The $11.4-billion question for Petronas

Ok, is this just a coincidence, or an artifact of converting the Ringgit to US dollars?

They were planning to spend $11.4-billion on the plant in Prince Rupert.

and now they’re saying they need to cut $11.4-billion because of energy prices.

Has Paddy Power updated the betting odds?

1 Like

it says in Capital and Operating Expenses not investment, but on that note wasn’t it in bloomberg news where the head of Petronas says he needs to know by spring if the project gets government approval? otherwise it is too late to make their timeline for delivering on their commitments to their partners.

“Dare to dream” you Westcoast rousing rabblers…dare to dream.

I can■t say I’m surprised…You readers of The Straight Goods were privy to this information last year…

I told you readers exactly that in the below August 21st/2015 posting…

Here is exactly what The Straight Goods said on August 21st/2015…and I quote…

"Petronass proposed Prince Rupert project is about to be cancelled, I suspect thats why the political forces that be, the BC Liberal Government and a sold-out compliant BC Media ran guns a blazing with the Steelhead LNG proposal…What a waste of spin on a project so uneconomical, never going to happen…With green technology running over fossil fuels, with a world glut of LNG, with oil prices in the tank, with China■s economy just starting a 10 year economic slowdown, maybe even recession…

With Iran, Iraq, Turkmenistan, Russia, China all busy constructing natural gas direct pipelines to Asia, to Japan, to Pakistan, tonnes of natural gas not needing expensive liquefaction facilities on one end and regasification terminals on the other…

Now with Japan for domestic financial reasons proceeding with nuclear restarts…

LNG export industry is the new poster boy for fools rush in…

Lastly…Steelhead LNG is nothing but noise, no financial institution is going to bankroll that operation on slim margins, in an already saturated market, with LNG use on the decline, with Japan about to slash its LNG use, with China starting a longterm slowdown, with oil and energy stocks in the tank…

The time is ripe for the BC Liberals to present their plan B to pay off the massive $140 billion they added to BC■s debt…

I won■t hold my breath."

Here is That Straight Goods Special Edition Posting in it■s entirety…

British Columbia LNG Industry, The Last Gas§…A Straight Goods Special (updated, January 1st 2016)

Not good news admittedly. However, it doesn’t say anywhere which parts of Petronas’ budget will be affected.

Keep in mind that Petronas has 350bn MYR of capital spending planned over the next 4-5 years. 50bn MYR of cutbacks is only a small portion of that. Part of it will also be done through efficiency savings, in other words not all of those savings will be in capital spending. So there is every chance that this project will still go ahead.

I just thought it was a weird coincidence that Petronas said they were going to trim $11.4-billion. The exact amount they said they would spend in Prince Rupert.

Indeed! I am very curious to see what happens.

I think that $11.4bn is an old number anyway. They would almost certainly have pushed it lower after they renegotiated with contractors in the middle of last year.

Not exactly sure how much money Petronas already spent on the project, but it’s a wasted effort if they decided to cancel it.

1 Like

Petronas confirms announced cuts in internal memo…Ahh…

Petronas has gone silent, won■t return Christy Clark and Rich Coleman’s phone calls.’-COST-OPTIMISATION-EFFORTS.aspx

"Dare to Dream"you Westcoast rousing rabblers

Where does it state they are not taking their phone calls?

Sometimes, you kinda reminded me of those ultra-religious doom folks.

When’s the next rapture by the way?

PS: THAT. GRAVE. ACCENT. I will never understand your love affair with that very seldom used character on the US layout keyboard.

Grant, I’ll be deleting your posts from now on if they contain either of the following:

  • huge wall of text that you copy and paste from elsewhere.


  • the use of an accent grave instead of an apostrophe.

You are more than welcome to post, but if you have a wall of text to share, please provide a short description and a link.

And the offer is still open if you’d like me to send you a new USB keyboard, still in the box.


Where does it state they are not taking their phone calls? as asked by jabber 63! lol
We are not at liberty to disclose or discuss the contents of the communication with external parties.

Okay stglider, no need to tell your life stories.

PS: Editing your post doesn’t help BTW.


I have it on good information that Petronas is in talks with Iran(Sanctions have been lifted) …

Christy Clark and Rich Coleman have blathered about how much natural gas British Columbia has(In the earth)…Well…Iran has 20 times the gas reserves of Canada, as a whole, not just British Columbia…Check out the below link, …Iran has the most natural gas in the world, Canada ranks a distant 20th place.

(Mig, I didn`t paste those words, just the link, your site does it)

Lastly, Petronas has many operations around the world, most in banana republics where environmental standards are not requied…Part II coming

Petronas has many many operations, in countries where wages are peanuts, and politicians are bought cheap…
As for the money Petronas has spent in British Columbia…It doesn■t matter, longterm lng buying contracts are being let out at prices of $5 to $6 dollars per MM BTUs…

Petronas needs a price of around $12 dollars to make Prince Rupert project profitable…

Petrpnas is in talks as we speak with Iran, Iran wants to sell their gas, Petronas is eager to be part of it…

Iran, no First Nations, no salmon rivers, no strict rules on the environment…

Petronas does not need the British Columbia headache, not with meager margins and financial losses.

So, the bottom line is…Petronas’s Prince Rupert project is not financially viable…regardless of money spent, …Only a fool deliberately loses more money because they already spent money…

“Dare to Dream” you Westcoast rousing rabblers.



Have you ever heard of something called a ‘sunk cost’? Guess not. Go look it up.

It is the marginal cost of production that matters, and that does not include the costs already incurred. Your $12 target price is nowhere near reality. It doesn’t factor in sunk costs, the drop in the loonie, the renegotiation of local contracts, etc etc.

That doesn■t matter investor…Petronas’s $11.4 billion build cost…$9 billion of that cost would have been mainframes and modules built in South Korea…

LNG longterm buying contracts are made in $US dollars…And, Canada■s $dollar will soon rise up(again)

Skilled Foreign temp workers will not be paid in Canadian $dollars…

@MIG…I need to prove what I said)

Petronas wants engineering work for B.C. LNG venture to be shifted offshore


VANCOUVER — The Globe and Mail
Published Thursday, Dec. 04 2014, 5:49 PM EST
Last updated Thursday, Dec. 04 2014, 6:11 PM EST

Petronas plans to push contractors to shift more engineering work for a proposed B.C. liquefied natural gas venture to lower-cost centres offshore as the Malaysian energy giant squeezes suppliers.

Of the total $11.4-billion in estimated construction costs for the Petronas-led Pacific NorthWest LNG export terminal at Lelu Island, there would be $8-billion worth of imported goods and services spread over a five-year period.

It is in that international component where Petronas hopes to find the bulk of cost savings, but the state-owned company will cast a wide net abroad and in Canada, including having TransCanada Corp. re-examine ways to make its proposed $5-billion natural gas pipeline project more efficient.


So let me guess you think external parties means politicians? Or to most it means reporters

Don’t you mean `sunk cost` or sunk cost ?

1 Like