Category: LNG

More pipeline debate coming to the Northwest: Changes to the Pacific Trails natural gas Pipeline

Pacific Trail Pipelines map
The Pacific Trails Pipeline map as of Feb. 2012. (PTP/BCEAO)

Another pipeline debate is about to open in the northwest. This time for  changes to the Pacific Trails (natural gas) Pipeline, that will run from Summit Lake, just outside Prince George, to Kitimat.

Public information meetings will be held in Terrace, Houston, Burns Lake and Vanderhoof in the next couple of weeks.

The PTP runs entirely within British Columbia, and so comes under the jurisdiction of the Environmental Assessment Office of  British Columbia.   The application to build the PTP was filed in 2005 and approved in 2008 which means the process for the amendments will go much faster than the current Northern Gateway Joint Review hearings for the Enbridge twin bitumen/condenseate pipeline which are expected to last at least another eighteen months.

Pacific Trails is asking to

  • Change the location of the compressor station;
  • Establish two new temporary stockpile sites;
  • Make pipeline route modifications

The period for commenting on the Pacific Trails Pipeline amendments opens on February 27 and closes March 28. The public meeting on the changes to the compressor station were held in Summit Lake last September.

The documents filed with the BCEAO say that Pacific Trails Pipelines is in ongoing negotiations with First Nations where the PTP will cross their traditional territory.

The natural gas project has general support in northwestern  BC, and the relations between First Nations and PTP, and Apache, the main backer of the Kitimat LNG project are much better than those with Enbridge. (The PTP would supply the liquified natural gas terminals in Kitimat)

Significantly, the documents show that the PTP is trying to enter separate negotiations with the Wet’suwet’en houses that are now objecting to the pipeline route through their traditional territory.

The filing says:

In addition, PTP is now consulting, or making all reasonable efforts to consult, with one of the 13 Wet’suwet’en Houses as a discrete entity. PTP was informed in February 2011 that Chief  Knedebeas’s House, the Dark House, was no longer part of the Office of the Wet’suwet’en  although the latter still maintains responsibility for the welfare of all Wet’suwet’en lands and  resources. Consultation that took place prior to this year with the Office of the Wet’suwet’en included consultation with the Dark House. PTP has been diligent in seeking to consult with  the Dark House since April 2011. The spokesperson for Chief Knedebeas of the Dark House, Freda Huson, states that she also represents a group called Unist’ot’en.

 

 

But it’s Enbridge that is the sticking point, and could bring controversy to this amendment request.  The Wet’suwet’en houses that blockaded a PTP survey crew last fall said they were worried that the Northern Gateway pipeline follows roughly the same route as the PTP. The PTP application was filed and approved long before the controversy over the Enbridge Northern Gateway began to heat up.

One reason is that original approval was for a pipeline to import natural gas before the shale gas boom changed the energy industry.  As PTP says in the application to change the compressor station.

When the original purpose of the PTP Project was to transport natural gas from an LNG import facility at Kitimat to the Spectra Energy Transmission pipeline facilities at Summit Lake, the design called for the installation of a mid-point compressor station to enable the required throughput of natural gas. This compressor station was sited at the hydraulic mid-point of the pipeline. The location of the compressor station in 2007 was south of Burns Lake and just east of Highway 35.

Now that the PTP Project is designed to move natural gas from Summit Lake to Kitimat, or east to west, a compressor station is required at Summit Lake rather than at the hydraulic mid-point of the pipeline. The new Summit Lake compressor station is required in order to increase the pressure of the natural gas from where it is sourced at the Spectra Energy Transmission pipeline facilities.

The EAO will hold open house meetings on the pipeline route changes from 4 pm to  8 pm at each location at

Monday, February 27, 2012
Nechako Senior Friendship Centre, 219
Victoria Street East
Vanderhoof, BC

Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Island Gospel Gymnasium
810 Highway #35
Burns Lake, BC

Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Houston Senior Centre
3250 – 14th Street W
Houston, BC

Thursday, March 1, 2012
Best Western Plus Terrace Inn
4553 Greig Avenue
Terrace, BC

The EAO says: Displays containing information on the proposed amendments will be available for public viewing. The EAO will be available to answer questions on the amendment process. The Proponent will be available to answer questions on the Project and proposed amendments.

