Energy Sector Thread - Operators, Engineers, Technicians Et Al

[zoom rader]

rule of thumb in the industry; u dont spend money unless u have an immediate and sure path to recoup that costs

the mere fact that bp has does the extraction woudl put them in place to know tru the grape vine if the prospects looking good or not, before presenting finalized reports.


is like, if they putting down a new layer of pitch all over, u know elections callin.

While dat is true, you have red government running a parlour and dictating how private companies should run their shops

Ever get the feeling the red government is trying to make private companies operate like how the public service is ran as wishy washy don't care attitude

[Redman]

rule of thumb in the industry; u dont spend money unless u have an immediate and sure path to recoup that costs

the mere fact that bp has does the extraction woudl put them in place to know tru the grape vine if the prospects looking good or not, before presenting finalized reports.


is like, if they putting down a new layer of pitch all over, u know elections callin.

Sounds like a very safe industry to be in-which industry rewards investment immediately and certainly?
Please provide some detail

[sMASH]

when ur customer and supplier is the same person and u name ngc...

they still cant 'create' gas, is our leadership that said, 'TAR at all costs'... when bp and shell was shelving the plant till it became economically feasible. even without inside info that supply might be down, there were NO factors telling us that the TAR was a good investment.

if it have no gas, it have no gas. wait till 2025.

[zoom rader]

when ur customer and supplier is the same person and u name ngc...

they still cant 'create' gas, is our leadership that said, 'TAR at all costs'... when bp and shell was shelving the plant till it became economically feasible. even without inside info that supply might be down, there were NO factors telling us that the TAR was a good investment.

if it have no gas, it have no gas. wait till 2025.

A red government that runs a company and cont tree as a parlour.

[sMASH]

iscott all over again,, lol.

[zoom rader]

iscott all over again,, lol.

I actually worked Iscott back then and then Indians took over the plant. Everyone made money. I remember Indians gave you production bonus per day under the table to avoid the taxes.

Was good times when the Indians was there. Leant alot from that plant all my PLC/HMI programming came from there.

[jhonnieblue]

rule of thumb in the industry; u dont spend money unless u have an immediate and sure path to recoup that costs

the mere fact that bp has does the extraction woudl put them in place to know tru the grape vine if the prospects looking good or not, before presenting finalized reports.


is like, if they putting down a new layer of pitch all over, u know elections callin.

Sounds like a very safe industry to be in-which industry rewards investment immediately and certainly?
Please provide some detail

You have clearly never worked in the energy industry.

What a pleb statement

Won't expect anything less from pnm idiots. Where habit

[pugboy]

lets be real, this is not the first country BP has operated in and had to deal with declining wells
neither is it the first govt they have had to deal with in this scenario.......

these energy companies know very well the kind of money they spend and what to expect for the risk and when to not take anymore risk.

sure all govts will want to think that they can keep squeezing eggs out of the golden goose but it just dont work that way

[pugboy]

lots of ppl learnt a lot there, many a competent machinist came out of their machine shop
too bad such an environment doesnt exist anymore here nor the ppl willing to learn

iscott all over again,, lol.

I actually worked Iscott back then and then Indians took over the plant. Everyone made money. I remember Indians gave you production bonus per day under the table to avoid the taxes.

Was good times when the Indians was there. Leant alot from that plant all my PLC/HMI programming came from there.

[sMASH]

the generation before me was iscott days, and a few remained inside till the arcelor days. even i got some stints with contractors there in the 2000's.. first real industry experience.

[sMASH]

rule of thumb in the industry; u dont spend money unless u have an immediate and sure path to recoup that costs

the mere fact that bp has does the extraction woudl put them in place to know tru the grape vine if the prospects looking good or not, before presenting finalized reports.


is like, if they putting down a new layer of pitch all over, u know elections callin.

Sounds like a very safe industry to be in-which industry rewards investment immediately and certainly?
Please provide some detail

You have clearly never worked in the energy industry.

