Russian Oil and Gas Industry: News #2

GarryB wrote:https://www.vesselfinder.com/?imo=8770261

Didn't go to Las Palmas, and is not taking the necessary hard left turn to go to Egypt and Port Said... heading North North West... at just over 4knts...

Nord Stream 2 construction plans unaffected by Covid-19

The project developer of Russian state-controlled Gazprom's 55bn m³/yr Nord Stream 2 pipeline anticipates that the Covid-19 pandemic will have "no impact" on implementation of the project.

No offshore work has been done on the project since contractor Allseas suspended work just before Christmas last year owing to US sanctions targeting pipe-laying vessels. All other works, including completing landfalls and offshore works for stabilising the pipeline, are continuing as planned, Nord Stream 2 said.

One key outstanding hurdle is securing the services of a vessel able to complete pipe-laying in line with the terms of permits issued by Danish and German authorities. Russian state-owned vessel Akademik Cherskiy could be suitable to complete the works in line with permit conditions. But Nord Stream 2 refused to confirm whether the vessel would be involved in completing the project and said it would make public its plans "in due time".

The vessel could be headed towards the Nord Stream 2 construction site in the Baltic Sea, and this morning was sailing off the coast of Morocco. But it has changed its notified sailing destination a number of times, most recently to Port Said in Egypt yesterday. The vessel has dynamic pipe-laying capabilities, meaning it is not required to drop anchor to conduct pipe-laying works, a key condition of the permit issued by the Danish Energy Agency (Dea). Nord Stream 2 also said it has not applied for a permit amendment, which would be required to use vessels without these capabilities.

Separately, the project developer said it has "taken precautions in line with instructions and guidance of authorities" in relation to social distancing and other Covid-19 measures. Nord Stream 2 said it "anticipates no impact on the implementation of the project" from these measures. It did not confirm a date by which it expects to complete construction works, but said it is "assessing different options" for the remaining pipe-laying works.

Nord Stream 2 also said it and the companies supporting the project "continue to believe the soonest possible commissioning of the pipeline is in the interest of Europe's energy security, EU economic competitiveness, and climate protection". Russian president Vladimir Putin had said earlier in January that completion of the pipeline could be delayed until the first quarter of 2021.

Besides outstanding completion of construction and test works, legal aspects related to how Nord Stream 2 will operate have yet to be resolved. The project developer has applied for a derogation from German legislation transposing an EU gas directive that would otherwise require it to grant access to pipeline capacity to third parties and to pass operational control to an independent entity for the short pipeline section in German territorial waters. But given that Gazprom has sole pipeline export rights within Russia and the pipeline has no other entry points beyond that in Russia where it leaves land, it is unclear how any access to third parties could be granted or made operational without an amendment to Russian legislation.

Nord Stream 2 said it is "fully convinced" the project fulfils all criteria to qualify for derogation. It made "irrevocable investments worth billions of euros trusting the applicable legal framework, long before the European Commission announced its intention to change the legal framework", it said. It is eligible for derogation on the basis of the project having been "completed" before the directive entered into force on 23 May 2019, when considered from a position of "economic functionality", it said.

Poland's state-owned PGNiG and PGNiG's German subsidiary PGNiG Supply and Trading were granted permission to participate in proceedings by German regulator Bnetza, which is responsible for deciding the derogation application. PGNiG said that Nord Stream 2 wants to avoid making the pipeline available to third parties, separating supply activities from operation of the pipeline, and applying transparent and market-based tariffs. The case must be decided not later than 24 May, based on German regulations.

The project developer also has two separate legal cases seeking annulment of the EU legislation itself. It argues the amended gas directive not only constitutes unlawful discrimination by applying in practice only to Nord Stream 2, but is also "costly for the gas market".

GarryB wrote:No ships around it... heading is 334.0 degrees, so it is heading north to go past spain and portugal on its way to the baltic sea perhaps?

That article mentions it is the only ship available that could do the job meeting the requirements of the permit to do the job... they clearly don't want to confirm or deny till they have to to delay any reaction from the US... and I can understand that... but pretty soon it will be obvious where it is going.

