ronwagn + 6,290 October 28, 2021 https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Demand-For-LNG-Is-Only-Going-To-Rise.html LNG powered ships, trucks, equipment, and industry will all be wanting more fuel in the future. The resources are available and stopping flaring should be mandatory. RCW Cheniere Energy recently announced plans for a $7-billion expansion of its Sabine Pass liquefaction plant in response to the surge in demand for the superchilled fuel in Asia. India's biggest gas importer said that this strong demand would lead to another surge - in long-term contracts. There may be doubts about long-term oil demand, but LNG's future seems to be bright. Morgan Stanley said earlier this week that it expected demand for liquefied natural gas to grow by between 25 and 50 percent by 2030. Spot prices for LNG over the next ten years, the bank's analysts also said, as quoted by Reuters, could be on average 40 percent higher than the last five-year average. The bank raised its long-term price outlook for the commodity to $10 per million British thermal units. The long-term price forecasts compare to a spot price of $56 per mmBtu in Asia earlier this month, the Reuters report noted. This would explain a move to long-term contracts, as forecast by the chief executive of India's Petronet. "Such a volatility was never seen in the history of LNG markets. We have seen the lowest and the highest prices in the last one year," he said, as quoted by Reuters, at an industry event last week. "Every dark cloud has a silver lining and this (high price) situation is pushing people to have more long-term contracts than normally and that could be the best thing for the gas economy across the world," A. K. Singh said. But for long-term contracts, there needs to be sufficient supply. The world seems to have swung into a deficit of the fuel and it needs new supply of at least 73 million tons by 2030, according to Morgan Stanley analysts. This would cost some $65 billion, and that's on top of $200 billion of LNG projects approved since 2019, Reuters noted. Related: Will The Energy Sector Continue To Outperform The Market?"We think that Asia is the growth driver for our industry for LNG demand for decades to come, and China is the single biggest piece in that," said the chief commercial officer of Cheniere Energy last week, as quoted by the Financial Times. Cheniere's $7-billion production expansion is part of a new wave of LNG projects that popped up amid the energy crunch that started in Europe and quickly spread to Asia. An earlier report by the Financial Times cited Tellurian, with plans for a $15-billion facility. NextDecade plans to sanction a new facility in Texas by the end of the year. "Market conditions in Europe and around the world confirm that the call on LNG far exceeds available supply," said NextDecade's chief executive Matt Schatzman. Another executive, the CEO of Venture Global, said U.S. liquefied natural gas will be "critical to meeting this growing need and bringing energy security to Europe and beyond." Meanwhile, the world's largest LNG exporter earlier this month said its production was maxed out as demand continued to outstrip supply. "We are maxed out, as far as we have given all our customers their due quantities," said Saad al-Kaabi, Qatar's energy minister, as quoted by Al Jazeera. "I am unhappy about gas prices being high." Qatar, by the way, is working on a substantial increase in its LNG production capacity. The project, costing $28.75 billion, will boost the country's LNG production capacity from 77 million tons per year to 110 million tons. It should start producing in 2025.Related: Alaska’s Oil Renaissance Stumbles Despite Rise In Crude Prices The going seems to be particularly good for LNG producers and is getting better as buyers become more willing to reduce the risk of future price spikes by locking in lower rates in long-term contracts. This also confirms the long-term growth trajectory of liquefied natural gas despite warnings from the International Energy Agency that LNG demand needs to peak soon if we are to hit the Paris Agreement emission targets. According to the IEA, gas demand must peak between 2025 and 2030 and start declining from 2030 onwards if the world is to achieve net-zero emission status by 2050. But the latest trends in LNG and gas make this doubtful. The fact that companies are willing to commit billions in upfront investments in new production capacity suggests that they expect quite the opposite of what the IEA advises. The Morgan Stanley forecast chimes in with these expectations. "Contrary to investor expectations, the world is going to need more LNG in the initial phase of the energy transition," the bank's analysts wrote. "Competing technologies for natural gas are not being developed fast enough, and there are significant benefits in reducing coal consumption while greener fuels