What a pleb statement

Won't expect anything less from pnm idiots. Where habit

spending that money was like nlcb removing number 36 ball, and u playing 36. it was not a guess. nobody who in the industry here, was saying that the other shareholders deciding to mothball and hold off on the TAR, as a bad idea. we know how they think and what they look at. even if it was a bad idea, that is what they WERE set on on doing.


and what redos and habbit7.xxx dont understand is, a TAR is just about a month or two, it dont really take that much time to get done.

in 2025, from the time the petroleum engineers seeing that they getting gas, they coudl casually tell the directors, who would then let the LNG side know ting coming, for them to pull the trigger and start mobilizing crane and contractors and what not.
so by the time the official word get sent up the chain to NGC, tings on the ground done in action. and by the time the deals and projections and prices get worked out and signed off, the TAR done wrapping up.

and that month TAR, u dont need that whole time to start using gas. they would be taking to start up the ancillary systems, and purge adn what not.








but thats what u get when u have cake-ah-hole running the country. sure the prefered contractors get they cut out of that budget

[De Dragon]

rule of thumb in the industry; u dont spend money unless u have an immediate and sure path to recoup that costs

the mere fact that bp has does the extraction woudl put them in place to know tru the grape vine if the prospects looking good or not, before presenting finalized reports.


is like, if they putting down a new layer of pitch all over, u know elections callin.

Sounds like a very safe industry to be in-which industry rewards investment immediately and certainly?
Please provide some detail

You have clearly never worked in the energy industry.

What a pleb statement

Won't expect anything less from pnm idiots. Where habit

Kantness confirmed with this absolutely moronic statement. A TAR basically means a company will expect to be back to capacity within a week or so of its conclusion, so what dotishness you talking about "immediately and certainly" like it is some unicorn concept?
Dotishly, you seem content for your own LFD RFD PNM brown nosing ends to ignore that BP, Shell and other shareholders put out ZERO for Train 1's TAR, precisely because of lack of Immediate and certain" returns. The supplier of gas realized there is none for the foreseeable future, but Jackarse JUHN and Goebbels front $300M? Even the loyal, but also culpable Guy Smiley must have gone to his grave knowing that piece of sheit deal was toots.
Colos and Tuntsy only put forth what their handlers and Massa tell them to. Imagine up to now with BP basically saying salt to gas for Train 1 basically until 2030 AT BEST, these two kants defending that sheit

[Cantmis]

Gas mafia > govt tnt

[De Dragon]

Anyone> LFD RFD PNM govt tnt

*Fixed*

[Redman]

rule of thumb in the industry; u dont spend money unless u have an immediate and sure path to recoup that costs

the mere fact that bp has does the extraction woudl put them in place to know tru the grape vine if the prospects looking good or not, before presenting finalized reports.


is like, if they putting down a new layer of pitch all over, u know elections callin.

Sounds like a very safe industry to be in-which industry rewards investment immediately and certainly?
Please provide some detail

You have clearly never worked in the energy industry.

What a pleb statement

Won't expect anything less from pnm idiots. Where habit

Well non PNM idiot, it's smash who made the statement.
If you find it to be a pleb statement take it up with him.
I asked him to expand on what he said and provide some details.

Instead of ranting you guys should share this wisdom of immediate and sure recoup as a rule of thumb in the industry.
Especially in any industry where you don't control market prices.


Again....
WHat are the actual terms and conditions of the 300 spend?


Allyuh still blathering based on the same info and "we wok dey"..but don't have the full picture

Could it be that the Billion usd that BP paid along side Shells 400M usd settlement came with the condition of funding the TAR?

Based on the seperate settlements reached which have changed the royalty schedule across the board, and the additional take ( yes Dumbass) from what is supposed to be less transfer pricing losses what's the expectations of the returns on the unitisation?
Post your sources of information please.

Keep the political blather to a minimum.