The documents show there are route changes to the pipeline route along the Kitimat River, but those are considered “minor route adjustments” so no meetings are planned for Kitimat.

Documents

PTP meeting schedule

Complete filing documents from PTP are available on the BCEAO site here.

Pacific Trails Pipeline

Apache waiting for sales deals before final green light for Kitimat LNG

There was no announcement of a green light for the Kitimat LNG project in today’s conference call by Apache Corp. with market anaylsts and journalists.

Apache CEO G. Steven Farris told the call that negotiations with overseas (likely Asian) buyers are at an advanced stage.

“Frankly we’re somewhat past the polite introductions and that kind of stuff with respect to buyers,” he said. “We’re now in the throes of actual negotiations.”

While Apache has yet to commit to building the $5-billion plant at Bish Cove, south of Kitimat, construction work has continued all winter at the site.

Market analysts still expect Apache and its partners in KMLNG, Encana and EOG, to give the go ahead sometime in the first quarter of 2012.

In a news release issued before the call, Farris, said “Apache’s balanced portfolio and returns focus fueled an outstanding year in 2011, setting records for production, earnings, revenues, proved reserves and cash flow.”
The release went on to say:

In the fourth quarter, earnings totaled $1.2 billion or $2.98 per diluted share, up from $670 million or $1.77 per share in the prior-year period. Production totaled 759,000 boe per day, up 4 percent from the year-earlier quarter, and cash from operations before changes in operating assets and liabilities* totaled $2.7 billion, up from $2 billion in the year-earlier period. Apache reported fourth-quarter adjusted earnings* of $1.2 billion or $2.94 per share.

Apache’s oil and natural gas liquids production was 50 percent of total volume in 2011 but contributed nearly 80 percent of revenues because of the wide gap between global crude oil and North American natural gas prices. Apache’s results also benefited from the price differentials between oil prices in basins linked to the West Texas Intermediate benchmark and higher prices for oil produced in the Gulf of Mexico, Egypt, Australia and the North Sea that represents approximately 76 percent of its crude production.

Apache ended 2011 with proved reserves of 3 billion boe, up 1 percent from 2010. Apache’s 2011 production was 273 million boe (MMboe). The company added 422 MMboe, or 155 percent of production, through extensions, discoveries and acquisitions. Divestitures and revisions totaled 113 MMboe. Apache spent $9.1 billion on exploration, development and acquisitions capital, excluding asset retirement obligations and capitalized interest.*

During 2011, with the continued downward pressure on North American natural gas prices, Apache transitioned its North American drilling program to oily and liquids-rich targets in the Permian and Anadarko basins, the Gulf of Mexico and Canada.

Kitimat key to Canada’s future relationship with China, Asia Pacific Foundation says

Asia Pacific FoundationAn editorial published today by the president of the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada says that the media concentrating on Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s trip to Beijing has it wrong, the key to the relationship between Canada and China is in Kitimat, not Beijing.

Yuen Pau Woo
Yuen Pau Woo (Asia Pacific Foundation)

In the editorial, President’s View, Future of Canada-Asia Energy Relations in Kitimat , foundation president Yuen Pau Woo reflects on a recent visit to Kitimat where he met representatives of the First Nations, industry, and municipality.

Woo says: “Kitimat’s livelihood depends on trade with Asia and the community knows it.”

The editorial lists such projects as the Kitimat modernization porject at the Rio Tinto Alcan, KMLNG’s Kitimat LNG project, other proposed LNG projects, “sharply increased vessel traffic through the Douglas Channel” and, of course, the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipline.

