Posted on 06/11/2017 3:04:30 AM PDT by GonzoII
One day in March, the Rioja Knutsen tanker, filled with liquefied natural gas, was travelling from the US to Portugal. Suddenly, Mexico’s power company lobbed in a higher bid for its cargo. At the Bahamas, the ship abruptly made a starboard turn and headed south.
How natural gas is bought and sold in the world’s scattered regional markets for the fuel is changing rapidly. Ships such as the Rioja Knutsen are stitching those regions together and a single global market is emerging.
This is already how nearly every other hydrocarbon, from crude oil to obscure petrochemicals, is sold. As gas joins the club, the effects will ripple through energy prices, company profits, the environment and geopolitics.
Behind the evolution is improving technology for moving gas as a liquid, which means it can go to many more places rather than simply where a pipeline runs. In addition, a glut of gas has producers working to develop new consumers all over the world. The result is growing flexibility in once-rigid gas contracts and a convergence in prices long dictated by local factors such as weather.
The share of gas moving by sea reached 40 per cent of total trades in 2015, and the International Energy Agency forecasts that seaborne gas will account for a bigger share of trading than pipelines by 2040.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.com.au ...
Mexico has plenty of internal LG production.
Plus, there must be mucho pipelines between the US and Mexico.
Seems like the MOST expensive way for them to get the stuff.
Transporting natural gas 3000 miles by pipeline will always be cheaper than transporting it 5000 miles by ship. There are two reasons to transport it by ship. First, it cuts into Russia’s margins on their gas exports and prevents price gouging. Second, it reduces their political leverage. Russia’s foreign policy relies a lot on bullying other countries, especially testicley deficient European countries who like to spend less than 2% of their GDP on national defense. Widespread use of LNG tankers makes that more difficult.
Building and maintaining a pipeline from here to there could be a bit of a challenge.
I guess natural gas has a higher octane than gasoline at the pump. Not sure how to prevent valor lock, though
Now we are taking their business.
And. This was always what all the hysteria about Russia has been about all along.
Over long distances, LNG is by far the most effective way to deliver natural gas. Of course, it requires a very expensive infrastructure, but once set up and in operation, it should be relatively easy to maintain.
Mexico may have plenty of internal natural gas production, but the internal delivery systems are a little antiquated.
Compressed natural gas COULD be transported by truck or rail car, but if one of these ruptures in the presence of the least spark, it would be the effect of a major bomb explosion, with very little life or property left within the blast zone.
And there is talk of transporting LNG by rail tank car, but these delivery options are still several years away from application. How to make carbon-fiber tanks rupture-proof?
We export our natural resources and import finished product. Where have I heard of that situation before?
All I know is when the globalist get involved the prices to the American consumer go up.
Vapor lock is actually not a problem for natural-gas fueled vehicles, as that is caused by a bubble forming in a liquid fuel line. Plus there is no problem with fuel vaporization even at extreme low temperatures, making cold starts in sub-zero weather much simpler.
The escape of even minute quantities of natural gas while fueling the vehicle is a much greater risk, as even the least bit of a static spark will ignite the gas, with sometimes disastrous results.
This trend will make global co2 emissions fall considerably.
(From)History of accidents in the LNG industry
At the peak-shaving plant a tank failed and spilled its contents into the street and storm sewer system. The resulting explosion and fire killed 128 people. The tank was built with a steel alloy that had low-nickel content, which made the alloy brittle when exposed to the extreme cold of LNG.
Cleveland 1944
https://www.laohamutuk.org/Oil/LNG/app4.htm
I suppose that depends on the difference between the BTU's per unit volume between CNG and LNG. I don't think they pump LNG through pipelines.
Nonsense! Just build the Saint Johns to Stornoway bridge and suspend the pipeline under it. :o)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.