[sMASH]

i have put the analogies previously in this same thread, and between u and habbit7.xxx, u both keep telling me macro economics is not a parlour, it dont operate the same,etc etc etc.

again, wrt TAR's, its money to service the plant. its analogous to a work vehicle, more a special duty truck, one that can only do a specific task like a cement truck.
when working, oil wears down, brakes, tires, bearings, chains, injectors etc etc etc. the wear, tear, and exhaustion of some components over time, reduce the effectiveness/productivity, of that system. where for the same inputs, u get reduced outputs. or ur unable to actually input the designed and budgeted amounts, and that reduces the outputs ur able to get.

the TAR's generally, is a servicing of the systems to get them BACK to designed productivity/earning potential.

sometimes there are a only minor things to rectify, thnk like oil filter brakes. other times, there are major things to rectify, think main bearing seal, timing chain, piston rings.
sometimes they use the opportunity to modify the plant. thing u take out the diff and put a larger one to handle more load.

what habbit7.xxx had thought was, that the TAR was a debottlenecking. meaning that it wsa to INCREASE the productivity more than what it was designed to do. so the plant desinged to give 700mt per day, and the TAR would allow it to go to 800 mt per day... arbitrary figures.

but no, the tar may just be that the plant desinged to do 700mt per day, and it makiing 650 mt per day. and the BIG BRIGHT EXPERIENCED boys at BG who oeprate multiple gas processing plants all over the world, that gas production and and processing is their bread and butter, life blood, decided that the amount of loss of prodction that the plant making is not feasible to absorb, and it is the right tiem to do the TAR.
(simple taxi man economics, if u get jobs making money, u stay on the road, make the money. u dont come off the road to jess change oil. and when the work slow donw, then u come down and change the oil)

and in this case, BG also knows even with the tar, the train 1 is a lower producing plant, so not as lucrative to operate as the other trains. if they have to make a choice between which trains to operate, the train 1 will alwasy be sacrificed.

they knew the gas prospects, and they knw it would not have gas to run it. so it just dont make sense spending the money on sharpening up the plant, when u cant recoup the cost. the plant not going no way, the failed components not going no way, so keep the money, spend it on other things. when u do get gas, then u spend the money, cause tar's dont take long.
next ting, u dont get gas, cause 2025 is a long way. they spent 270m to repair a plant that WILL NOT RUN.

u coudl take the chance and spend money to search for oil. u will spend money on a plant u know u getting gas for, to run and make it back.
u WILL not spend money on a palnt that u SURE u dont have gas to run.







govt up and take the money from NGC to pay for th whole TAR, and there was no gas for it to use when it was complete.
there was no indicators to tell anybody that there will be gas available for it. the nail in that coffin was when govt signed the gas supply contracts with tringen1 and proman. what ever was available ws already contracted to other sites.

[jhonnieblue]

rule of thumb in the industry; u dont spend money unless u have an immediate and sure path to recoup that costs

the mere fact that bp has does the extraction woudl put them in place to know tru the grape vine if the prospects looking good or not, before presenting finalized reports.


is like, if they putting down a new layer of pitch all over, u know elections callin.

Sounds like a very safe industry to be in-which industry rewards investment immediately and certainly?
Please provide some detail

You have clearly never worked in the energy industry.

What a pleb statement

Won't expect anything less from pnm idiots. Where habit

Well non PNM idiot, it's smash who made the statement.
If you find it to be a pleb statement take it up with him.
I asked him to expand on what he said and provide some details.

Instead of ranting you guys should share this wisdom of immediate and sure recoup as a rule of thumb in the industry.
Especially in any industry where you don't control market prices.


Again....
WHat are the actual terms and conditions of the 300 spend?


Allyuh still blathering based on the same info and "we wok dey"..but don't have the full picture

Could it be that the Billion usd that BP paid along side Shells 400M usd settlement came with the condition of funding the TAR?

Based on the seperate settlements reached which have changed the royalty schedule across the board, and the additional take ( yes Dumbass) from what is supposed to be less transfer pricing losses what's the expectations of the returns on the unitisation?
Post your sources of information please.

Keep the political blather to a minimum.

Don't need to rant I was addressing you not smash, and and habit are pnm idiots. Anyone in industry could state every specific reason why a TAR shouldn't be conducted on a plant about to be mothballed but you will defend that party till death. Well great job killing the industry.