Woo’s key paragraph reads:

The future of Canada-Asia energy relations is not about Beijing; it is about Kitimat. It is in this remote coastal community that the confluence of Asia’s growing economic clout, Canada’s abundance of natural resources, the livelihoods and economic aspirations of First Nations, the challenge of supporting rural communities, and the pristine environment of the Canadian wilderness have created conditions that demand new forms of partnership for a sustainable future.

Woo says that “the Alcan Modernization Project and the Kitimat LNG Plant are excellent examples of community and First Nations consultation and collaboration that have so far yielded positive results,” without mentioning how long it took to come to those agreements; the decades of problems outlined by Haisla leaders before the Joint Review Panel, and that the current agreements are just the start to redress those problems.

On Northern Gateway, Woo concludes:

The challenges facing the Northern Gateway Pipeline project are of a different order of magnitude, but even on this most contentious of projects, I would not underestimate the capacity of stakeholders to find a uniquely Canadian solution that is based on mutual benefit, compromise, and the long-term good

Three new powerful players said to join the BC West Coast LNG export rush

The race to ship liquified natural gas to Asia is getting hotter with three new powerhouses joining the scramble for west coast export terminals.

BG GroupThe Prince Rupert Port Authority announced Tuesday, Feb. 7, that it is working with an energy powerhouse BG Group, on a feasibiity study for an LNG terminal at Ridley Island.

At the same time The Globe and Mail reports that there are rumours that Exxon Mobile is “examining LNG options” in the northwest. The paper also quotes sources as saying the Japanese firm Itochu is looking to export gas via Kitsault, where there is an abandoned molybdenum mine, town and port.

British Gas was once the retail domestic supplier of natural gas to the UK market. The company split in two in 1997, with BG Group becoming an international exploration and energy production company.

Itocchu logoItochu is a 150-year old Japanese company which began as Chibou Itoh’s one man linen trading company, later adding drapery shops and over more than a century expanding operations to become a major international conglomerate with strong interests in the energy sector. According to the company website, Itochu is also a player in the solar energy and bio-ethanol fields.

“The Prince Rupert Port Authority has engaged with the BG Group to consider Prince Rupert for a potential LNG export facility. The BG Group is number two in the world in LNG, next to Shell and they are number two depending on what measurements you look at, so they are already a big player in that industry” according to Shaun Stevenson, vice-president of Marketing and Business Development for the Prince Rupert Port Authority.

“We have an agreement signed to provide them a site and to secure that site to examine the suitability of it and the feasibility of the facility…We have given them a period of time to conduct the feasibility and suitability study, and if it is determined to be viable from the preliminary work that is done then we will look at further development,” he said.

David Byford, spokesman for the BG Group in Houston, confirmed the deal has been signed but cautioned “Prince Rupert is one of the areas we are looking at, and we are in the very early feasibility study stage.”

“The west coast of Canada is certainly advantageous for LNG export, and there is a lot of natural gas in BC as well.”

Prince Rupert port spokesperson Michael Gurney says it will be 12 to 24 months before there’s a clear commitment on the project.

A spokesman with Itochu declined comment when contacted by The Globe and Mail. Kitsault, near Alice Arm, in the traditional territory of the Nisga’a nation, was the site of  a short lived molybedenum venture by the Phelps Dodge company. After the mine was abandoned, the town was bought by Indo-American businessman Krishnan Suthanthiran and is now promoted as a nature and wilderness retreat, called Heaven on Earth.

Exxon MobileThe Globe and Mail also quotes sources as saying that Exxon Mobil Corp., which has substantial natural gas reserves in northeastern B.C., has also been examining LNG options. Pius Rolheiser, a spokesman with Canada’s Imperial Oil Ltd., which is majority-owned by Exxon, said in a statement to the Globe and Mail: “Imperial continuously reviews a variety of opportunities to increase value to our shareholders. As a matter of practice, and for competitive reasons, we do not discuss specific strategies.”

