Key point here also, is the fact that Tassie Shoals via its...

Key point here also, is the fact that Tassie Shoals via its methonal projects, removes the high carbon by product from LNG production. (and generates revenue, from the carbon via this $350 revenue per ton methonal production, on site).


Only Tassie Shoals offers this solution.....here is a story, (at very bottom)which shows the extent, likely cost and degree of effort.....other LNG projects require to dispose of carbon from their LNG production projects.

______________________________________________________

Everthing seems to get back to ENI....even the catalyst here, is ENI coming together with Shell to develop the Evans Shoal high carbon fields At TS....Shell equity in Greater Sunrise is 27% Woodside 33% Conoco 30%....so with the carbon solution (it fact, its an earner) it is not logical for Shell to agree to more expensive floating LNG.

------------------------

The big kicker here ortstock...and not previously presented is this:

All informationd in any coverage about Greater Sunrise, from Woodside...is cost of development of the floating LNG verse construction on Timor Island. Woodside and the others...say floating LNG is cheaper, and thus Timor, should agree, so both share greater profits.

...(In actual fact...security of tenure may be the issue to Woodside/others.....however they are hardly going to suggest that to the Timor Gov leaders....my words-views only)

That aside,....and here we go - what about in these critical last minute dealings.....something emerged from left field, which would save the project development costs, many billions of dollars. (Means lower capex- means higher returns for Timor, afer development cost amortisation.Timor benefits greater also, in reduced upfront spend)

In quick summary therefore

...I think that all along.... Woodside intended to use a Tassie Shoals wildcard to close the deal with Timor....right now, right at this last minute (given many months , years of debate over CAPEX - well here is something new, that both the big oil companies and Timor can benifit from...to the tune of billions, but also to finally wrap it up....close the deal, once and for all.


I am investing accordingly, based on at least my views on the matter.

___________________________________________________________



Projected CO2 emissions from top Australia LNG projects

Tue May 10, 2011 4:34am EDT

(Reuters) - Australia has more than a dozen liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects under construction or planned aimed at meeting the world's booming energy needs, particularly in Asia.

While LNG is a cleaner fuel than coal, extracting, processing, chilling and then shipping it releases large amounts of greenhouse gas emissions, particularly carbon dioxide. And such emissions from Australia's booming LNG sector are set to grow sharply.

Following are the estimated emissions from several major projects either under construction or awaiting final investment decisions.

Note: The amount of greenhouse gases (or carbon dioxide-equivalent -- CO2-e) varies depending on the CO2 content of the gas field and energy efficiency measures.

Carbon dioxide has to be stripped out of the raw gas before the clean gas is chilled and liquefied at minus 161 degrees Celsius. The CO2 is usually vented back to the atmosphere.

GORGON

Major owner: Chevron at 47 percent, with ExxonMobil and Shell with 25 percent each

Initial capacity: 15 mtpa (likely be expanded to 20 mtpa)

Emissions: Estimated CO2-e emissions: Between 5.45 and 8.81 million per annum, depending on the level of CO2 captured and stored. The A$37 billion project includes a A$2 billion investment to pump 3.3 million tonnes of CO2 stripped from the raw gas back into a deep natural reservoir.

The Gorgon gas field has a high CO2 content of between 13 and 14 percent. But capturing part of the CO2 helps lower the project's emissions intensity to about 350 kilograms per tonne of LNG shipped.

WHEATSTONE

Majority owner: Chevron

Target total LNG capacity: 25 mtpa

Emissions: Based on 25 mtpa production, the company estimates total greenhouse gas production of 10.3 million tonnes per year.

The gas fields tapped for this project have a much lower CO2 content than Gorgon and the company, in its draft environmental impact statement in 2010, said the lack of commercially viable reservoirs nearby and low CO2 content made reinjection of the stripped CO2 unfeasible. Estimated emissions intensity for the project is 370 kg of CO2-e per tonne of LNG.

PLUTO

Majority owner: Woodside

Initial capacity to come on line in 2011: 4.3 mtpa. Second production train of 4.3 mtpa planned. Possibility up to 4 trains of 4.3 mtpa.

Emissions: About 1.4 million tonnes of Co2-e for the first 4.3 mtpa.

The Pluto gas field has a CO2 content of 2 percent and the company says the emissions intensity of the project is about 320 kg of greenhouse gas pollution per tonne of LNG produced. The company has signed a deal worth nearly A$100 million to create tree plantations to offset emissions from the project.

BROWSE

Majority owner: Woodside

LNG capacity: Between 11 mtpa and up to 50 mtpa

Emissions: Between 7.1 million tonnes of CO2-e and 32 million tonnes. Total CO2 will depend on the design of the LNG plant and eventual size of the operation. Emissions from the project are estimated to be higher because the high CO2 content of the raw gas from the three main fields at 10 percent.

The company says it is looking at reinjecting CO2 back into underground rock formations.

ICHTHYS

Main owners: Inpex and Total

LNG capacity: 8.4 mtpa

Emissions: About 7 million tonnes of CO2-e per year, or an estimated 278 million tonnes over the project's 40-year lifetime. Energy efficiency steps might trim this over time.

The project will tap two main gas fields with 8 percent and 17 percent CO2 content. About a third of the project's total carbon emissions will come from venting the stripped CO2 into the atmosphere.

PRELUDE

Majority owner: Shell

LNG capacity 3.5 mtpa

Emissions: 2.3 million tonnes of CO2-e. This is among the more emissions-intensive LNG projects because of its 9 percent CO2 content in the feed gas. Total greenhouse gas emissions are just over 600 kg per tonne of LNG produced.

AUSTRALIA-PACIFIC LNG PROJECT (APLNG)

Majority owners ConocoPhillips and Origin

LNG capacity: Initially about 9 mtpa in 2 trains. Up to 18 mtpa in final development. Coal-seam gas to LNG project.

Emissions: Estimated at 640 kg CO2-e per tonne of LNG shipped, or about 5.7 million tonnes for a 9 mtpa production capacity.

CURTIS ISLAND (QCLNG)

Majority owner: BG Group

LNG capacity: Estimated at 11 mtpa by 2021 in 3 trains. Coal-seam gas project.

Emissions: 4.5 million tonnes CO2-e.

GLADSTONE (GLNG)

Owners: Joint venture between Santos, Malaysia's Petronas, France's Total and Korea Gas Corp (KOGAS).

Capacity: 10 mtpa in three production trains. Coal-seam gas project.

Emissions: Project documents estimate between 5 and 7.2 million tonnes CO2-e per annum.

(Sources: Company reports, Western Australian government, the Greens party, J.P. Morgan, Macquarie Research)

(Reporting by David Fogarty; Editing by Simon Webb)

Related Quotes and News