Any plant that has to be mothballed will require significant investment to restart. Why waste that money In a TAR prior to shutting down. Just admit was growly ego pulling the cards and life can move on. Oh wait you wouldnt cause that logic escapes you and as said before you a complete pnm idiot

[zoom rader]

i have put the analogies previously in this same thread, and between u and habbit7.xxx, u both keep telling me macro economics is not a parlour, it dont operate the same,etc etc etc.

again, wrt TAR's, its money to service the plant. its analogous to a work vehicle, more a special duty truck, one that can only do a specific task like a cement truck.
when working, oil wears down, brakes, tires, bearings, chains, injectors etc etc etc. the wear, tear, and exhaustion of some components over time, reduce the effectiveness/productivity, of that system. where for the same inputs, u get reduced outputs. or ur unable to actually input the designed and budgeted amounts, and that reduces the outputs ur able to get.

the TAR's generally, is a servicing of the systems to get them BACK to designed productivity/earning potential.

sometimes there are a only minor things to rectify, thnk like oil filter brakes. other times, there are major things to rectify, think main bearing seal, timing chain, piston rings.
sometimes they use the opportunity to modify the plant. thing u take out the diff and put a larger one to handle more load.

what habbit7.xxx had thought was, that the TAR was a debottlenecking. meaning that it wsa to INCREASE the productivity more than what it was designed to do. so the plant desinged to give 700mt per day, and the TAR would allow it to go to 800 mt per day... arbitrary figures.

but no, the tar may just be that the plant desinged to do 700mt per day, and it makiing 650 mt per day. and the BIG BRIGHT EXPERIENCED boys at BG who oeprate multiple gas processing plants all over the world, that gas production and and processing is their bread and butter, life blood, decided that the amount of loss of prodction that the plant making is not feasible to absorb, and it is the right tiem to do the TAR.
(simple taxi man economics, if u get jobs making money, u stay on the road, make the money. u dont come off the road to jess change oil. and when the work slow donw, then u come down and change the oil)

and in this case, BG also knows even with the tar, the train 1 is a lower producing plant, so not as lucrative to operate as the other trains. if they have to make a choice between which trains to operate, the train 1 will alwasy be sacrificed.

they knew the gas prospects, and they knw it would not have gas to run it. so it just dont make sense spending the money on sharpening up the plant, when u cant recoup the cost. the plant not going no way, the failed components not going no way, so keep the money, spend it on other things. when u do get gas, then u spend the money, cause tar's dont take long.
next ting, u dont get gas, cause 2025 is a long way. they spent 270m to repair a plant that WILL NOT RUN.

u coudl take the chance and spend money to search for oil. u will spend money on a plant u know u getting gas for, to run and make it back.
u WILL not spend money on a palnt that u SURE u dont have gas to run.







govt up and take the money from NGC to pay for th whole TAR, and there was no gas for it to use when it was complete.
there was no indicators to tell anybody that there will be gas available for it. the nail in that coffin was when govt signed the gas supply contracts with tringen1 and proman. what ever was available ws already contracted to other sites.

Again don't waste time explaining to habitarse 7, he's and rest have never worked in industry or understands how it works

[Redman]

i have put the analogies previously in this same thread, and between u and habbit7.xxx, u both keep telling me macro economics is not a parlour, it dont operate the same,etc etc etc.

again, wrt TAR's, its money to service the plant. its analogous to a work vehicle, more a special duty truck, one that can only do a specific task like a cement truck.
when working, oil wears down, brakes, tires, bearings, chains, injectors etc etc etc. the wear, tear, and exhaustion of some components over time, reduce the effectiveness/productivity, of that system. where for the same inputs, u get reduced outputs. or ur unable to actually input the designed and budgeted amounts, and that reduces the outputs ur able to get.

the TAR's generally, is a servicing of the systems to get them BACK to designed productivity/earning potential.

sometimes there are a only minor things to rectify, thnk like oil filter brakes. other times, there are major things to rectify, think main bearing seal, timing chain, piston rings.
sometimes they use the opportunity to modify the plant. thing u take out the diff and put a larger one to handle more load.