Apache, Shell mark LNG progress at District of Kitimat council

Eurocan site at Kitimat
Apache will build the work camp for the Kitimat LNG project at the old Eurocan site. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)

As the financial and energy markets speculated Monday, Feb. 6, 2012 that Apache Corporation would make an official announcement during its quarterly webcast next week that the Kitimat LNG project will go ahead, a company report to the District of Kitimat Council, released this evening, is a strong indication that the project is a go.

Mayor Joanne Monaghan told the council that Apache has reported to the district that work at the site for the LNG terminal at Bish Cove has been “progressing well” through the winter and was now “progressing toward the construction phase.” Work so far at Bish Cove includes site preparation, building an access road and a temporary dock for the crew boat.

Monaghan said that Apache will begin work on a work camp for the Kitimat LNG project at the old Eurocan site “shortly.”

Monaghan also that the province of British Columbia told her that it estimates that there will be 800 permanent,  long term jobs in British Columbia over the life of the projects  9,000 construction jobs over the 10 to 15 year multi-train (phase) plans from the KM LNG, BC LNG and Shell projects.  Premier Christy Clark estimated that LNG projects will bring the province $1 billion in revenue. (For Premier Christy Clark’s statement see Vancouver Province Liberals shift strategy to LNG)

The mayor said that Apache plans to work closely with local contractors in general contracting, supplies, concrete supply, logging and land clearing and other supporting jobs.

Apache will be in competition with Rio Tinto Alcan for the local workforce and contractors. Last Thursday, RTA, which is working on a $3 billion modernization project at the Kitimat aluminum smelter, stole a march on Apache, by holding a day long conference for contractors and suppliers across British Columbia, including a tour of the plant, so they could bid on work during that project.

At the same meeting, district council was told that Shell has begun the official transition in its takeover the old Methanex site, which it recently purchased from Cenovus by applying for a licence of occupation at the site, which included asking for permission under district of bylaws to put a  Shell Canada sign at the entrance to the site, replacing the current Methanex sign.  The old Methanex site will be the base for Shell’s plans for its LNG project.

 (This story has been updated and corrected after checking Christy Clark’s statement on LNG which at the council meeting was attributed, in part, to Apache)

CIBC analyst speculates on one big natural gas pipeline to Kitimat as rumours persist that Apache decision on KM LNG will come next week

Apache CorporationThere is increasing speculation in the financial and energy markets that Apache Corporation, the lead investor in KM LNG partners, who propose to build the Kitimat LNG project will announce the investment decision next week. If the decision is positive, and it is expected to be positive, that means the work underway at the Bish Cove site will ramp up to full construction.

Related: Apache, Shell mark LNG progress at District of Kitimat council

The speculation is heightened by the fact that the two other partners in KM LNG, Encana and EOG, report the following morning.  Rumours on the Kitimat announcement began after Encana delayed its announcement by a week from its normal time in early February.  (At that time one energy market analyst who follows NWCEN on Twitter contacted this site to ask if there were rumours here. At that time, there were none)

Apache has scheduled a fourth quarter report conference call  and webcast from its headquarters in Houston, Texas, Feb. 16, 2012, at 1 pm Central Time.

Apache has always said that the go/no-go decision on the Kitimat project would come in the first quarter of 2012.

CIBC World MarketsThe market speculation, however, may not be entirely good news.  That’s because this morning, Andrew Potter, of CIBC World Markets, told a conference call that the rush to export liquified natural gas from northeastern BC and Alberta to Kitimat would mean building one or two large natural gas pipelines, instead of several small ones, to reach the terminal projects.

Reuters quoted Potter as saying: “There is no logic at all to seeing three to five facilities built with three to five independent pipelines,” he said.

At the moment, the just approved BC LNG project, a cooperative of 13 energy companies, plans  to utilize the existing Pacific Northern Gas facilities which already serve northwestern British Columbia. The PNG pipeline roughly follows the communities it serves along Highway 16.  KM LNG is in partnership with the Pacific Trails Pipeline project, which would take that pipeline across country.

