Clark, Christy

Let’s play political football with Kitimat

BC Government Online Newsroom, British Columbia to develop liquefied natural gas industry, Sep 19, 2011:

“Premier Christy Clark today announced British Columbia will take four key steps to create a prosperous liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry and jobs, including making the Kitimat liquefied natural gas plant operational by 2015…”

Michael Smyth, The Province, Christy Clark’s jobs agenda recycling of old projects, Sept 20, 2011:

So, expect many re-announcements of old projects. The proposed Kitimat liquefied natural gas plant Clark trumpeted Monday, for example, was approved three years ago.

But, the project has been around far longer. It has been a favourite for provincial and federal politicians and for business promoters selling dreams and possibilities.

Associated Press, Victoria BC, Nov 28, 1981:

“The Rim Gas Project, which includes Petro-Canada of Calgary, Westcoast Transmission of Vancouver and Mitsui and Co. Ltd. of Japan, wants to deliver and sell liquefied natural gas to Japan from a plant it will build at Bish Cove, six miles from Kitimat. To get approval, the proponents …”

Hamilton Spectator, Venture eyes Far East, Jan 30, 1995:

Pac Rim LNG, a Calgary-based consortium of companies, has agreed to form a joint venture to promote and develop liquid natural gas facilities in British Columbia using natural gas from B.C. and Alberta

Anchorage Daily News, Apr 10, 1997:

“…tons of liquefied natural gas a year for use by Korean electric generators The plant will be nearly twice as large as Phillips’s LNG facility … Construction should begin later this year near Kitimat British Columbia with shipments to South Korea beginning in late 1999 Phillips’s …”

Petroleum Economist, Jun 1, 2004:

“Pacific Coast Terminal is soliciting long-term commercial contracts to build the first LNG receiving terminal on the British Columbia coast. Pending community and regulatory approval, the C$300m facility could be operating by late 2008 at Kitimat, handling 340m cf/d…”

Business Edge News Magazine, Dec 23, 2004:

“Another company Galveston LNG Inc is proposing to build a larger $500million facility in the nearby village of Kitimat …”

Maritime News, Jan 13, 2009:

“Kitimat LNG Inc. and Mitsubishi Corporation (” Mitsubishi”) announced on Jan. 13, 2009 that they have signed a Heads of Agreement under which Mitsubishi will acquire terminal capacity and an equity stake in Kitimat LNG’s proposed…”, Mar 7, 2011:

“KBR announced today that it has been awarded a front-end engineering and design contract by KM LNG Operating General Partnership for the Kitimat Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Development near Kitimat, British Columbia, Canada. KM LNG Operating General Partnership is a subsidiary of Apache Corporation and the operator of the Kitimat LNG Development. The Kitimat LNG Development is co ..”

Oilweek, Jun 2, 2011:

“Apache Corporation (NYSE:APA) and EOG Resources Inc. (TSX:EOG), are already working on an LNG export terminal in Kitimat, BC Engineering and design work is underway on the Kitimat terminal, which will have an initial capacity of 700 million cubic feet per day. The three companies could begin exporting …”

Categories: Clark, Christy

4 replies »

  1. The countries that buy LNG are already being supplied by countries already well positioned to sell to them.

    I think BC jumping in without a sure market may prove to be another folly.

    Recent unfortunate events in Japan have caused a surge in LNG price to about $18 US / gigajoule (roughly one million BTU),hence frenzied corporate interest, but in reality will dampen demand by current users.

    Unless BC 'gives' it away as has been their practice with other resources, we should not rush in on another sketchy corporate enterprise.

    At best BC will only ever be a small player in the LNG market.


  2. However, the main activity involving LNG ports on the mid-coast has been making announcements. I could have given many more examples, the ones here are merely representative. Private and public enterprises always aim to demonstrate they are moving forward with major plans but once the big announcement is made, their interest and dedication dwindles.

    The danger here, as pointed out by Conservative Party leader John Cummins, is that government subsidies are being offered to business projects that could proceed without them.


  3. Odd that LNG would be exported to S. Korea to be used to generate electricity.

    BC Hydro is supposed to reduce its use of Burrard Thermal, due to CO2 emissions. But using the NG here would reduce emissions, by not having to ship it across the Pacific.


Leave a reply but be on topic and civil.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s