what habbit7.xxx had thought was, that the TAR was a debottlenecking. meaning that it wsa to INCREASE the productivity more than what it was designed to do. so the plant desinged to give 700mt per day, and the TAR would allow it to go to 800 mt per day... arbitrary figures.

but no, the tar may just be that the plant desinged to do 700mt per day, and it makiing 650 mt per day. and the BIG BRIGHT EXPERIENCED boys at BG who oeprate multiple gas processing plants all over the world, that gas production and and processing is their bread and butter, life blood, decided that the amount of loss of prodction that the plant making is not feasible to absorb, and it is the right tiem to do the TAR.
(simple taxi man economics, if u get jobs making money, u stay on the road, make the money. u dont come off the road to jess change oil. and when the work slow donw, then u come down and change the oil)

and in this case, BG also knows even with the tar, the train 1 is a lower producing plant, so not as lucrative to operate as the other trains. if they have to make a choice between which trains to operate, the train 1 will alwasy be sacrificed.

they knew the gas prospects, and they knw it would not have gas to run it. so it just dont make sense spending the money on sharpening up the plant, when u cant recoup the cost. the plant not going no way, the failed components not going no way, so keep the money, spend it on other things. when u do get gas, then u spend the money, cause tar's dont take long.
next ting, u dont get gas, cause 2025 is a long way. they spent 270m to repair a plant that WILL NOT RUN.

u coudl take the chance and spend money to search for oil. u will spend money on a plant u know u getting gas for, to run and make it back.
u WILL not spend money on a palnt that u SURE u dont have gas to run.


govt up and take the money from NGC to pay for th whole TAR, and there was no gas for it to use when it was complete.
there was no indicators to tell anybody that there will be gas available for it. the nail in that coffin was when govt signed the gas supply contracts with tringen1 and proman. what ever was available ws already contracted to other sites.

The point remains.
There were inputs into the decision to spend the 300.
What were they?
You and I dont know.
If its as you say...then yes its crap.
On the other side of the spectrum it could be part of the whole restructuring and as such gives a IRR of 40%(just saying)
Then its a good move.

My guess is that isnt a stand alone decision and probably creates obligations and benefits elsewhere.
There are expected outcomes on the 300-AND these out comes are part of the larger picture of restructuring.
What are these outcomes?
We have to wait and see.

The analogies etc fail to accept that there are many sources for return on that 300 meaning that its not necessarily tied to only train 1.

The whole structure of the Royalty,marketing and pricing have changed for all 4 trains as they come off contract.
Whats the yield of all of this?



If they are unitising-which everybody says they are, what are we getting -what are we giving up?

[sMASH]

the inputs into the spending:

-rowley have some contractor padnah he need to funnel money to, to get the kickbacks
-he didnt understand the equation "plant + gas = money", and thought that "plant - gas + bully TAR = money.

the factors that led to rowley deciding to do the tar was political. the factors that keeping the plant down, is lack of available feedstock. u cant bully ur way into making more gas available. if u do that, then u would be taking away gas from another plant, and u already signed supply contracts with them.











i not against or for anything. its just that this situation, there was no gas available to run the plant. it needed a tar too, butthe tar would not make it run. it needed gas to run, and there isnt... until 2025.

the thing is, we in a ecnomic crunch OUTSIDE of the oil gas too. we only have 10% shares in tr1, so its foolhardy to think that shouldering 100% of the cost of the TAR would make sense. put that money to other use, and when 2025 reach and we get gas we will cross that bridge.



why i vexed for, is rowley telling we to tighten our belts, and eat one fig, and that is the sheit they doing with hundreds of millions of dollars. i must be penny wise but its okay for them to be pound foolish.



the only way for this debacle to get squared off, is when gas does come available, that the other shareholders to say, 'we go handle some repayemnts'. given bp and bg likes to have a good reputation, they might do it. but given that its in our best interest to have th plant producing and earnign dividends, they dont have to do it, cause we need beggin for it to restart.

