks like $10 to $12 per MMBTU for Alaskan LNG would justify a project. 

Mega Projects like this require risk mitigation. Typically LNG prices are indexed to crude oil prices.  Using that pricing mechanism places too much downside risk on Alaska in the event oil prices take a dive as the economy continues to sputter.  What would work is fixed pricing until the project reaches payout, then index to crude.  That would allow the project to reach payout at the soonest possible date.

The "do nothing" option (Alaska's current path) will lead to some incremental development of Gulf Coast LNG export capacity with a marginal impact on lower 48 gas prices.  That impact will not be enough to shove prices back into the $6/MMBTU range needed to justify the Alaska Gas Pipeline.

Japan Wants USA LNG

I wonder if LNG hawk Bill Walker is on a plane to sell his idea of Valdez LNG to the Japanese?  From Bloomberg (LINK):

Japan’s senior vice minister of trade and industry, Seishu Makino, asked U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu at a meeting yesterday in San Francisco to increase LNG exports, Akinobu Yoshikawa, deputy manager for the Petroleum and Natural Gas Division, told reporters today in Tokyo.

“I believe we gained the U.S.’s understanding to some extent,” said Yoshikawa. “We can’t buy LNG from the U.S. unless the Department of Energy approves LNG plant owners to export. There is one plant that recently won the approval and there are two others in progress.

Japan is a motivated buyer, a long term customer, they can make X120 pipe - where's the photos of the happy Alaskan trade delegation to Japan? Come on guys - time to get your head in the game.

The only good news in the story is that Gulf Coast LNG exports to Japan will sponge up cheap shale gas and improve to overall prospects for any North American gas project.

Trends and News

Shale gas development has threatened the Alaska Gas Pipeline, but there are trends that will build demand for North American gas:

Japan drops nuclear expansion plans (LINK) - this can only boost LNG demand.

Japan's reliance on LNG grows (LINK)

Southern Union, BG apply for LNG export license (LINK). The lower 48 is awash with $4/mmbtu shale gas - it's only a matter of time before this cheap gas is sponged up by LNG exporters. More on "wet shale" and LNG (LINK).

The natural gas glut is disappearing (LINK).

Fed AK-Gas Coordinator Larry Persily still thinks the Alaska gas pipeline is a go: (LINK) A quote from the News Miner article:

Dozens of federal agency personnel in Washington, D.C., and Alaska are working hard, reviewing the project’s first resource reports that came in last month, preparing for permit applications and talking with project sponsors to ensure everyone knows what’s needed. Canadian officials are doing the same, from Ottawa to Whitehorse. Only the private sector, however, can decide if the pipeline is a good business decision. The best course of action is a single project sponsor team, working with the state and federal governments to pull together the deal.

More on LNG markets and the push to export LNG from the lower 48 (LINK).