Japan's $66 billion Demand For WA Gas

[CriticalSilver]

That's right, it doesn't change the right of anyone to sell anything they like, but the question is, how ethical is it if the trade of my neighbour imports the inflation of a foreign nation that dilutes the value of my savings?

As far as I can see, it is effectively the same as being personally attacked by the actions of a foreign power who has used my neighbour as an accomplice.

In the case of the BOJ, if directed into the foreign trade of importing resources, the inflation of their money supply directly inflates the AUD and through the forex process, indirectly the USD.

But you can't import inflation. By definition Japan/USA etc are devaluing their currency relative to Australia's. They are creating inflation within their own currency and improving our purchasing power.

I understand that foreign central bank money printing to finance international trade is as inflationary locally as a counterfeiter printing up AUD onshore.

From my perspective, if they buy stuff with currency they have fraudulently created and we exchange on par, via the USD or directly, the RBA has to have an equivalent amount of AUD to balance the trade or print up what is required...stealing my local purchasing power.

That is why, I thought, the net balance of trade (import/export) was so important. Greater than parity, the RBA prints money, less than parity the RBA accumulates foreign reserves.

 

[bordsilver]

If the RBA was pegging the exchange rate then I'd agree. But not when it's floating (but happy to be proven wrong if you have a link).

 

[bja]

Actually, it should result in higher PRRT payments as it reduces the CAPEX cost substantially. (There's also more operations jobs compared to a land-based facility, but these are always only a small portion of the capital-intensive projects such as this.)

The money is not in the 200 operational jobs but rather the 6000 construction jobs and the logistical support that such an organisation requires.

Yes and no. Yes, the old stick build construction method requires a lot more Australian content and labour compared to the newer FLNG, GBS or pre-assembled modules that are increasingly being used. In many respects the newer build techniques were a reaction to the high labour costs endured by the companies during the boom. Some, especially the FLNG, fundamentally allows uneconomic resources to be developed.

Broadly however, the CAPEX phase doesn't really add much to Australia's real GDP as it is basically an alternative form of consumption. We principally benefit from the higher terms of trade due to the need for the developers to bid up wages to get the few thousand people on-site in regions that people generally don't want to live. But these higher paying jobs crowd out other economic activity. The operations phase is where the real benefit from these projects occurs as the per worker output jumps considerably and gives a terms of trade kick as well.

In basic terms:
1. Paying 6,000 construction workers an extra, say, $50,000 a year in wages for 5 years provides $300 million a year benefit for 5 years.
2. Conservatively, let's say that 200-300 operations workers are producing 4mtpa @ $500/tonne. That's $2,000 million a year in revenue excluding any condensate revenue. Operations costs are probably around 10-15% of revenue so that's somewhere around $1,700+ million gross profit. Allowing for depreciation allowances etc even a low net 20% company tax equates to $340 million a year to the Commonwealth Government for 20-30 years. PRRT would probably easily add another 50% in revenue to say a conservative $500 million a year benefit. This is far higher than the construction benefit without accounting for the crowding out effects of taking 5,700 workers away from other activities.

Capital deepening is beneficial when it is operating.

Very good points and logic, however what you are failing to account for are that the 6000 working on site are also being supported by at least as many workers producing the material, providing the transport, conducting the engineering etc. etc. I would also suggest that wage increases are closer to $100,000 per year not $50,000, this is LNG construction not iron ore mining.

Now regardless of how the project is completed the end result will still be the production of LNG and the associated government revenues. The main difference being that the construction costs are injected into the South Korean economy rather than the Australian one. I would also conclude that money paid to Australians and spent in the local economy will have a greater economic impact then money paid to the government and wasted in Canberra. Either way we get a cut of the profit, what we dont get is the initial project business (in Gorgons case 56 billion and rising).

A further note would be that FLNG will only produce 3.5mtpa whilst Gorgon will be capable of 15mtpa (in its current form), therefore 4 times the revenue.

 

[bordsilver]

We can quibble about whether there really would be 6,000 workers on site for the entire period or just the peak workforce but even if you do double it, it is still only for a few years rather than for the 20-30 years of operations and I was being deliberately pessimistic on the operations calcs as you know.