The third LNG project, by Shell, is still in the planning stages, but it, too, would need pipeline capacity.

Although there is general support for the LNG projects in northwestern BC, and less controversy over natural gas pipelines, last fall, members of one Wet’suwet’en First Nation house blocked a survey crew for Apache and Pacific Trail Pipelines who were working near Smithers on that house’s traditional territory.  The survey project was then stood down for the winter.

The fear among some First Nations leaders and environmentalists is that the Pacific Trails Pipeline could, intentionally or unintentionally, open the door to much more controversial Enbridge Northern Gateway bitumen pipeline, since the PTP and Northern Gateway could follow the same cross country route.

Whether or not Potter intended to stir up a hornet’s nest, he likely has. What appears to be logical and economic for a CIBC analyst in a glass and steel tower, one or two giant natural gas pipelines, is now likely going to be fed in to, so to speak, and amplify the controversy over the Northern Gateway pipeline.

Potter also told the conference call that together the natural gas projects do not have enough gas in the ground to support the export plans. That means, Potter said, more acquisitions and joint venture deals in the natural gas  export sector. Bob Brackett of Bernstein Research, quoted by Alberta Oil magazine, also says there will likely be consolidation of Kitimat LNG projects, since there was similar consolidation in Australia.

 Apache Corp. Fourth quarter reporter webcast page.

 

PNG System map
The existing Pacific Northern Gas Pipeline follows Highway 16 (PNG)

 

 

Pacific Trails Pipeline
The Pacific Trails Pipeline (yellow and black) would go cross country to Kitimat. The existing PNG pipeline, seen in the above map, is marked in red on this map. (PTP)

 

Northern Gateway Pipeline
The Northern Gateway Pipeline also goes cross country, on a similar route to the proposed Pacific Trails Pipeline. (Enbridge)

PetroChina looks to Kitimat as it spends $1 billion for Shell shale gas in northeastern BC

PetroChina has bought a 20 per cent stake in Shell Canada’s Groundbirch shale-gas project in north eastern BC, leading to media reports that PetroChina is also investing in Shell’s planned Kitimat liquified natural gas export terminal in Kitimat.

The Groundbirch  “play”  in the northeastern BC shale gas fields produces 180 million cubic feet of gas a day form 250 wells.

A Hong Kong website, FinanceAsia, reported that PetroChina is paying $1 billion for the stake in the northeast BC shale gas operation.

China Daily confirmed the story, quoting Mao Zefeng, the Beijing-based spokesman of PetroChina, who declined to give the value of the transaction.

China Daily said Shell and PetroChina’s parent agreed in June to increase cooperation in energy exploration in China, estimated to hold the world’s largest reserves of shale gas. The semi-official newspaper says Petro China is looking to Canada to obtain drilling technology and expertise.

“It’s a continuation of our cooperation in China, and we can learn about shale-gas exploration and production by being a partner in the Canadian shale-gas project,” Mao said. “The project will also bring us good investment returns.”

Barron’s also reported that China is looking to get more experience shale gas, quoting Benchmark analyst Mark Gilman who told Dow Jones Newswires. “They are trying to learn about this business, on the basis of their belief that it will better position them to assess and develop similar resources within China,” he said. In fact, Shell and PetroChina are exploring for shale together in China, so the Canadian deal may be a “quid pro quo” gesture to Shell, he added.

Shell executives said at a meeting in London on Thursday that the company has invested $400 million in shale gas exploration in China, funding 15 wells with more in the future.

Last fall, Shell purchased the old Methanex site and the Methanex marine terminal in Kitimat.

Both The Globe and Mail and Postmedia News are tying the investment directly to Shell’s Kitimat LNG export project.

The Globe and Mail says that PetroChina as well as Japan’s Mitsubishi and Korean Gas are stakeholders in the Shell Kitimat LNG project.

PetroChina’s had agreed with Encana, a partner in the KM LNG project to invest $5.4-billion in the company’s shale gas operations in British Columbia. That deal collapsed last fall after the two companies could not agree on finances.