[De Dragon]

rule of thumb in the industry; u dont spend money unless u have an immediate and sure path to recoup that costs

the mere fact that bp has does the extraction woudl put them in place to know tru the grape vine if the prospects looking good or not, before presenting finalized reports.


is like, if they putting down a new layer of pitch all over, u know elections callin.

Sounds like a very safe industry to be in-which industry rewards investment immediately and certainly?
Please provide some detail

You have clearly never worked in the energy industry.

What a pleb statement

Won't expect anything less from pnm idiots. Where habit

Well non PNM idiot, it's smash who made the statement.
If you find it to be a pleb statement take it up with him.
I asked him to expand on what he said and provide some details.

Instead of ranting you guys should share this wisdom of immediate and sure recoup as a rule of thumb in the industry.
Especially in any industry where you don't control market prices.


Again....
WHat are the actual terms and conditions of the 300 spend?


Allyuh still blathering based on the same info and "we wok dey"..but don't have the full picture

Could it be that the Billion usd that BP paid along side Shells 400M usd settlement came with the condition of funding the TAR?

Based on the seperate settlements reached which have changed the royalty schedule across the board, and the additional take ( yes Dumbass) from what is supposed to be less transfer pricing losses what's the expectations of the returns on the unitisation?
Post your sources of information please.

Keep the political blather to a minimum.

Don't need to rant I was addressing you not smash, and and habit are pnm idiots. Anyone in industry could state every specific reason why a TAR shouldn't be conducted on a plant about to be mothballed but you will defend that party till death. Well great job killing the industry.

Any plant that has to be mothballed will require significant investment to restart. Why waste that money In a TAR prior to shutting down. Just admit was growly ego pulling the cards and life can move on. Oh wait you wouldnt cause that logic escapes you and as said before you a complete pnm idiot

Dummy, the people who you are stupidly and obstinately arguing with have actual experience with TAR's and they know no one in the world funds a TAR and does not immediately expect to be back in production within a week of restart. NO large scale heavy industry in Trinidad and Tobago controls market prices, even when we were the largest producers of ammonia and methanol in the world, beyond price shocks, we were still at the mercy of MNC's, which is why immediate restart and production of a TAR is critical to avoid unnecessary downtime and subsequent revenue loss.
Colos and Tunts7 seem to genuinely feel that $300M was either a condition of an agreement with BPP and Shell(dotishness) or to put Train 1 in plastic until it can get gas(dotishness).
Conclusion? Colos and Tunts7 believe in dotishness.

[Redman]

I am saying that we dont know.
You definitely dont know....neither do I.

Where is the argument?

You saying its a mistake because....xyz. ...largely operational issues, and lets ignore any other possibilities.
Great- maybe at the operational level thats where you focus your attention.
But the operational level isnt the sole pivot point in this whole affair.
If it was, we probably would not be having this argument.

So the OBVIOUS reality is that in the absence of the operational justification there must be (or were) other inputs that support spending that money.

The overarching plan,published and scrutinized by smarter people than ALL of us, is comprised of a massive change to each part of the process...from well head with the Royalty schedule, to how TnT participates in the the end user price.
Isnt it clear that BP/Shell ,no longer sharing the $6.5B usd per year transfer pricing bonus would push back against GORTT some how?

Redman dont know,Dragon dont know,Smash dont know,JohnnieBlue dont know.

As I said in my first post on this topic - you dont KNOW but you have made a firm conclusion.

all your blathering eh changing that

[ruskie]

I am saying that we dont know.
You definitely dont know....neither do I.

Where is the argument?

You saying its a mistake because....xyz. ...largely operational issues, and lets ignore any other possibilities.
Great- maybe at the operational level thats where you focus your attention.
But the operational level isnt the sole pivot point in this whole affair.
If it was, we probably would not be having this argument.

So the OBVIOUS reality is that in the absence of the operational justification there must be (or were) other inputs that support spending that money.