As far as I see it, the most significant benefit from FLNG is that it allows the Prelude and Browse resources to actually be developed (or at least far sooner than they otherwise would be). So it really isn't an either/or situation for many of the fields. I doubt whether resources the size and location of Gorgon would warrant the use of FLNG technology. But given the engineering breakthroughs as LNG technology in general continues to evolve, it certainly won't happen in the same way again. If nothing else they'll move toward a greater use of pre-assembled modules like the East Coast guys are doing. Engineers are great at economising on bottlenecks, and one of the biggest bottlenecks in recent years has been the supply of skilled labour to the region requiring it. Consequently, they have moved toward figuring out ways of cutting this cost significantly. Now that it has happened, it won't be undone.

Edit: Worth noting that the engineering jobs can still be predominantly Australian, even with FLNG. Indeed, from memory Shell actually did a lot of the engineering from Perth (you may know). These sorts of skills/jobs can support developments all around the world as they don't really need to be tied to the place where the resource is located.

 

[bja]

The last two trains completed in WA have been modules. Gorgon, Wheatstone, Inpex etc are all module builds. Prelude will use the Browse field. This is the same field that Inpex pipes to Darwin and Woodside was going to develop in Broome, so its not like they are resources that can only be reached by FLNG. You are spot on when you state that the reason for doing so is a lower upfront cost, the only problem is that Australia traditionally takes a big bite of that upfront cost.

 

[bja]

Also, thanks for helping me pass another boring Sunday at work with intelligent debate, much appreciated.

 

[bordsilver]

The estimated resources in the Icthys field underpinning INPEX's project is over 4 times bigger than the Prelude field (approx 13 tcf versus 3 tcf).

It'll be interesting to see how Shell's FLNG develops. I'm sure there'll be some "bugs" that'll be ironed out as it actually enters into operation. It is quite ambitious. Assuming it works then I can imagine a suite of small fields being opened up through a tolling/fixed charge arrangement with a separate owner of the FLNG facility like we see already with some offshore oil platforms.

 

[C.H.]

If the RBA was pegging the exchange rate then I'd agree. But not when it's floating (but happy to be proven wrong if you have a link).

RBA "prints" the AUD hence indirectly participating in exchange market. (Not sure if they outright sell AUD on FX).
So even though they don't exactly "peg" AUD to USD or JPY, they play exactly the same game of devaluing the currency at the similar rate as other Central banks.

Yes the fault here is not with BOJ, but with RBA who's basically robbing us blind. Because if they stop "printing" AUD would rise and keep rising.
But we can't allow that, can't we?
That'd be too much.

In summary: LNG companies should be able to sell it to whoever they want to, but RBA shouldn't be participating in the "race to the bottom" (in fact it should be abolished altogether), so the exchange rate will show who's - who.

 

[systematic]

Wrong project. Wrong gas. Try hydrogen.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag4iy6yg4R4[/youtube]

 

[bordsilver]

In summary: LNG companies should be able to sell it to whoever they want to, but RBA shouldn't be participating in the "race to the bottom" (in fact it should be abolished altogether), so the exchange rate will show who's - who.

I agree with this.

 

[Holdfast]

One million Australian cattle expected to be sent to China under new deal

One million Australian cattle are set to be exported to China each year, as part of a breakthrough deal between the two trading nations.

The cattle, worth $1 billion, would be able to help the country currently suffering a beef shortage.

http://www.news.com.au/national/one...a-under-new-deal/story-fncynjr2-1227115615426

 

[Roswell Crash Survivor]

One million Australian cattle expected to be sent to China under new deal

One million Australian cattle are set to be exported to China each year, as part of a breakthrough deal between the two trading nations.

The cattle, worth $1 billion, would be able to help the country currently suffering a beef shortage.

Watch the usual anti-everything greenies/animal liberation front types scream 'live export cruelty'.

Ranchers need to be (tacitly) allowed to herd theose pot-smokers out into the Simpson Desert with zero provisions.

 

[bordsilver]

Tacitly? Don't you mean "secretly"?

 

[Roswell Crash Survivor]

Tacitly? Don't you mean "secretly"?

Even better. That way there will be no rescue party.

 

[doomsday surprise]

One million Australian cattle expected to be sent to China under new deal

One million Australian cattle are set to be exported to China each year, as part of a breakthrough deal between the two trading nations.

The cattle, worth $1 billion, would be able to help the country currently suffering a beef shortage.

Watch the usual anti-everything greenies/animal liberation front types scream 'live export cruelty'.

