Professional Documents
Culture Documents
There has been dramatic increase in worldwide demand for LNG in last few years Several factors are responsible:
New gas-fired generation facilities; will comprise 30% of total U.S. gas demand by 2025 Voracious energy appetites of East and South Asian economies Production of natural gas in North America and Europe is not expected to keep pace with demand Increased demand (and reduced U.S. and Canadian supply) has pushed equilibrium price for natural gas in United States to $3-4 per mmbtu range
2
Improvements in liquefaction processes and technology Increased train and LNG tanker sizes and resulting economies of scale Sharing of costly common facilities (e.g., ports) Competitive bidding for all aspects of EPC process
In response to demand, numerous LNG production projects announced or under construction, including several in West Africa:
Nigeria LNG: Nigeria National Petroleum Company, Shell and others; financing obtained for trains 4 and 5 for the Bonny LNG plant Brass LNG: Nigeria National Petroleum Company, ENI, Conoco Philips and Chevron Texaco; proposed 10 mtpa facility Equatorial Guinea LNG: GEPetrol and Marathon; proposed 3.4 mtpa facility for sale into U.S.
4
Capital costs for LNG projects are enormous as each project often requires development of entire LNG supply chain:
Drilling of wells and construction of offshore platforms and gathering systems Construction of liquefaction facilities: the LNG trains themselves Construction of related common facilities that can be utilized with one or more trains (e.g., ports, preprocessing facilities)
Construction of LNG tankers to transport cargoes from liquefaction facility to receiving terminal, with number of ships varying depending on distance to market
Construction of receiving/regasification terminal
5
Given enormous capital needs and political and commercial risks, LNG projects must call on a variety of financing sources. Focusing on liquefaction facilities, these include:
Commercial banks Export credit agencies Multilaterals Capital markets Islamic financing sources
LNG tankers, receiving terminals and regasification facilities also may require their own separate financing
Different asset classes draw on different financing sources, e.g., banks with ship financing tradition and expertise Financing sources for liquefaction facilities applicable to receiving terminals as well
Yes
RasGas I
Qatargas II
USExim, OPIC
Sakhalin II
Yes
EBRD
Commercial Banks
Reduced capacity in project finance market due to banks leaving market and bank mergers Enormity of LNG capital requirements may result in banks reaching internal industry and/or country limits Experience in market Speed of execution and ease of obtaining amendments and waivers but more intrusive ongoing involvement in project
Allow leveraging of bank lending capacity as banks may not count ECA backed facilities against various limits ECA sourcing requirements impose constraints on countries of origin of goods and services Increased financing costs due to significant ECA insurance premiums Typically slower execution (Rule of Thumb: one year from delivery of Info Memo)
10
Multilaterals
Multilateral funding provides political risk umbrella for other lenders Compliance with institutional policies Typically slower execution
11
Capital Markets
Big risk: one cannot count on capital markets being open at time project is anticipated to close; result is that fallback financing (on parallel path) may be needed with resultant cost impact Only two LNG bonds to date: both on RasGas I: $1.2 billion in December 1996 and $662 million in March 2004 Due to nature of covenants and defaults, less ongoing intrusion in project
12
Sharing exceptions Who votes? how do they vote? veto rights? Creditor decision making points
Intercreditor arrangements
Pro rata lending principle may need to accommodate sourcing requirements and delivery schedules
13
Traditionally LNG sold via long term sale and purchase agreements which facilitated project financings In U.S., gas typically purchased under shorter duration contracts Will lenders accept shorter duration contracts and take volume risk? Possible reliance on gas marketers
14
Gas production and gathering facilities, ships, and receiving terminals must all be financed and achieve completion in synchronized manner Intercreditor issues between lenders to various projects comprising the LNG supply chain
Common Facilities
Sharing between projects and resulting intercreditor (and interproject) issues Possibility of separate financing of common facilities (and increased intercreditor complexity)
15
Facility expansion
What say do lenders have re facility expansion and associated debt incurrence
Insurance
16
Reserve, refinery construction and operating risks Product off-take contract EPC contracts
Financing alternatives
17