PetroChina is also a heavy investor in the Alberta bitumen sands.

The deal between PetroChina and Shell came on the same day that National Energy Board approved the BC LNG project, the second one to be proposed for Kitimat. The first, approved in October, is the Kitimat LNG project owned by the KM LNG partnership.

It also comes a few days before Prime Minister Stephen Harper begins an official visit to China.

NEB approves BC LNG, second Kitimat LNG project

The National Energy Board has approved a 20-year-export licence for Kitimat’s second LNG project, known as BC LNG. A NEB news release says:

The export licence authorizes BC LNG to export 36 million tonnes of LNG, which is equivalent to approximately 47.9 billion m³ of natural gas, over a 20 year period.

The maximum annual quantity allowed for export will be 1.8 million tonnes of LNG, which amounts to approximately 2.4 billion m³of natural gas.

A co-operative comprised of natural gas producers, marketers and LNG buyers is a central feature of BC LNG’s export proposal, where members of the co-operative will submit bids to provide natural gas to be liquefied or purchase LNG.

A committee will review the bids and choose those that will yield the greatest margin to the co-operative. Membership in the co-operative is currently comprised of thirteen parties, and additional members may join upon request.

BC LNG’s export model permits smaller natural gas market participants in Canada to play a part in exporting LNG. In approving BC LNG’s application, the Board satisfied itself that the quantity of gas to be exported is in excess of the requirements to meet the foreseeable Canadian demand.

The Board also determined that the volumes of natural gas proposed to be exported are not likely to cause Canadians difficulty in meeting their energy requirements at fair market prices.

The Board acknowledged the potential economic benefits associated with BC LNG’s project. In particular, the Board noted the benefits for the Haisla Nation, including an interest in BC LNG, and employment opportunities resulting from the development and operation of the liquefaction facility.

BC LNG Map
Map showing the BC LNG site in Kitimat harbour (NEB)

The Haisla Nation has a 50 per cent stake in the project through the Hasila Nation Douglas Channel Limited Partnership.
The NEB says the Haisla say the new revenue source would allow the First Nation to support health, education, community development and the many other needs of the First Nation and its members. The Haisla say that business and
employment opportunities associated with the development of the LNG terminal and associated
facilities would be available for Haisla members and businesses.

The NEB also says that the Haisla indicated
that a number of other Aboriginal persons, businesses and nations would see economic spinoff  benefits from the development.

The NEB decision says there will be two “liquefaction trains” on barges in Kitimat harbour. The
first train is scheduled to commence in 2013-14 and the second train in 2016-18. Each train will
have a daily volume requirement of 3.5 million cubic metres a day (125 MMcf/d) of natural gas. After completion of both trains, the terminal will have an annual liquefaction capacity of 1.8 million tonnes of LNG.

LNG from the Terminal will be pumped directly into an LNG tanker berthed adjacent to the barge. It will take about 30 days to fill a typical LNG tanker and approximately 25 days to make the roundtrip between Kitimat and markets in Asia.

Talisman Energy Inc. and Tenaska Marketing Canada both have a stake in the project.

The NEB approved the first project, known as Kitimat LNG, operated by the KM LNG partnership on October 13, 2011.

That export licence authorized KM LNG to export 200 million tonnes of LNG (equivalent to

BC LNG pipeline map
Map of pipelines that will feed the BC LNG project (NEB)

approximately 265 million 10³m³ or 9,360 Bcf of natural gas) over a 20 year period. The maximum annual quantity allowed for export will be 10 million tonnes of LNG (equivalent to approximately 13 million 10³m³ or 468 Bcf of natural gas). The supply of gas will  come from producers located in the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin. Once the natural gas has reached Kitimat by way of the Pacific Trail Pipeline, the gas would then be liquefied at a terminal to be built in Bish Cove, near the Port of Kitimat.

A third LNG project by Shell Canada, which will use the old Methanex site in Kitimat and the old Methanex marine terminal in Kitimat harbour is currently in the preliminary planning stages.