Live export trade should have been banned decades ago. It is animal cruelty and it should be stopped. We can slaughter cattle/sheep here and then export the meat.

 

[Miksture]

Live cattle export = cheaper for china to kill and process meat. It is all about money. If you want to sell butchered meat force our dollar down so that it is cheaper to process here.

 

[SpacePete]

Live cattle export = cheaper for china to kill and process meat. It is all about money. If you want to sell butchered meat force our dollar down so that it is cheaper to process here.

I thought it would be far more efficient to slaughter here, pack into compact slabs and send over refrigerated. Less hassle all round?

If cost is the prohibitive factor, and we want to ensure ethical treatment of the livestock, why not just setup a processing facility in some sort of designated extraterritoral zone near the ports where Chinese workers can come over and stay for a period to do butchering work cheaply without being subject to Australian employment conditions or taxes, with some conditions that there would be audits of the facility, some supervision by Australian regulators, and the meat could not be imported back into Australian territory.The workers themselves would still need to pass through customs if they wanted to visit Australian territory.

Does that make any sense at all?

 

[lakesentrance]

It is all about money.

Almost every decision we make on this planet, is usually within the framework of "the money".

If it's not profitable, we don't do it. If it is profitable, we do it. Generally regardless of the consequences to us, and future generations.

It's tied in with the incessant need for continuous, infinite growth.

I'm surprised to find such ruthless disregard for your environment and surrounds, on a forum, where the contributors are aware of the evil that currently exists in our government corporate culture.

How can we so easily disregard facts such as the current rate of extinction we're causing to various species on this planet, every day?

Do I hear cheering for the pirates currently burning in the Amazon jungle, terrorizing the natives, because it's making lots of money, jobs and economic activity?

Do the lines blur, when it's the ice dealer, raking in bucketloads of cash, spending it in his local economy ... what consequences?

The Greenies of yesterday don't exist anymore, except in the corporate arena and the minds of sheeple.

The Greenies that are awake today, stack silver, detest Wall St, protest against government sanctioned murder and foreign invasions (war), rally against corporations that are slowly poisoning us and our children, because it's profitable, and are hell bent on getting out from under the state sponsored conditioning that begins in kindergarten and continues via hollywood. They see the rort called religion, and the fake two party systems. They know there are 4 strange soveriegn cities on this planet where all seats of power seem to be concentrated.

The Greenies we see in the media, are usually the ONLY greenies most of us have ever consciously met. We've got to take into account ... who's been relaying the message about greenies to us? Is it a trustworthy source?

Go hug a Greenie, you might just find you're looking in a mirror.

 

[smk762]

It is all about money.

Almost every decision we make on this planet, is usually within the framework of "the money".

If it's not profitable, we don't do it. If it is profitable, we do it. Generally regardless of the consequences to us, and future generations.

It's tied in with the incessant need for continuous, infinite growth.

I'm surprised to find such ruthless disregard for your environment and surrounds, on a forum, where the contributors are aware of the evil that currently exists in our government corporate culture.

How can we so easily disregard facts such as the current rate of extinction we're causing to various species on this planet, every day?

Do I hear cheering for the pirates currently burning in the Amazon jungle, terrorizing the natives, because it's making lots of money, jobs and economic activity?

Do the lines blur, when it's the ice dealer, raking in bucketloads of cash, spending it in his local economy ... what consequences?

The Greenies of yesterday don't exist anymore, except in the corporate arena and the minds of sheeple.

The Greenies that are awake today, stack silver, detest Wall St, protest against government sanctioned murder and foreign invasions (war), rally against corporations that are slowly poisoning us and our children, because it's profitable, and are hell bent on getting out from under the state sponsored conditioning that begins in kindergarten and continues via hollywood. They see the rort called religion, and the fake two party systems. They know there are 4 strange soveriegn cities on this planet where all seats of power seem to be concentrated.

The Greenies we see in the media, are usually the ONLY greenies most of us have ever consciously met. We've got to take into account ... who's been relaying the message about greenies to us? Is it a trustworthy source?

Go hug a Greenie, you might just find you're looking in a mirror.

 

[SpacePete]

...

The most surprising thing about your post is that I discovered someone here who possibly lives in Lakes Entrance

Hello friend... how familiar are you with the residents of Raymond Island across from Paynesville?