[Free]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FireJack', 'I') have wondered about this, if there was somekind of fire on a LNG tanker would it explode or would it simply burn off.

[lateStarter]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FireJack', 'I') have wondered about this, if there was somekind of fire on a LNG tanker would it explode or would it simply burn off.

[Free]

Well that just shows you that you shouldn't rely on novels for facts, doesn't it?

Thanks for the info - so as I understand it leaks are rarely a serious problem, and even with explosives it would be difficult to blow it up? - my doomerometer concerning LNG-tankers has been tuned down significantly...

[lateStarter]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FireJack', 'I') have wondered about this, if there was somekind of fire on a LNG tanker would it explode or would it simply burn off.

[No-Oil]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Free', 'W')ell that just shows you that you shouldn't rely on novels for facts, doesn't it?

Thanks for the info - so as I understand it leaks are rarely a serious problem, and even with explosives it would be difficult to blow it up? - my doomerometer concerning LNG-tankers has been tuned down significantly...

[Free]

Thanks No-Oil for this very qualified information!

Of course you are right that there is always the possibility of something going wrong, but as a layman I had the imagination that you just need "a match" and the thing would go boom.
Obviously, as you and lateStarter showed, many more conditions have to be fulfilled previous to ignition, and that sort of is quite reassuring (compared to the match phantasy).

Yes we can quite safely assume that at one point there will be an LNG accident again, but if we look at the list of the accidents so far the probability of wiping out a whole town or inflicting huge casualties is quite low IMHO...

[Permanently_Baffled]

Without sounding flippant, dont all forms of energy generation carry a risk?

Ie

Nuclear (TMI, Chernobyl etc)
Coal(kills more than nuclear, just ask Chinese miners!)
Gas (LNG ships, large scale storage facilities)
Oil (Buncefield?, if Fawley went up in the UK it would take everything upto Winchester ! )

etc

The decision on LNG Im sure is the lesser of the evils? If we dont have LNG we have to use coal or Nuclear. In which case more deaths/risks have to be taken.

Choose your poison!

Renewables would be the safest and lowest risk. But like anything else , low risk = low return(or in this case energy)

PB

[Free]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Permanently_Baffled', 'W')ithout sounding flippant, dont all forms of energy generation carry a risk?

[advancedatheist]

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/artic ... _page_id=2

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')P feels the heat over gas debacle
Lisa Buckingham, Mail on Sunday
1 January 2006
DESPITE sub-zero temperatures and soaring gas prices, BP has again failed to deliver liquefied natural gas to the huge Isle of Grain terminal.

The energy giant has been warned by the regulator Ofgem and Chancellor Gordon Brown that unless it keeps the storage tanks full, it will lose its exclusive rights.

In a week when British Gas warned homeowners of even bigger bills because of high wholesale gas prices, BP and Algerian partner Sonatrach advertised the berth at the UK's only LNG import terminal to any supplier. But National Grid, owner of the Kent terminal, said no cargo had arrived.

[Laurasia]

Well, I wonder where that piece of news fits in with all the other strange info swirling around the subject of natural gas; the crisis between Russia and the Ukraine, and something similar that someone posted on one of these threads about LNG tankers not getting to the US either?

I'm not in the UK, but my family, my Mum and my sister, are, and I know that there have been a lot of very low temps over there. I'm rather worried, needless to say.

Regards,

L.

[Free]

Don't forget about the troubles with newly constructed LNG tankers:

http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic15791.html

It seems to me that there are not that many LNG tankers around, if 20 tankers already cause headaches...

[RonMN]

I have to say that something seems to be very wrong with NG...

I was just reading how several other countries are affected by russia turning off the gas to the ukraine...I can't imagine making other countries suffer because only the ukraine hasn't paid it's bill. Considering it's january, couldn't this possibly considered an act of war? If it's simply to make a point about paying the bill, why not turn it off during a more mild month of the year?

[untothislast]

We're currently on the outer fringes of an undeclared world war over access to energy resources.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was all about securing a stake in the middle of the world's premier oil producing region. The actual motive was easily camouflaged with rhetoric about WMD and the act of 'bringing democracy' to the beleaguered Iraqi people. Now, as nations start to openly jostle for position, countries like Russia are starting to declare their hands in an overtly political fashion, which will ultimately force into the open the discussion and admissions about supply scarcity which the West has done its utmost to conceal.

2006? You had to be there . . .

[shakespear1]

I am not a great fan of Russian politics, but lets give them a small break. They are doing what any other nation would certainly do intheir position.

They are selling something that is looking to be in short supply in the near future if not already. Their economy is basickly running on oil/gas. SO WHY shouldn't they tell the Ukranians or any one else "Pay market rate". Simple principle of business that has been done this way for a heck of a long time in the West with little symapthy for the little guy.

Sorry, time to try something else such as economize and get off the petro habit. We are dealing with a commodity which will not be replaced for at least 20-40 million years from now

[PWALPOCO]

So , where ARE the LNG Tankers ?

The UK arent getting them, apparently we were being outbid by up to $14m per tanker by the US and Spain and I seem to recall another article about some other far off land getting the tankers either (was it ironically the US?).

So, I guess the Spaniards are gobbling up all the LNG then ? Wouldnt like to see their bills if they are prepared to pay even more than we are for it.

In the meantime , glancing at the rows of newspapers in the local shop the frontpages are all how the Europeans are cowering at the Russians Gas Dictatoropoly(TM).

If I were the Russians Id be doing the maths on how much more they can grab in price increases. They certainly seem to be pivotal in much of Europes supplies and Winter has a while still to go.

Paul

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Leaf', 'S')eems like it may be possible that prices now at $200-400 USD meter for gas in Europe..ie via Russia as of now may be seeing even anouther price spike before the yr is over. Germany is paying what 290 or so for Russian gas..Woundnt surpise me come April is 400 dollars range isnt seen...what and see.

[DantesPeak]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('untothislast', 'W')e're currently on the outer fringes of an undeclared world war over access to energy resources.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was all about securing a stake in the middle of the world's premier oil producing region. The actual motive was easily camouflaged with rhetoric about WMD and the act of 'bringing democracy' to the beleaguered Iraqi people. Now, as nations start to openly jostle for position, countries like Russia are starting to declare their hands in an overtly political fashion, which will ultimately force into the open the discussion and admissions about supply scarcity which the West has done its utmost to conceal.

2006? You had to be there . . .

[Graeme]

LNG as interim energy source

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he deepwater liquefied natural gas project proposed by BHP Billiton is not a renewable source of energy, but it is certainly a lot cleaner than the existing, appallingly dirty sources of California's energy, including coal, oil and nuclear. Coal-fired power plants in this country contribute 90 percent of all pollution generated by the electric industry, including dangerous nitrogen and sulfur oxides, toxic mercury, and carbon dioxide, the pollutant that contributes most to global warming. In contrast, electricity produced from LNG emits 60 percent less carbon dioxide compared with coal. The Cabrillo Port project can replace dirtier sources of energy and provide cleaner energy required now, while we aggressively move toward a more sustainable and renewable portfolio of energy sources.

[pea-jay]

I have some personal experience with this subject.

LNG is indeed in CA's plans. It was incorporated in the state's planning documents, with key state planners focused on its touted effect of lowering prices for the state's consumers. When I was a planner, I chatted with a few of the guys that authored the report. The PRICE justification was the KEY reason for persuing this option. The state is standing by the EIA's forecasts for Natural gas production, even after years of evidence of its uselessness.

I also had this conversation with a energy industry executive on the future of natural gas and LNG.

Very interesting.