are commercialised." This was precisely the idea of Europe switching from coal to gas. Yet as the crunch showed, there is no guaranteed hedge against shortages. Now, it is this drive to minimize the chance of future shortages that is spurring demand. Once the long-term contracts are signed, a demand decline would be difficult to effect artificially to advance the Paris Agreement agenda. By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sebastian Meana + 278 October 29, 2021 (edited) On 10/27/2021 at 10:29 PM, ronwagn said: https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Demand-For-LNG-Is-Only-Going-To-Rise.html LNG powered ships, trucks, equipment, and industry will all be wanting more fuel in the future. The resources are available and stopping flaring should be mandatory. RCW Cheniere Energy recently announced plans for a $7-billion expansion of its Sabine Pass liquefaction plant in response to the surge in demand for the superchilled fuel in Asia. India's biggest gas importer said that this strong demand would lead to another surge - in long-term contracts. There may be doubts about long-term oil demand, but LNG's future seems to be bright. Morgan Stanley said earlier this week that it expected demand for liquefied natural gas to grow by between 25 and 50 percent by 2030. Spot prices for LNG over the next ten years, the bank's analysts also said, as quoted by Reuters, could be on average 40 percent higher than the last five-year average. The bank raised its long-term price outlook for the commodity to $10 per million British thermal units. The long-term price forecasts compare to a spot price of $56 per mmBtu in Asia earlier this month, the Reuters report noted. This would explain a move to long-term contracts, as forecast by the chief executive of India's Petronet. "Such a volatility was never seen in the history of LNG markets. We have seen the lowest and the highest prices in the last one year," he said, as quoted by Reuters, at an industry event last week. "Every dark cloud has a silver lining and this (high price) situation is pushing people to have more long-term contracts than normally and that could be the best thing for the gas economy across the world," A. K. Singh said. But for long-term contracts, there needs to be sufficient supply. The world seems to have swung into a deficit of the fuel and it needs new supply of at least 73 million tons by 2030, according to Morgan Stanley analysts. This would cost some $65 billion, and that's on top of $200 billion of LNG projects approved since 2019, Reuters noted. Related: Will The Energy Sector Continue To Outperform The Market?"We think that Asia is the growth driver for our industry for LNG demand for decades to come, and China is the single biggest piece in that," said the chief commercial officer of Cheniere Energy last week, as quoted by the Financial Times. Cheniere's $7-billion production expansion is part of a new wave of LNG projects that popped up amid the energy crunch that started in Europe and quickly spread to Asia. An earlier report by the Financial Times cited Tellurian, with plans for a $15-billion facility. NextDecade plans to sanction a new facility in Texas by the end of the year. "Market conditions in Europe and around the world confirm that the call on LNG far exceeds available supply," said NextDecade's chief executive Matt Schatzman. Another executive, the CEO of Venture Global, said U.S. liquefied natural gas will be "critical to meeting this growing need and bringing energy security to Europe and beyond." Meanwhile, the world's largest LNG exporter earlier this month said its production was maxed out as demand continued to outstrip supply. "We are maxed out, as far as we have given all our customers their due quantities," said Saad al-Kaabi, Qatar's energy minister, as quoted by Al Jazeera. "I am unhappy about gas prices being high." Qatar, by the way, is working on a substantial increase in its LNG production capacity. The project, costing $28.75 billion, will boost the country's LNG production capacity from 77 million tons per year to 110 million tons. It should start producing in 2025.Related: Alaska’s Oil Renaissance Stumbles Despite Rise In Crude Prices The going seems to be particularly good for LNG producers and is getting better as buyers become more willing to reduce the risk of future price spikes by locking in lower rates in long-term contracts. This also confirms the long-term growth trajectory of liquefied natural gas despite warnings from the International Energy Agency that LNG demand needs to peak soon if we are to hit the Paris Agreement emission targets. According to the IEA, gas demand must peak between 2025 and 2030 and start declining from 2030 onwards if the world is to achieve net-zero emission status by 2050. But the latest trends in LNG and gas make this doubtful. The fact that companies are willing to commit