LNG Market 180: Spot Prices are Out, Long-Term Contracts are In
If you monitor the oil and gas industry long enough, you’ll come to discover cycles, trends, and the old saying, “Everything old is new again.” That’s what is happening with the LNG market. For years (several decades), LNG was sold on long-term contracts of 10 to 20 years. Buyers would agree to purchase X amount of LNG for Y amount of cash for long periods of time. Long-term contracts offer price stability and guaranteed availability. But then came shale…
Read More “LNG Market 180: Spot Prices are Out, Long-Term Contracts are In”
Each month the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) issues a monthly Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO). In May, the STEO made the startling prediction that the average Henry Hub price for natural gas (the national benchmark) would average $8.59 for the entire second half of this year (see 
Although we understand self-interest and wanting to protect one’s profit margin, we continue to be distressed that some of the biggest chemical companies in the world (meaning in the U.S.) are actively trying to block LNG exports. Why? They want the natural gas they buy (in very large quantities) to be as cheap as possible. In 2017, Big Chemical–companies like Dow Corning, BASF, Eastman Chemical, and others–via their trade association Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA), launched an effort to try and persuade Energy Secretary Rick Perry and the Trump Administration to create barriers to exports of natural gas (see 
Yesterday the NYMEX natural gas price lost 20% of its value in a single day for the second time in two weeks. When news broke on June 14 that the Freeport LNG plant would not likely return to full service before the end of this year, the NYMEX front-month contract lost $1.42 (19.75%) to close at $7.19/MMBtu (see 
In March MDN brought you information from the Toronto Financial Post that said the Ukrainian crisis has put two East Coast Canada LNG export facilities “back on the map” (see 
The Group of Seven (G-7) is an inter-governmental political forum consisting of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. G-7 countries are the world’s largest democratic (freely elected) economies, representing roughly half of the world’s wealth (but only 10% of the world’s population). President Biden and the leaders of the other G-7 countries had a confab yesterday in Germany and issued a joint communique (copy below) that says, in part, it’s OK to invest in natural gas and LNG infrastructure.
President Biden began a five-day “swing” through Europe on Sunday. Yesterday he met with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to discuss energy security in light of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. European countries are in various stages of reducing the import of Russian natural gas and oil, which is leading to upheaval in the world market. Biden and von der Leyen issued a joint statement following their meeting (pre-written, of course). What does the statement say about energy and LNG in particular?
Two weeks ago the second-largest LNG export terminal in the U.S., Freeport LNG located near Galveston, Texas, experienced an explosion and fire (see 
Wrapping up the coverage of the recent Hart Energy DUG East Conference, Pittsburgh Business Times reporter Paul Gough pulled together comments by various speakers on the topic of LNG and whether or not the Marcellus/Utica can and will benefit from a growth in American LNG exports. Opinions by some of the biggest drillers in the M-U diverged on this topic.
Freeport LNG provided an update yesterday to inform the public about what happened at its export facility just south of Galveston, Texas, situated on the Gulf Coast. Freeport said an “incident” occurred in pipe racks that support the transfer of LNG from the facility’s LNG storage tank area to the terminal’s dock facilities located on the intracoastal (i.e., north) side of Freeport LNG’s dock basin. None of the liquefaction trains, LNG storage tanks, dock facilities, or LNG process areas were impacted. Freeport originally said the facility would be back online in three weeks. That’s a pipe dream (pun intended). Yesterday Freeport revised their estimate to three months minimum before partial operations are back online. It will be the end of the year for full operations exporting all 2 Bcf/d are back online, according to Freeport.
In years gone by arrogant Europeans turned their noses up to American “fracked” LNG (see 
Last week MDN told you about the June 8th explosion and fire at Freeport LNG located near Galveston, the second-largest LNG export terminal in the U.S. (see