The NEB hearings on the LNG projects are different from the current Joint Review Panel hearings on the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline.   The JRP hearings are a “facility hearing” and cover the entire project, including environmental impacts.  Since neither LNG project actually crosses a  provincial boundary, the NEB’s jurisdiction is limited to granting the export licence.

Blue Horizon obtains injunction to stop Methanex equipment leaving Kitimat site

Old Methanex site, Kitimat BC
A truck enters the old Methanex site, now being dismantled, on the snowy afternoon of January 13, 2012. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)

Blue Horizon, the company that had  and lost the contract to  dismantle the old Methanex site in Kitimat has obtained an injunction preventing the buyer of the equipment from removing the material from the site by the Kitimat River.

Last November, Ko Yo Development of Hong Kong cancelled its contract with Blue Horizon that would have seen the equipment in the plant dismantled and shipped to China.

Part of the old Methanex site is now operated by Cenovus and is used to ship condensate to the Alberta bitumen sands by rail.

Shell purchased the Methanex site and marine terminal in October, 2011, as part of its plans for a liquified natural gas facility at Kitimat.  At the time of the contract cancellation in November, Shell spokesman Stephen Doolan told Northwest Coast Energy News  “The transaction … does not affect Shell’s purchase of the Cenovus property, nor is Shell involved in any way.” On Friday, Doolan said he had nothing more to add to the original statement.

A news release issued by Blue Horizon says:

Blue Horizon Industries Inc. (“Blue Horizon” or the “Corporation”) (CNSX:BH) announces that its wholly owned subsidiary Blue Horizon Energy Inc. (“BH Energy”), on behalf of its wholly owned division Blue Horizon Contracting, obtained on January 12, 2012 an injunction in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Vancouver Registry, prohibiting Ko Yo Development Co. Ltd., a Hong Kong incorporated company (“KoYo”) and Guangan Lotusan Natural Gas Chemicals Co. Ltd., a corporation incorporated under the laws of the Peoples Republic of China (“GLN”) from removing any portion of the dismantled ammonia or methanol plants from the Province of British Columbia unless and until KoYo / GLN posts security in court in the amount of $4,180,000 by way of an irrevocable letter of credit or other security acceptable to BH Energy and to the Court.

Mr. Don Allan, President and CEO of Blue Horizon, stated “We are pleased that the Supreme Court of British Columbia ruled quickly and decisively in this matter by issuing the injunction against KoYo / GLN while at the same time awarding significant security for costs and court costs to BH Energy. We are continuing to focus our attention on completing the bid process for a number of new high value dismantling contracts expected to be awarded for execution in 2012 as well as advancing our other operating businesses.”

 

The dispute between Blue Horizon, the Red Deer  based contractor  and Hong Kong based Ko Yo goes back months.   The original contract was awarded in February, 2011, renegotiated in September 2011 and then cancelled in November, 2011.

Bula sign on Methanex site
On the Methanex Project sign at the entrance to the decomissioning site, stencils from Bula.ca, the new contractor, can be seen overwriting Blue Horizon, the former contractor. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)

The dismantling of the Methanex plant has since resumed with work being handled by a new contractor, Bula Enterprises, also of Red Deer.  A profile of Bula Enterprises on the website shows that  it has extensive construction experience, much of it in the Alberta   oil patch, including projects for Shell Albian, CNRL, Suncor, Conoco Phillips in Fort McMurray. As of late Friday afternoon, Bula had not returned calls seeking comment on how the injunction might affect the deocommissioning.

Ko Yo Chemical (Group) Limited, formerly Ko Yo Ecological Agrotech (Group) Limited, is a Hong Kong based investment holding company. According to a company profile it is engaged in the research and development, manufacture, marketing and distribution of chemical products, chemical fertilizers and bulk blending fertilizers and has a natural gas energy utilization project at Dazhou City, Sichuan Province, China. The company has a number of subsidiaries with similar names.