billions in upfront investments in new production capacity suggests that they expect quite the opposite of what the IEA advises. The Morgan Stanley forecast chimes in with these expectations. "Contrary to investor expectations, the world is going to need more LNG in the initial phase of the energy transition," the bank's analysts wrote. "Competing technologies for natural gas are not being developed fast enough, and there are significant benefits in reducing coal consumption while greener fuels are commercialised." This was precisely the idea of Europe switching from coal to gas. Yet as the crunch showed, there is no guaranteed hedge against shortages. Now, it is this drive to minimize the chance of future shortages that is spurring demand. Once the long-term contracts are signed, a demand decline would be difficult to effect artificially to advance the Paris Agreement agenda. By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com I'm not that big of a fan of LNG as you might have noticed... altho i reversed my opinion that is better to make methanol than LNG for intercontinental transport, partially because the 10% energy loss, partially because i work in refrigeration so i get excited about cryogenics more than about chemistry, but Methanol is a way superior fuel for engines Liquefaction plants are expensive tho, they should standardize more trains and limit the size to mass produce them and reduce the cost of constructing them Edited October 29, 2021 by Sebastian Meana 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrei Moutchkine + 828 October 29, 2021 (edited) 5 hours ago, Sebastian Meana said: I'm not that big of a fan of LNG as you might have noticed... altho i reversed my opinion that is better to make methanol than LNG for intercontinental transport, partially because the 10% energy loss, partially because i work in refrigeration so i get excited about cryogenics more than about chemistry, but Methanol is a way superior fuel for engines Liquefaction plants are expensive tho, they should standardize more trains and limit the size to mass produce them and reduce the cost of constructing them Novatek's "Arctic Cascade" is supposed to have only two stages, because the ambient air / water is cold enough. Some patent links here https://neftegazru.com/tech-library/technology/635919-arctic-cascade/ Edited October 29, 2021 by Andrei Moutchkine 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ronwagn + 6,290 October 29, 2021 9 hours ago, Sebastian Meana said: I'm not that big of a fan of LNG as you might have noticed... altho i reversed my opinion that is better to make methanol than LNG for intercontinental transport, partially because the 10% energy loss, partially because i work in refrigeration so i get excited about cryogenics more than about chemistry, but Methanol is a way superior fuel for engines Liquefaction plants are expensive tho, they should standardize more trains and limit the size to mass produce them and reduce the cost of constructing them I don't know, but it sounds like a good idea. I am wondering if it hasn't been done already though. Small scale CNG plants have been designed to avoid flaring, but I am not sure about LNG. LNG is much better for truck or ship transport if the end user can accept it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sebastian Meana + 278 October 30, 2021 9 hours ago, ronwagn said: I don't know, but it sounds like a good idea. I am wondering if it hasn't been done already though. Small scale CNG plants have been designed to avoid flaring, but I am not sure about LNG. LNG is much better for truck or ship transport if the end user can accept it. Most likely because oil executives are unlikely to listen to the ideas of a 20 somethings year old guy in the third world who makes a living repairing aircons, blast freezers, cold chambers, and refrigeration units. There are issues with natural gas on internal combustion engines if is not for power generation -the high autoignition temperature means that you must compress it to around 600°C close to the autoignition temp before actually igniting it -that increases engines wear and tear and reduces efficiency -Natural gas also burns slowly, which means you need to advance timing and you cant necessarilly increase the compression that much -Some of those issues could be solved with LNG being injected as a liquid since the phase change from liquid to gas absorbs heat and cools the intake but i dont know any engine that uses direct LNG liquid injection Methanol is a liquid at room temperature has a Octane rating of 135, against 120 of Methane, and the lower autoignition temperature means the engine overheats less and is more efficient due to a lower delta T between the compression and exhaust stroke. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrei Moutchkine + 828 October 30, 2021 (edited) 15 hours ago, Sebastian Meana said: Most likely because oil executives are unlikely to listen to the ideas of a 20 somethings year old guy in the third world who makes a living repairing aircons, blast freezers, cold chambers, and refrigeration units. There are issues with natural gas on internal combustion engines if is not for power generation -the high autoignition temperature means that you must compress it to around 600°C close to the autoignition temp before actually igniting it -that increases engines wear and tear and reduces efficiency -Natural gas also burns slowly, which means you need to advance timing and you cant necessarilly increase the compression that much -Some of those issues could be solved with LNG being injected as a liquid since the phase change from liquid to gas absorbs heat and cools the intake but i dont know any engine that uses direct LNG liquid injection Methanol is a liquid at room temperature has a Octane rating of 135, against 120 of Methane, and the lower autoignition temperature means the engine overheats less and is more efficient due to a lower delta T between the compression and exhaust stroke. The methanol engines are the ones with highest compression around though? No https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_engine is very high compression. The higher compression is actually usually in argument in favor of direct-injection diesels. Because they are overbuilt to handle it (and why small diesels don't really work) There is also a third relative - DME, dimethyl ether. It is a gas at room temperature, but is easily liquefied by pressure.Is probably the most powerful option (for reasons not actually related to delta t or compression) Is supposed to be the official future transportation fuel of Japan. Edited October 30, 2021 by Andrei Moutchkine 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ronwagn + 6,290 October 30, 2021 17 hours ago, Sebastian Meana said: Most likely because oil executives are unlikely to listen to the ideas of a 20 somethings year old guy in the third world who makes a living repairing aircons, blast freezers, cold chambers, and refrigeration units. There are issues with natural gas on internal combustion engines if is not for power generation -the high autoignition temperature means that you must compress it to around 600°C close to the autoignition temp before actually igniting it -that increases engines wear and tear and reduces efficiency -Natural gas also burns slowly, which means you need to advance timing and you cant necessarilly increase the compression that much -Some of those issues could be solved with LNG being injected as a liquid since the phase change from liquid to gas absorbs heat and cools the intake but i dont know any engine that uses direct LNG liquid injection Methanol is a liquid at room temperature has a Octane rating of 135, against 120 of Methane, and the lower autoignition temperature means the engine overheats less and is more efficient due to a lower delta T between the compression and exhaust stroke. https://www.volvotrucks.com/en-en/trucks/trucks/volvo-fh/volvo-fh-lng.html https://www.automotivelogistics.media/inbound-logistics/bmw-using-lng-powered-trucks-for-engine-deliveries-to-regensburg/41624.article I can give endless references to LNG uses including large ships. CNG use is more common an has more fueling locations. It can also be made of renewable waste products from an endless variety of waste. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sebastian Meana + 278 October 31, 2021 (edited) 13 hours ago, ronwagn said: https://www.volvotrucks.com/en-en/trucks/trucks/volvo-fh/volvo-fh-lng.html https://www.automotivelogistics.media/inbound-logistics/bmw-using-lng-powered-trucks-for-engine-deliveries-to-regensburg/41624.article I can give endless references to LNG uses including large ships. CNG use is more common an has more fueling locations. It can also be made of renewable waste products from an endless variety of waste. I didnt say that LNG doesnt work, is just that Methanol works better, California had until 2005 a fleet of Methanol gas station and cars that woerked quite nicely until natgas prices shot up to over 500U$D a ton.https://www.pollutionsolutions-online.com/news/air-clean-up/16/seabornecomms/methanol-fuelled-ships-less-costly-to-build-and-operate-than-those-burning-lng/55830https://www.man-es.com/discover/the-benefits-of-methanol Edited October 31, 2021 by Sebastian Meana 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ronwagn + 6,290 October 31, 2021 Methanol has some fans. Ammonia does too. It often takes a long time for superior ideas to take hold. My focus is on natural gas because it has proven itself for a long time and has fueled vehicles since WW1. Even wood gas was used then too. Alcohol and batteries were also considered as the main fuel for for vehicles. I am open to all new ideas, but have already looked at dozens of them. It looks like politics has more to do with what fuels are used. Not because of technical superiority but because of donations to politicians from crony capitalists and stock tips telling them how they can get rich off of said ideas. Senator Kerry is probably the best example of that. As it turns out, China, Russia, and OPEC are determining the real choices for the fuels that will run the world for quite awhile. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KeyboardWarrior + 527 November 1, 2021 @ronwagn Just to be 100% clear, you are aware that methanol is an LNG derived fuel right? Which means that methanol from LNG --> gasoline is effectively running a car on LNG. I wouldn't worry about the conversion efficiency either for the following reasons: 1. Industrial production of chemicals is becoming stupidly efficient. I can give several examples. 2. Even if there is energy loss, it's better than spending billions on trying to run everything on LNG. All we need to do is build thermochemical processing plants, which are profitable. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ronwagn + 6,290 November 1, 2021 2 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said: @ronwagn Just to be 100% clear, you are aware that methanol is an LNG derived fuel right? Which means that methanol from LNG --> gasoline is effectively running a car on LNG. I wouldn't worry about the conversion efficiency either for the following reasons: 1. Industrial production of chemicals is becoming stupidly efficient. I can give several examples. 2. Even if there is energy loss, it's better than spending billions on trying to run everything on LNG. All we need to do is build thermochemical processing plants, which are profitable. I am all for chemical processes that work well and are cost efficient while being free of unacceptable levels of pollution. I am still trying to figure out the ramifications of methanol. It sounds like it could be made with electricity from renewables and CO2 which should help renewables when they have too much wind or sunlight. I would think that methanol could use many feedstocks including coal and methane. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/production-of-methanol 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sebastian Meana + 278 November 2, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, ronwagn said: I am all for chemical processes that work well and are cost efficient while being free of unacceptable levels of pollution. I am still trying to figure out the ramifications of methanol. It sounds like it could be made with electricity from renewables and CO2 which should help renewables when they have too much wind or sunlight. I would think that methanol could use many feedstocks including coal and methane. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/production-of-methanol There's many ways apart from CNG and LNG to use Natural gas in transport, Methanol is attractive because it can be from Methane in two steps, Gasification and Catalysis, issues are that it has half the energy density per KG of Methane or Gasoline, but you compensate that for a better cooling effect, faster cleaner combustion. and for the Fact LNG weights around half as much as Methanol per liter.so liter per liter they are around the same problem of making it from captured CO2 and hydrogen is that you waste a lot of hydrogen, you first need ot make synthetic Methane-identical syngas probably making synthetic CH4, that way you need 500KG of Hydrogen to make 1000KG Methane that contains 250KG of Hydrogen, the rest becomes water to reduce the CO2 into CH4 a better quirkier use for carbon capture is synthetic fuel from methane, Diesel, Jet Fuel, LPG, and Gasoline are 85% carbon and 15% hydrogen, while natural gas is 75% carbon and 25% hydrogen, so to make fuel from nat gas you have two options, to decrease hydrogen content or increase carbon content, this is the quirky part, if you get rid of Hydrogen to make synfuel you make 750KG of Synthetic fuels for every ton of NatGas but if you increase carbon content with captured Co2 from a nearby powerplant you make 1312KG for every ton of NatGas, a 10% of the energy gain comes from the extra power to break Co2 during the gasificationmore importantly, Synthetic fuel is fuel everyone who uses fuel can use in their current engines with no modification in infrastructure engines or distribution, and unlike Natural gas in a normal engine which loses power a engine on synthetic fuel can gain up to 10% more power, mainly cause higher flame temperature, faster combustion, easier ignition, less displacement of air Edited November 2, 2021 by Sebastian Meana 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ronwagn + 6,290 November 2, 2021 Thanks for the info! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Most Active Members
Recently Online
Popular Members