KITIMAT, B.C. – Royal Dutch Shell and its partners in the LNG Canada joint venture could be announcing a final investment decision for the proposed $40-billion liquified natural gas terminal on B.C.’s North Coast as early as next week, with sources telling Bloomberg News that the partners will be approving the project.Bloomberg is reporting that sources with direct knowledge of events say that preparations are underway for a final investment decision to be made on October 5th, with an LNG Canada event and fireworks display at a local golf course the following day.Those anonymous sources added that the situation is fluid and the timing could change.- Advertisement -“We are currently reviewing the decision support package that LNG Canada submitted to joint venture participants,” said Shell Canada in an email to Bloomberg today. The company declined to comment on the announcement date and whether a final decision has been made.The group has long said an investment decision will be made this year. British Columbia has set a Nov. 30 deadline for a final decision if the project is to claim as much as C$6 billion in tax breaks and savings.On Tuesday, The Globe and Mail reported that the Federal government has conceded that LNG Canada can’t source steel domestically for the LNG facility, a decision that could clear the way for the project to be exempt from steel tariffs.Advertisement Unnamed officials from the Prime Ministers office are said to have told LNG Canada that it agrees the project will need to be built from imported steel.LNG Canada requested an exemption from tariffs on the steel needed to build the facility – tariffs that could have added $1 billion to construction costs.Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also met with Royal Dutch Shell CEO Ben van Buerden in New York Tuesday.Last week, LNG Canada CEO Andy Calitz spoke with Bloomberg News from Vancouver, saying that the overall conditions for Royal Dutch Shell to make a positive final investment decision were good.Advertisement “That is, and feels, so very different to 2016 when the project was delayed,” said Calitz.LNG Canada, which is a joint venture led by Shell and includes Mitsubishi, Petronas, PetroChina Co., and Korea Gas Corp. as partners, delayed making an FID twice in 2016.Story courtesy Bloomberg News: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-26/shell-canada-said-poised-for-lng-decision-as-signs-point-to-yes
Maybe it won’t take an international conference after all to clean up the gross polluters of the sea. That’s been the excuse for many years. Nobody could do anything about oceangoing ships that belch the world’s foulest exhaust because this was a worldwide problem. Not the local ports’ problem. Not the shippers’ problem. Not the problem of anybody who could actually do something about it. Now somebody has. California’s attorney general, Jerry Brown, last week filed a legal petition asking federal regulators to act against greenhouse gas emissions from cargo ships, cruise ships and other large vessels. What this amounts to is an invitation to do the right thing before the state takes the federal Environmental Protection Agency to court. Such a lawsuit could do some good. Ships cause horrendous pollution to regions adjacent to shipping centers – and those downwind. The real subject here, however, is money. Ships burn bunker because it is cheap. But it’s also the dirtiest of fuels. Switching to low-sulphur diesel fuel will cost the consumers of imported goods more. But first the EPA, target of Brown’s lawsuit, will have to stir itself. If it does, any new regulations would affect about 6,000 ships calling on the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The port complex and its many diesel-powered parts are the single biggest source of diesel pollution in the L.A. Basin. Will the EPA have to wait until, say, Singapore agrees to a ban on bunker? Not necessarily. Nations can legally limit environmentally harmful activity within their territories, which can extend seaward for 200 miles. Bunker fuel has sulfur content of up to 27,000 parts per million, compared with 15 parts per million in diesel burned by cars and trucks in the United States. The ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel, mandated last year, results in lower emissions of nitrous oxides, an ingredient of smog, and particulates, which are known to cause cancer. Californians now are looking forward to the favor of a reply from the EPA to our invitation. There is more than enough reason to accept. 160Want local news?Sign up for the Localist and stay informed Something went wrong. Please try again.subscribeCongratulations! You’re all set!