Russia Races To Squeeze The U.S. Out Of Asian Natural Gas Markets

The increasingly close relationship on multiple levels between Russia and China became obvious to anyone with an interest in such matters last July when the two countries staged their first joint air patrol in the Asia-Pacific region, sending the air and naval defences of the principal U.S. satellite countries in the area – Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines – into panic mode. At the same time, the two countries continue to push ahead with their game-changing US$400 billion ‘Power of Siberia’ gas project that will move at least 38 billion cubic metres of gas annually for 30 years from the Chayandinskoye and Kovyktinskoye fields in Eastern Siberia to Northeastern China. Last week saw major announcements from Russia that now that China is apparently past the peak of its coronavirus outbreak, plans for the project are moving quickly ahead and are being expanded in scope and scale.

In broad terms, Russian President Vladimir Putin has found a perfectly complementary counterpart in China’s President Xi Jinping. Xi, like Putin, is a leader who - since taking over as General Secretary of the Communist Party in China in November 2012 and as President of the People’s Republic of China in March 2013 - has stressed the virtue of ‘self-reliance’ and, as part of this, the importance of the State extending its influence into all areas of the country’s economic and social fabric. This ‘centralisation’ ethos of the Chinese Communist Party, was encapsulated in Xi’s recent statement that: “Government, military, civilian, and academic, east, west, south, north, and centre, the [Communist] Party leads everything.”

Putin tried in his early years to make friendly overtures to the West – notably his 25 September 2001 speech in Germany’s Bundestag in which he outlined that Russia’s destiny was in Europe and that the Cold War was definitively over – but then drew back, initially because of the West’s censure over the Chechen Wars and then over the annexation of Crimea. Xi, though, has never sought such a relationship with the West and, since taking power, has actively sought to develop limited relationships with global partners to make up for the ending of the ‘constructive engagement’ with the U.S. and its allies of China’s previous leaders over the past four decades.

As TS Lombard’s London-based China research team chairman, Jonathan Fenby, told OilPrice.com: “This political-economic nexus is set to bring growing divergence from the U.S. as part of the wider agenda of the ‘national strengthening’ being pursued by Xi Jinping, and Beijing is shifting from being an economic adversary to the U.S. to a geopolitical alternative and this could result in a step change in the nature of the confrontation between the two countries.” In both cases, the Power of Siberia project is perhaps the most tangible representation of this increasing economic and political congruence between the two countries.

Having already demonstrated its willingness to use its abundant gas resources as a weapon in its numerous suspension and complete shutdowns of supply to Ukraine (and therefore to Europe) since the first major supply cut-off on 1 January 2006, Russia is looking to extend such leverage further in the shape of Nord Stream 2, the undersea Baltic gas pipeline to Germany, and the TurkStream pipeline to Turkey and Southern Europe. The Power of Siberia pipeline project fits into such a mould, although the initial focus is in undermining the U.S.’s geopolitical position in the Asia-Pacific, a broad strategic move that is thoroughly in line with China’s own plans for the area that it regards as its own backyard.

With the outbreak of the coronavirus, it is easy to forget that China was fully engaged in an all-out trade war with the U.S., and in this context the Power of Siberia pipeline can be used to edge out the U.S.’s gas supplies to the region as and when the need for an extra negotiating weapon arises. It would also add weight to China’s global geopolitical game-changing strategy implicit in its multi-generational ‘One Belt, One Road’ programme.

Russia, therefore, in the course of the last week, has stated that it is looking to increase both the flows through the Power of Siberia and the overall capacity (including storage) associated with these flows. Currently, the pipeline – in its eastern route - supplies gas from the Chayandinskoye field (the key element in the Yakutia gas production centre) to domestic consumers in Russia’s Far East and then on to China. According to Russia’s state gas giant, Gazprom, these commercial flows began last December at a rate of around 10 million cubic metres per day (cu m/d) towards an overall target rate of 38 billion cubic metres per year (Bcm/y).

To achieve this as quickly as possible, Gazprom stated last week, the Chayandinskoye field – discovered in 1983, with B1+B2 reserves of at least 1.2 trillion cubic metres of gas and about 61.6 million tons of oil and gas condensate – is now fully back on track following a two-week maintenance programme that was implemented to coincide with the force majeure on some import obligations declared in March by China’s PetroChina, due to the coronavirus outbreak. This is aimed at achieving the field’s annual design output of 25 billion cubic metres of gas ahead of schedule and specifically includes expanding the operating Comprehensive Gas Treatment Unit (CGTU) that feeds gas into the Power of Siberia pipeline and finalising the membrane unit for helium concentrate extraction (expected to come onstream in the next few months).