The overarching plan,published and scrutinized by smarter people than ALL of us, is comprised of a massive change to each part of the process...from well head with the Royalty schedule, to how TnT participates in the the end user price.
Isnt it clear that BP/Shell ,no longer sharing the $6.5B usd per year transfer pricing bonus would push back against GORTT some how?

Redman dont know,Dragon dont know,Smash dont know,JohnnieBlue dont know.

As I said in my first post on this topic - you dont KNOW but you have made a firm conclusion.

all your blathering eh changing that

Without a doubt, redman is correct in saying that operational considerations alone did not cause that 300 million spend. The unsaid, says it all.

[sMASH]

we dont know what factors led to them taking that decision.

from industry side, there were NO factors indicating that they should have undertook that spending, at this time.

the only reason why the TAR spending is an issue, is because govt opted to shoulder the total cost. if it didnt shoulder the total cost, i woudl say go right ahead, it woudl be money we need to spend esle where, but 30m is small ting, dont mind 30k students didnt have e devices for school, and pupils that didnt meet a mandatory minimum online time, must repeat.


stating that we dont know what went tru rowley head to spend all that money upfornt, does not negate or invalidate it was the wrong financial decision to make.
*u dont kno the reasons why the man waste he money and buy a tiger*
none of the reasons why the man buy a tiger can excuse the fact he wasted the money.



and the main reason why govt people pass contracts, is to funnel treasury money to some contractor pockets, cause they kick it back up the chain of bestowment

as police say, 'ignorance of economics is not excuse from economics'

[De Dragon]

I am saying that we dont know.
You definitely dont know....neither do I.

Where is the argument?

You saying its a mistake because....xyz. ...largely operational issues, and lets ignore any other possibilities.
Great- maybe at the operational level thats where you focus your attention.
But the operational level isnt the sole pivot point in this whole affair.
If it was, we probably would not be having this argument.

So the OBVIOUS reality is that in the absence of the operational justification there must be (or were) other inputs that support spending that money.

The overarching plan,published and scrutinized by smarter people than ALL of us, is comprised of a massive change to each part of the process...from well head with the Royalty schedule, to how TnT participates in the the end user price.
Isnt it clear that BP/Shell ,no longer sharing the $6.5B usd per year transfer pricing bonus would push back against GORTT some how?

Redman dont know,Dragon dont know,Smash dont know,JohnnieBlue dont know.

As I said in my first post on this topic - you dont KNOW but you have made a firm conclusion.

all your blathering eh changing that

*Sigh*
Your flailing attempt to divorce "operational issues" from what is clearly a ridiculously misguided LFD RFD PNM blunder, assumes that people who plan and execute TAR's yearly don't consider everything involved in a TAR, from when to execute it. the budget etc, shows that you don't know sheit.
A TAR is a major undertaking and is LITERALLY what the output and thus profits of a heavy industry hinges on. NO ONE invests $300 million in a minority shareholder plant, when clearly the major stakeholders have seen the writing on the wall and spent $0.00, all while being told by the very supplier (and MAJOR shareholder) of your most significant input, that they have none for you, maybe even up to 2030.
Your "push back" argument also holds no water as BP/Shell own most of Train 1, and there is no room for "push back" when dollars and cents are at stake.
Even if you get gas then, your plant will then again need a major cash infusion to get it up and running again, in addition to the $300M that was unwisely spent. Will we foot the entire bill again?
It makes ZERO sense to expend $300M on a TAR, and not restart the plant IMMEDIATELY

[sMASH]

gas supplies gonna crank up, but not now.

https://www.guardian.co.tt/news/denovo- ... d500e82274

DeNovo, NGC sign gas sales contract
Mon Aug 02 2021


DeNovo Energy Limited (DeNovo) and The National Gas Company of Trinidad and Tobago (NGC) yesterday announced the signing of the Zandolie Field development Gas Sales Contract (GSC) for commercialisation of the Zandolie Field located in Block 1(a).

The Zandolie Field Development project will be DeNovo’s second offshore installment following the Iguana field development in the same Block 1(a) which was the first west coast natural gas field to be developed in Trinidad and Tobago.

