Thread: Qld company supplying 75% of Australia's adblue needs.

Originally Posted by BradC

I've never been able to figure that out. It's.....problematic.
I know we have less of an issue over here, but off the top of my head I can't recall why other than it was noted as a "good decision" by whomever was in power at the time.

BPB.jpg

The decision to not have a gas reservation policy was by The Queensland government.
WA has a Gas reservation policy.
It was greed on behalf of the Queensland Government that has caused the current situation. ( or maybe they were just stupid and fooled by the Gas companies)
My understanding was that the original projections of gas availability showed there that there was plenty of gas for export and domestic , but then OOPS the resource was not as big as planned and there was "Skinny" gas.
The export hubs were built and funded on the basis of long term contracts.
So it was the domestic market which then suffered when they found not enough gas to go around.
NSW has not developed the Narrabri resource and Victoria has not allowed any development of the Gippsland resource.

I am sur ethere is an expert on here who can fill in the details or disagree so go to it.

Regards PhilipA

Originally Posted by PhilipA

The decision to not have a gas reservation policy was by The Queensland government.
WA has a Gas reservation policy.
It was greed on behalf of the Queensland Government that has caused the current situation. ( or maybe they were just stupid and fooled by the Gas companies)
My understanding was that the original projections of gas availability showed there that there was plenty of gas for export and domestic , but then OOPS the resource was not as big as planned and there was "Skinny" gas.
The export hubs were built and funded on the basis of long term contracts.
So it was the domestic market which then suffered when they found not enough gas to go around.
NSW has not developed the Narrabri resource and Victoria has not allowed any development of the Gippsland resource.

I am sur ethere is an expert on here who can fill in the details or disagree so go to it.

Regards PhilipA

Try this.

Understanding the East Coast Gas Market | Bulletin – March Quarter 2021 | RBA

New natural gas well is being drilled for a urea plant being built near Eneabba

Strike Energy awarded grant for urea project | Oil & Gas Journal

Read about it in the farm weekly, more for fertiliser production but could be utilised in adblue production

Gav

Originally Posted by PhilipA

The decision to not have a gas reservation policy was by The Queensland government.
WA has a Gas reservation policy.
It was greed on behalf of the Queensland Government that has caused the current situation. ( or maybe they were just stupid and fooled by the Gas companies)
My understanding was that the original projections of gas availability showed there that there was plenty of gas for export and domestic , but then OOPS the resource was not as big as planned and there was "Skinny" gas.
The export hubs were built and funded on the basis of long term contracts.
So it was the domestic market which then suffered when they found not enough gas to go around.
NSW has not developed the Narrabri resource and Victoria has not allowed any development of the Gippsland resource.

I am sur ethere is an expert on here who can fill in the details or disagree so go to it.

Regards PhilipA

Was always my understanding that Gillard went for the six terminals instead of four, and there wasn't / isn't enough gas.

DL

Of course the game has now changed with the EU classing gas as "green" which means they do not have to phase it out.
Regards PhilipA

Originally Posted by PhilipA

The export hubs were built and funded on the basis of long term contracts.
So it was the domestic market which then suffered when they found not enough gas to go around.

Regards PhilipA

That's my understanding - and I'd presume that at the time that the contracts were struck they were good prices - or, at least, sufficient to gain FID.

FID - the "Final Investment Decision" - is the point when the project developers decide whether there's a financial case to go forward with the project. Obviously, if you're about to spend billions of dollars building a plant that won't be paid off for 30 years, you will want long-term contracts to sell your product at a price that will pay for the development. And the banks will need to see FID, and be happy with it, before they release any money. And in ten years time that price may be less than market or more than market: no-one can predict that with any certainty. I recall discussions of WA's domestic reserve policy when a specific NW Shelf project went ahead: a lot of economists and politicians regarded it as a market distortion and it does fly in the face of our import parity approach to fuel prices and taxes.

As an example of how things can change, back around 2005 the US had a shortage of natural gas, so there were a number of large projects being planned to create new import hubs. A couple of years later the US had turned into a huge gas producer because it had tapped into shale gas, which they accessed by fracking:

ttps://www.strausscenter.org/energy-and-security-project/the-u-s-shale-revolution/#:~:text=The%20United%20States%20is%20now%20the%20 world's%20largest%20producer%20of,which%20is%20der ived%20from%20shale.&text=There%20are%20three%20ma jor%20shale,over%2070%25%20of%20total%20production .

The new hubs never got built.