At the same time, Gazprom announced that it will complete the construction of the second compressor station on the Power of Siberia line before the end of 2020 and that it is to bring gas into the pipeline flow from the second major field involved in the project – Kovyktinskoye, the focus of the Irkutsk gas production centre – as from the end of 2022. Discovered in 1987, the Kovyktinskoye field holds the largest gas reserves in eastern Russia, with C1+C2 reserves across the licensed blocks (Kovyktinsky, Khandinsky, and Chikansky) containing 2.7 trillion cubic metres of gas and 90.6 million tons of gas condensate. Production drilling is now in full swing, according to Gazprom, with seven drilling rigs currently in operation but 18 in total planned for next year.

This will allow the company to export to China at least 5 Bcm of gas in the first year of operations through the Power of Siberia before the figure increases to at least 10 Bcm in the second year and the full capacity of 38 Bcm/y as from 2025. Linking the two key sites of Chayandinskoye and Kovyktinskoye will begin in the third quarter of this year with the construction of a new section of the Power of Siberia pipeline.

Alongside this, Gazprom is busy building out its storage capacity, last week announcing a target of more than 1 Bcm/d of withdrawal capacity by 2030. From 2010 to now, Gazprom has increased this amount that can be delivered from storage daily by 36 per cent, to 843 million cu m/d but plans to add a further 200 million cu m/d by the beginning of 2030, according to the firm. This will be achieved by expanding exiting storage facilities at the Kaliningradskoye and Volgogradskoye sites and the construction of a new facility at Shatrovskoye and other – as yet unspecified sites – in Tatarstan and the Northwestern, Siberian, and Far Eastern Federal Districts, Gazprom concluded.

kvs wrote:There was no annexation of Crimea.  Any article that uses such propaganda language is not worth the time of day.
And this article also deliberately confuses competition with "squeezing out".    The USA is blatantly trying to squeeze
Russia out of the EU gas market to the point of sabotaging pipeline construction.  According this hack piece that's
just fine and dandy, but Russia opening up a gas pipeline to the far east is "squeezing out".   Get fucked, you lying
sacks of propagandist shit.  Nobody is forcing gas customers in the far east to buy from Russia.    

magnumcromagnon wrote:

kvs wrote:There was no annexation of Crimea.  Any article that uses such propaganda language is not worth the time of day.
And this article also deliberately confuses competition with "squeezing out".    The USA is blatantly trying to squeeze
Russia out of the EU gas market to the point of sabotaging pipeline construction.  According this hack piece that's
just fine and dandy, but Russia opening up a gas pipeline to the far east is "squeezing out".   Get fucked, you lying
sacks of propagandist shit.  Nobody is forcing gas customers in the far east to buy from Russia.    

Indeed the claim of Crimean annexation is pure hyperbole, just like the idea of a Syrian 'Civil War'....Syria is experiencing a mercenary jihadist invasion, and the Crimea situation is technically called a retrocession. The Russian base predates the Maidan event by least 17 years (circa 1997), and Russian military personnel has had a presence in Crimea since the 1800s (hello Crimean war). The Western media has went to great lengths to bury the fact that Federation soldiers have had 200+ year historical existence in Krym.

JohninMK wrote:
Yes, it can only be heading for the Channel and then the Baltic now.

PapaDragon wrote:
https://www.vesselfinder.com/vessels/AKADEMIK-CHERSKIY-IMO-8770261-MMSI-273399760

Location: South Portugal

Heading: North

Destination: Las Palmas


These guys either have excellent maskirovka or excellent sense of humor

Having already demonstrated its willingness to use its abundant gas resources as a weapon in its numerous suspension and complete shutdowns of supply to Ukraine (and therefore to Europe) since the first major supply cut-off on 1 January 2006, Russia is looking to extend such leverage further in the shape of Nord Stream 2, the undersea Baltic gas pipeline to Germany, and the TurkStream pipeline to Turkey and Southern Europe.

The Power of Siberia pipeline project fits into such a mould, although the initial focus is in undermining the U.S.’s geopolitical position in the Asia-Pacific, a broad strategic move that is thoroughly in line with China’s own plans for the area that it regards as its own backyard.

Comprehensive Gas Treatment Unit (CGTU) that feeds gas into the Power of Siberia pipeline and finalising the membrane unit for helium concentrate extraction (expected to come onstream in the next few months).