DeNovo will invest US$52 million on the Zandolie development which is expected to deliver approximately 40 million standard cubic feet of gas per day (MMSCFD).

On the current project schedule, production is projected to begin within the first half of 2022.

NGC has been working collaboratively and earnestly with both the upstream and downstream sectors to ensure alignment of supply and demand for the medium to longterm.

This has included a focus on opportunities to monetise small and marginal fields. The Zandolie design plan includes a connecting pipeline to the Iguana Platform which will enable the new field to utilise spare processing capacity at Iguana.

DeNovo said the strategy of utilising the Iguana platform as a hub not only reduces project costs but also provides proof of concept for the vision of the Iguana platform serving as a hub for natural gas developments in the Gulf of Paria.

Detailed Design engineering is ongoing for the Zandolie Platform which is planned to be an Unmanned Minimum Facility and is projected to be lighter and smaller than Iguana.

Aligned to DeNovo’s higher local content intention, the platform will be fabricated locally in Trinidad and Tobago and a local rig will be utilised for installation of the platform as well as drilling and completion.

DeNovo’s managing director, Bryan Ramsumair remarked: “At DeNovo, we are intent on developing safe, innovative and cost-effective initiatives consistent with our prime objective of increasing gas supply to the Trinidad and Tobago Petrochemical sector, particularly from formerly stranded gas fields. The signing of our Zandolie GSC demonstrates the sustainability of the DeNovo model and keeps us on schedule to deliver, first gas into the system next year.”

Specific to local content, he further stated, “As we demonstrated with our first field development of Iguana, we are committed to maximising the use of local expertise for this project and we look forward to enhancing local collaboration through in-country engineering, fabrication and drilling. In support of the carbon agenda, Zandolie will utilise 100% green power generation powered by both wind and solar energy.”

Mark Loquan, NGC President, commented, “This gas sales contract will enhance our current natural gas supply and is a notable step for the local energy industry. This signing is framed against a background of the strategic priorities of both companies to increase natural gas production through the monetisation of proven stranded natural gas reserves. NGC is committed to partnering with upstream producers to maintain the global competitiveness of our petrochemical producers, and indeed, the sustainability and the continued attractiveness of Trinidad and Tobago’s energy industry to current and potential global investors.”

In expressing his commitment to the Trinidad and Tobago energy industry, Claus Cronberger, managing director of Proman Trinidad and Tobago and chairman of DeNovo, stated, “Today’s announcement is further validation of DeNovo’s pioneering model for developing and monetising stranded gas fields, which Proman proudly supports as part of our commitment to driving innovation and broadening the energy mix for Trinidad and Tobago’s vital energy industries.”

Claus Cronberger added, “The collaboration between DeNovo’s Operations, Engineering and Construction teams as well as local services and contractor partners to fabricate, engineer and install this platform is testament to the wealth of home-grown talent in this country. We look forward to working with the Ministry of Energy and Energy Industries, NGC and other partners to get this exciting project underway.”

[Habit7]

what habbit7.xxx had thought was, that the TAR was a debottlenecking. meaning that it wsa to INCREASE the productivity more than what it was designed to do. so the plant desinged to give 700mt per day, and the TAR would allow it to go to 800 mt per day... arbitrary figures.

When I expressed this?

[ST Auto]

Long term gas contracts jumping out

[sMASH]

what habbit7.xxx had thought was, that the TAR was a debottlenecking. meaning that it wsa to INCREASE the productivity more than what it was designed to do. so the plant desinged to give 700mt per day, and the TAR would allow it to go to 800 mt per day... arbitrary figures.

When I expressed this?

when u was dreaming about gargling sh!tkicker

[Habit7]

what habbit7.xxx had thought was, that the TAR was a debottlenecking. meaning that it wsa to INCREASE the productivity more than what it was designed to do. so the plant desinged to give 700mt per day, and the TAR would allow it to go to 800 mt per day... arbitrary figures.

When I expressed this?

when u was dreaming about gargling sh!tkicker

So your points so poor you have to invent me saying something so that you can defeat it?

What really going in tuner these days boy?