Comments on: DEBATING THE STRATEGIC SIGNIFICANCE OF IRAN’S NATURAL GAS http://www.raceforiran.com/debating-the-strategic-significance-of-irans-natural-gas Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:40:16 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Kamran http://www.raceforiran.com/debating-the-strategic-significance-of-irans-natural-gas#comment-2936 Kamran Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:11:45 +0000 http://www.raceforiran.com/?p=1652#comment-2936 This post may serve as policy guideline for the world countries with regards to their relationships with Iran. How come we can isolate a country economically which is sitting on second largest reserves of natural gas and is also a significant oil exporter. Iran is interested in exporting natural gas and its pipeline exports shall be cheaper for asian consumers (Pakistan, India and China) as against LNG. Stopping Iran from exporting piped natural gas would significantly hurt asian gas consumers in the times to come. It is interesting to note that despite all the problems associated with production and transporation of LNG, current glut in the market advocates buying cheap LNG, India being an example. However, the situation will change quickly and the poor asian consumers shall not be able to afford LNG in the long run. Remember it has to be liquified, put in a cryogenic vessel througout transportation (via sea a vessel costs around US$ 80,000 per day), regassified and then again put in the pipeline to reach consumer door-step. Can we (asians) afford it when gas price would reach US$ 12 per MMBTU. No we can not ....... only Korea and Japan can afford, due to reasons of value addition and non availability of alternatives. This post may serve as policy guideline for the world countries with regards to their relationships with Iran. How come we can isolate a country economically which is sitting on second largest reserves of natural gas and is also a significant oil exporter. Iran is interested in exporting natural gas and its pipeline exports shall be cheaper for asian consumers (Pakistan, India and China) as against LNG. Stopping Iran from exporting piped natural gas would significantly hurt asian gas consumers in the times to come. It is interesting to note that despite all the problems associated with production and transporation of LNG, current glut in the market advocates buying cheap LNG, India being an example. However, the situation will change quickly and the poor asian consumers shall not be able to afford LNG in the long run. Remember it has to be liquified, put in a cryogenic vessel througout transportation (via sea a vessel costs around US$ 80,000 per day), regassified and then again put in the pipeline to reach consumer door-step. Can we (asians) afford it when gas price would reach US$ 12 per MMBTU. No we can not ……. only Korea and Japan can afford, due to reasons of value addition and non availability of alternatives.

]]> By: pmr9 http://www.raceforiran.com/debating-the-strategic-significance-of-irans-natural-gas#comment-2885 pmr9 Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:47:49 +0000 http://www.raceforiran.com/?p=1652#comment-2885 LNG is a somewhat wasteful way to transport gas to consumers: apart from the cost of constructing special liquefaction plants, terminals and tankers, the energy required for liquefaction, transport and regasification uses about 15% of the gas. Pipelines are more efficient: the energy cost is only about 1% of the gas per 1000 km. For gas exporting countries that are on the Eurasian land mass, it's more rational, and more environmentally friendly, to export gas via pipelines to large consumer markets in Asia and continental Europe, than to export it across the oceans via LNG terminals. But for some reason the US and the UK don't see it that way. LNG is a somewhat wasteful way to transport gas to consumers: apart from the cost of constructing special liquefaction plants, terminals and tankers, the energy required for liquefaction, transport and regasification uses about 15% of the gas. Pipelines are more efficient: the energy cost is only about 1% of the gas per 1000 km. For gas exporting countries that are on the Eurasian land mass, it’s more rational, and more environmentally friendly, to export gas via pipelines to large consumer markets in Asia and continental Europe, than to export it across the oceans via LNG terminals. But for some reason the US and the UK don’t see it that way.

]]> By: JohnH http://www.raceforiran.com/debating-the-strategic-significance-of-irans-natural-gas#comment-2852 JohnH Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:11:19 +0000 http://www.raceforiran.com/?p=1652#comment-2852 Very informative post. I would only reinforce what Ed said, "If Iran is to export large volumes of pipeline gas, I find the Pakistan-India pipeline much more compelling." The problem is Indian distrust of Pakistan and use of Pakistani territory to transship gas reliably. Of course, such agreements are possible and extremely constructive, as the The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) proved. However, the The US would obviously not welcome any agreement that might obviate its role as the "indispensable party." Also, Iran is not only challenged by LNG trains. They have had trouble just developing their part of South Pars. http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=49844 It also bears mentioning that, exports aside, natural gas is hugely important domestically. First, an ample supply of natural gas will break Iran's dependence on imports to satisfy its need for refined gasoline. Second, increased supplies will allow full realization of the program to convert's Iran's transportation sector to natural gas, reducing domestic need for oil. Third, additional gas can be a powerful stimulant to economic development as a whole. Bringing natural gas projects on-line is critical to Iran's future prosperity, self-sufficiency and hence their ability to resist the West. Iran's potential success in realizing its natural gas projects may be more of a driver to United States belligerency towards Iran than any nuclear weapons program, which is years away in any case. And there are plenty of technology partners whom Iran can tap to realize its domestic natural aspirations. Very informative post. I would only reinforce what Ed said, “If Iran is to export large volumes of pipeline gas, I find the Pakistan-India pipeline much more compelling.” The problem is Indian distrust of Pakistan and use of Pakistani territory to transship gas reliably. Of course, such agreements are possible and extremely constructive, as the The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) proved. However, the The US would obviously not welcome any agreement that might obviate its role as the “indispensable party.”

Also, Iran is not only challenged by LNG trains. They have had trouble just developing their part of South Pars. http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=49844

It also bears mentioning that, exports aside, natural gas is hugely important domestically. First, an ample supply of natural gas will break Iran’s dependence on imports to satisfy its need for refined gasoline. Second, increased supplies will allow full realization of the program to convert’s Iran’s transportation sector to natural gas, reducing domestic need for oil. Third, additional gas can be a powerful stimulant to economic development as a whole. Bringing natural gas projects on-line is critical to Iran’s future prosperity, self-sufficiency and hence their ability to resist the West.

Iran’s potential success in realizing its natural gas projects may be more of a driver to United States belligerency towards Iran than any nuclear weapons program, which is years away in any case. And there are plenty of technology partners whom Iran can tap to realize its domestic natural aspirations.

]]>