Indeed the claim of Crimean annexation is pure hyperbole, just like the idea of a Syrian 'Civil War'....Syria is experiencing a mercenary jihadist invasion, and the Crimea situation is technically called a retrocession. The Russian base predates the Maidan event by least 17 years (circa 1997), and Russian military personnel has had a presence in Crimea since the 1800s (hello Crimean war). The Western media has went to great lengths to bury the fact that Federation soldiers have had 200+ year historical existence in Krym.

Aiming to get to the Baltic in time for the calm seas of Summer? I think I read somewhere that it will only take 6 weeks to lay the remaining pipe.

GarryB wrote:
Over the last week or two the speed has varied quite a bit from about 4knts to about 8 knts... I see the destination has changed from Port Said in Egypt back to Las Palmas... at 7.2 knots is it about 70 nautical miles south of Lisbon on a heading of 349 degrees....

JohninMK wrote:

GarryB wrote:
Over the last week or two the speed has varied quite a bit from about 4knts to about 8 knts... I see the destination has changed from Port Said in Egypt back to Las Palmas... at 7.2 knots is it about 70 nautical miles south of Lisbon on a heading of 349 degrees....

Now off Lisbon, seems she is well out to sea, avoiding the normal north south sea traffic and at 50 miles beyond sight from nosy cameras on land. Looks like the Channel before we know if she has an escort.

Risking death for Arctic gas? Novatek construction site emerge as hotbed for coronavirus

PapaDragon wrote:
Cruiser Marshal Ustinov was waiting for it in Cape Town and frigate Yaroslav Mudry is still AWOL so I'm pretty sure there is escort in play

owais.usmani wrote:https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/industry-and-energy/2020/04/novatek-construction-site-emerge-hotbed-coronavirus

Risking death for Arctic gas? Novatek construction site emerge as hotbed for coronavirus

Nord Stream 2 dispute goes into final round

The German Federal Network Agency must decide by the end of May whether Nord Stream 2 will be subject to European regulation. A new expert opinion is now to refute the arguments of the opponents.

From the point of view of the opponents of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, the matter is clear: in their opinion, the pipeline impairs competition on the European gas market and at the same time weakens security of supply. The opponents want the EU directive for the internal gas market, which was amended last year, to apply to Nord Stream 2.

Until now, the principles of network regulation have only applied to pipelines that have their starting and end points within the EU. Nord Stream 2 is an import pipeline that will transport natural gas from Russia across the Baltic Sea to Germany. Construction of the pipeline is not yet completed.

If the principles of European network regulation were to apply, the operators of Nord Stream 2 in the German Baltic Sea territory would also have to grant third parties non-discriminatory access to the pipeline.

In addition, the fees for the use of this 54-kilometre section of the pipeline would be controlled by the regulatory authority. The unbundling would be even more serious: gas producer and operator of the pipeline section on German territory would not be identical.

Nord Stream 2 AG, which is wholly owned by Gazprom, applied to the German Federal Network Agency weeks ago to be exempted from EU regulation. In principle, the EU Gas Directive provides for an exemption from regulation.

An expert opinion by Frontier Economics, a consultancy specialising in energy issues and commissioned by Nord Stream 2 AG, now attempts to refute all the arguments of the pipeline opponents.

Excerpts of the report are available to Handelsblatt. The experts are taking the project, which is being driven forward by the EU Commission in particular, to subject Nord Stream 2 to European gas network regulation to a hard core.

From the experts point of view, there is nothing in favour of regulation

From the point of view of the experts, there is nothing in favour of regulation. They argue that the Russian gas company Gazprom is the export monopolist for Russian natural gas under Russian law anyway, and thus - with or without exemption from European regulation - the only transport customer with access to the entry point of the pipeline and thus the only user of the pipeline: "Regardless of whether the German pipeline section is regulated or not, only Gazprom gas is transported via Nord Stream 2," the experts write.

The claim that the regulation would allow non-discriminatory access to the pipeline for third parties would therefore be in vain. "An exemption therefore has no influence on which producers can supply the market via Nord Stream 2," they conclude. It is therefore "only logical that the exemption cannot have any negative effects on competition".

Accordingly, "no economic benefit can be seen from regulating the German section of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline". Even without regulation, 100 per cent of the gas volumes transported via Nord Stream 2 would be fed into the German gas network from the landing point in Lubmin on the German Baltic Sea coast, which in turn would be subject to regulation under the Energy Industry Act.

