Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mark on August 26, 2009 at 3:13

I was going off of a report from a petroleum engineer on the Barnett Shale. San Diego is now importing gas from a Baja re-gas plant. This volume is in the range of 2 bcf/d. Gulf Coast plants are re-gasing @ 6 bcf/d, as another plant came on-line last June.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Grillin' - MmmMmm on August 26, 2009 at 7:07

The Gulf Coast plants are not regasing 6 BCF/day. That is their capacity, but not what they are running at.

The gas from Baja would be counted as Mexican imports and not included under the published LNG numbers you see.

Saw a report on LNG inputs areound here somewhere. They peaked at 3 BCF/day a while back, "bottomed" at under 1 BCF/day last year but are back over 1 right now. Many thought they would be around 3 BCF/day right now but fortunately that didn't happen.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark on August 26, 2009 at 8:13

The whole problem lies with this:
Why buy from the old town market, farmer, and rancher, when you can get it cheaper from Wal-Mart? Eventually we are going to be extremely dependent on other countries for NG as we are with oil.
I'll keep growing my garden until the EPA regulates it also.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on August 26, 2009 at 8:23

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/ng_move_poe1_a_EPG0_IML_Mmcf_a.htm

switch the data series to lng volumes

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jlgm on August 26, 2009 at 12:16

Import volumes declined in 2008.

"U.S. Imports and Exports: 2008
The net volume of U.S. natural gas imports decreased by 20.9 percent from 2007 to 2008, as both pipeline imports from Canada and LNG imports declined and U.S. exports increased. The United States in 2008 received net volumes of 2,996 Bcf, which were 789 Bcf less than 2007 levels (Figure 9). The decrease resulted largely from a 632-Bcf decline in gross imports, including declines of 419 Bcf in LNG supplies, 202 Bcf from Canada, and 11 Bcf from Mexico. In absolute terms, the net imports were the lowest since 1997.


Source: Energy Information Administration, based on data from the Office of Fossil Energy, U.S. Department of Energy. Figure Data



The fall in imported natural gas to the United States reflects the increased need for natural gas in other countries willing to compete for available global supplies. The role of imports in meeting U.S. demand changed radically over the course of the last 20 years. Net imports of natural gas to the United States rose substantially since the mid-1980s, when pipeline imports from Canada began a dramatic increase. As expansion of imports from Canada fell off early this decade, additional imports of LNG flowed into the United States. However, this trend of increasing import volumes stalled at least temporarily as net imports only met about 13 percent of overall U.S. natural gas consumption in 2008, which is the lowest percentage since 1997. "

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on August 26, 2009 at 9:26

Mark, you need to get a better data source. The Energia Costa Azul Terminal in Baja Mexico has a capacity of 1 Bcfd but has not delivered any significant volumes to the US.

The four Gulf Coast terminals have a combined capacity of 7.4 Bcfd but are currently sending out at a rate of only ~ 0.5 Bcfd.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark on August 26, 2009 at 9:56

Is this the cf of LNG as a liguid or as a gas.
Also, there are 8 LNG re-gas plants in the US, 2 are under construction and 13 are planned. Only 5 are listed in the EIA list, 2 on the East coast and 3 in the Gulf.
Where are you finding how much each plant is producing?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on August 26, 2009 at 12:24

Mark, volumes are in cubic feet of gas.

There are four LNG terminals in service in the Gulf Coast with two more under construction. Ther are three terminals in service on the East Coast of the US.

I have access to non-public information regarding output rates but it is possible to generate similar information from public sources with a lot of work.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on August 26, 2009 at 15:38

Pirats 4 higher, cheep! No wear seekrit hiding plase is 4 speshul liberry card. Contack me on my commint wall. :0) lol

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Grillin' - MmmMmm on August 27, 2009 at 1:50

Mark: Les' numbers are more in line with what I see in my non-public sources as well.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Grillin' - MmmMmm on August 27, 2009 at 1:50

Generally speaking, when people discuss volumes and rates of natural gas, they are either quoted in variations of SCF (standard cubic feet) such as MCF/day (1000 SCF/day), BCF/day (1 billion SCF/day) etc. or they refer to mmBTU (heating value of the volume). When you see LNG quoted in BCF or MMCF or any other SCF type reporting, it is by definition the volume at standard conditions and temperature. So when someone quotes LNG in BCF/day, that is the volume at 14.7 psi and 60 degrees F. So, that would be the gaseous phase as LNG at those pressures and temperatures becomes not-so-liquid!

Another way of referring to LNG is in tonnes per time unit. That is used internationally as a standard and then converted to BCF per time unit when discussing volumes.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark on August 27, 2009 at 2:54

Good info, thanks

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page