Nord Stream 2 AG has also commissioned the auditing firm PwC to examine the cost side of including the pipeline in the European network regulation. The result: the costs for the German gas market would increase significantly. According to PwC, this would result in costs of around 600 million euros by 2030. Extrapolated to the maximum 50-year operating life of the pipeline, this would amount to up to 2.5 billion euros according to PwC's calculations.

"The decision for or against regulation makes a tangible difference in the wallets of German citizens," says Henry Otto, Head of Energy Consulting at PwC. Without regulation, Gazprom would pay for the entire use of the pipeline, "The gas is then fed into the German network at Greifswald and sold to traders and suppliers at market price," he explains.

In the event of regulation, however, the 54 km long German section in the Baltic Sea would become part of the German network fee system. "These costs will be socialised to German consumers through the grid charges. In contrast to the costs of non-regulation, they lead to an increase in gas bills of an average of 50 million euros per year," says Otto.

The gas importer would be relieved by the same amount, as the German market area would not start at the coast, but 54 kilometres away at sea. "All in all, it can be said that, if regulation were to take place, Gazprom would save an average of 50 million euros per year, and German gas customers would pay just that amount more each year," Otto said.

Expert: Pipeline increases supply security

The report by Frontier Economics also emphasises that Nord Stream 2 will improve security of supply by creating additional transport infrastructure when the pipeline comes on stream. "This will increase the diversification of transport routes and the reliability of the natural gas system in the event of, for example, technically induced failure of individual infrastructures," the experts write.

This contribution to security of supply is reinforced by the fact that the pipeline connects Russia directly with Germany and thus the EU and thus "does not depend on transits through third countries, which means that risks due to technical failures in the transit countries can be avoided".

Nord Stream 2 also makes a positive contribution to security of gas supply by creating the possibility for additional gas import volumes to compensate for declining gas production in the EU.

The experts from Frontier Economics thus point to a growing problem, especially for Germany. Domestic production is falling continuously. In 2005, 19 percent of the natural gas consumed in Germany still came from German sources. By 2019, this figure will have fallen to just seven percent.

In addition, the Dutch government announced last year that it would stop producing gas completely by mid 2022. The Netherlands is Germany's third most important gas supplier - after Russia and Norway - with a share of around one fifth.

At the same time, Germany has decided to phase out coal-fired power generation and to replace some of the coal-fired power stations that are no longer in operation with gas-fired power stations. Germany's demand for natural gas is likely to rise as a result.

The evaluators focus on climate protection aspects

The German government therefore takes a fundamentally positive view of the Nord Stream 2 project. At the same time, it supports efforts to open up additional import opportunities by building terminals for the landing of liquefied natural gas (LNG). US companies in particular are very interested in selling LNG to Europe. The U.S. government is massively supporting these efforts and at the same time is using very rude methods to prevent Nord Stream 2.

The experts from Frontier Economics are convinced that importing Russian gas via pipelines has a cost advantage over importing gas via LNG. Moreover, LNG trade takes place in a global market, and with high demand and correspondingly high prices in markets outside the EU, especially in Asia, the costs of LNG imports to Europe would rise accordingly. "An increase in transport capacity from Russia to the EU via the Nord Stream 2 pipeline would therefore help to increase the supply of low-cost gas in the EU," the experts concluded.

The experts pay particular attention to the climate protection aspects of the pipeline. The gas pipeline would make it possible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by increasing the switch from CO2-intensive fuels such as oil and coal, which still account for around 50 percent of primary energy consumption in the EU.

In addition, Nord Stream 2's greenhouse gas emissions are significantly lower than those of alternative pipeline routes because the transport distance is much shorter than the traditional route through Ukraine.

The experts refer to calculations according to which the specific greenhouse gas emissions from transport via Ukraine are more than 60 percent higher than on the Nord Stream 2 route.

Nord Stream 2 also has significantly better values than the alternative import by LNG. The authors point out the high energy consumption of LNG due to the processing and liquefaction of natural gas.

With the expert opinions of Frontier Economics and PwC, Nord Stream 2 AG has bundled its arguments for the requested exemption from regulation to refute the arguments of the opponents.

According to the German Federal Network Agency, eleven EU member states alone have participated in the consultation process, which is part of the procedure. The Eastern European states in particular have been vehemently opposing the project for years. According to the network agency, various companies have also been invited.

“Nord stream-2” has become a thorn in the side of the US authorities

Washington was advised to solve economic problems together.

Against the background of the crisis with the oil market and the coronavirus epidemic, the fight against the “Nord stream-2” gas pipeline does not seem to be a priority for the US, and it is time for the US authorities to pull out this “thorn.” This opinion was expressed by the Chairman of the Energy Committee of the state Duma, Pavel Zavalny.

According to him, from a purely economic point of view, it is not relevant for Washington to block the laying of the Russian pipe, because now the States have a lot of other concerns to cope with. He called for joint efforts to overcome the existing difficulties.

“To deal with this thorn for them – I don’t know if it even makes political sense, not just economic? I think it would be right if America refused these ineffective, incorrect sanctions,” the MP said.

Earlier, it became known that the only domestic pipelayer capable of completing the gas pipeline was seen in the area of the Atlantic coast of Portugal. The Akademik Chersky is heading in the direction of the Suez Canal. A number of experts believe that the ship is purposefully heading towards the Baltic Sea, although it has not yet announced its final destination.

According to analysts, this is done deliberately so as not to bring sanctions on the ship from Washington.

owais.usmani wrote:
that last part, can the US also stop Akademik Chersky from laying the final NS2 section through any sanctions?

JohninMK wrote:

owais.usmani wrote:
that last part, can the US also stop Akademik Chersky from laying the final NS2 section through any sanctions?

Basically, no it can't, other than by sinking her which might be a step too far.

She is just about to enter the Bay of Biscay, should be in the English Channel Sunday/Monday.

Best thing now, destination has changed to Aberdeen, Scotland

Construction of Novatek’s Arctic LNG 2 Project Ahead of Schedule

Russia’s largest private natural gas producer, Novatek, reports that it is “slightly ahead of schedule” for opening Arctic LNG 2 by the end of 2022. The facility will consist of three production lines, or trains, and is designed to produce 19.8 million tons of LNG annually. The Arctic LNG 2 plant will utilize natural gas from the nearby Utrennoye field. The project is located across the Ob Bay from the existing Yamal LNG plant which opened in 2017.

Last month the construction site on the Gydan peninsula received 20,000 tons of construction material. The world’s sole nuclear-power icebreaking cargo ship Sevmorput delivered reinforced concrete and metal structures, large pipes, and construction and electrical equipment from Arkhangelsk. Sevmorput made two similar deliveries last summer and several more are scheduled for 2020.

The nuclear icebreaker Vaygach assisted in creating an approach channel to the landfast ice for unloading. After successfully unloading the vessel departed on April 5th in the direction of Murmansk.

Based on satellite images initial construction of docks and roads began in 2016. Since then offices, housing, and storage facilities have been constructed and major earth work in preparation of constructing the actual LNG plant has been conducted.

The bulk of the foundation work is currently conducted in a construction yard near Murmansk. Arctic LNG 2 relies on gravity-based structure (GBS) platforms pre-assembled off-site. The platforms are then towed into place and intentionally sunk in shallow waters to serve as foundation for the plant.

Recent images also show the approach channel through the ice-covered waters Sevmorput used last week during its delivery. Winter sea ice usually retreats from Ob Bay by May or early June allowing unassisted cargo deliveries during the summer months.

Novatek holds a 60 percent stake in the project, while its partners Total, Chinese CNPC and CNOOC and a Japanese consortium each hold 10 percent. Novatek had also solicited investments from Saudi Arabia and India, among others. Arctic LNG 2 is scheduled to open at the end of 2022 with the second and third production lines to follow in 2024 and 2026.

Novatek aims to substantially reduce construction costs, from $27bn for Yamal LNG to $20-21bn for this new project.

An investment decision on a smaller project, Ob LNG, consisting of two 2.5 million ton production lines is expected for the first half of 2020. Additional plants, Arctic LNG 1 and 3, may follow during the second half of the decade. No investment decisions have been made on these projects.

In order to deliver natural gas from its Arctic fields to Europe and Asia the company relies on a growing fleet of specialized ice-class LNG tankers. Another key building block in Novatek’s strategy to export LNG will be two transshipment hubs outside ice-covered waters near Murmansk, Russia and on the Kamchatka peninsula in the Far East.

In addition Novatek has partnered with Norwegian firm Tschudi to transfer LNG in the North of Norway. Reloading operations began two weeks ago and are scheduled to continue until the end of May.