Aminex Share Discussion Threads

[warbaby43] 13/6/2016 16:33

"it is after all an asset having the Namisange prospect as a high-grade lead and ready to drill"

I would suggest a careful look at how little seismic has been done over Namisange, blackgold, and are you implying it lies within the Ntorya Appraisal Licence? Likonde-2 definitely does and that might indeed qualify as "drill ready"

[blackgold00] 13/6/2016 14:43

"Given that Aminex have failed twice now to meet obligations under license terms don't be surprised that even best case they lose the acreage apart from the Ntorya appraisal area."

i don't see it as best case but i wouldn't be surprised ngms, it is after all an asset having the Namisange prospect as a high-grade lead and ready to drill, so no doubt it can and will be used in the negotiations as they try to extend the licence and exchange all or some of the 4 committed exploration wells to appraisal wells.
TPDC will want Ntorya proved up as much as Aminex and i can't see them playing hard ball in times like this, when some of the bigger company's have already relinquished licences. And not forgetting that the "(Ntorya-3 to test 1.5 TCF Pmean GIIP Resources from Cretaceous and Tertiary reservoirs)".

[ngms27] 13/6/2016 12:51

That's the real nub. When Bowleven went through due diligence I suspect that Aminex wanted them to start the drilling campaign around now whilst Bowleven quite rightly said not until we get the license sorted post 2016.

I also suspect that's why Bowleven haven't completely written off the farmout and would reconsider once the licensing position becomes clearer and of course assuming it has a positive outcome for Aminex.

Given that Aminex have failed twice now to meet obligations under license terms don't be surprised that even best case they lose the acreage apart from the Ntorya appraisal area.

[warbaby43] 13/6/2016 11:19

blackgold, while there has been much mention on here of financing based on $1m per month from Kn-1, that makes no allowance for the December reduction in PSC stake to 39% at best but more likely 36%. What must also be faced up to is that they cannot get drilling financing, neither loan nor equity, without licence certainty and despite "discussions" with TPDC going on for comfortably over 12 months now there continues to be anything but licence certainty.

They are entirely beholden to and at the whim of TPDC and IF (an "if" which gets ever larger) TPDC do grant them extensions, any such will be at considerable cost to shareholders' interests whether that be surrender of a further slice of KN-1 or a chunk of Ntorya through an increase on their 15% back-in and/or free carry on that on development.

[gerryjames] 13/6/2016 10:53

There's loads of gas, building good working relations at the begining over time and during is more important. In 10 years Aminex could be a household name. Like Postyourneighbourswifespycamclub.com.

[blackgold00] 13/6/2016 10:49

ngms, not even if the RBL funds are to drill N-2 and N-1 work-over, which then if successful and an early production system was implemented, would then provide a further 50 mmscfd oprox for many more years. and that's before the big N-3 well i.e the TCF of gas which numbers make my head boggle.

[ngms27] 13/6/2016 09:48

Do the maths, 30mmscfpd for 2 years = 70% depletion of audited reserves NOT 50%

Look at the production profile as well. No one will give then a RBL unless it's on ridiculous terms

[gerryjames] 13/6/2016 08:58

Your're welcome.

[skinwalker] 13/6/2016 08:39

Wow! Given birth by an anaconda in Montana. A member of the shape-shifting skinwalker tribe. Probably a relative. Thanks Gerry

[warbaby43] 13/6/2016 07:58

"that implementation of the plan would depend on the natural gas situation in Mtwara and other regions in the southern part of the country. .................... Unfortunately, however, to the frustration of the Tanzanians, the oil company with the largest gas acreage has long been paralyzed by a lack of funding and no progress can be made with our proposed plant until more exploration and appraisal wells have been drilled. The Tanzanian Government have however told us that they now intend to take appropriately radical action to finally resolve this situation."

[gerryjames] 13/6/2016 05:44

Who is Cedomir “Cheddy” M. Sliepcevich Skin? Or put another way... perhaps you should do some research. Your business instincts and rat-sniffing have served you well but now we have computers and endless information about stuff.

[blackgold00] 11/6/2016 08:45

well warbaby, Aminex/TPDC need to prove the resource is there first, that is Ruvuma/Ntorya is as big as hoped, then the route to market will be down hill.

The thing is on-shore natural gas is so much cheaper to produce than off-shore LNG, so if the estimated resource is there and given the high Energy Return on Investment (EROI), then a very favorable/viable environment would then exist and would naturally attract those industry's with high energy use. There are those who are waiting in the wings.

THURSDAY, 24 MARCH 2016
Norwegian fertiliser firm to build plant in Mtwara



"As part of its long-term strategies, according to firm’s boss, the company plans to put up a fertilisers-manufacturing plant in Tanzania, but noted that implementation of the plan would depend on the natural gas situation in Mtwara and other regions in the southern part of the country."

"Natural gas is an important ingredient in fertilisers-production, and that sufficient quantity of the resource could make the envisaged fertilisers-manufacturing plant a reality."

“In fact, if we are to set up a fertilizer plant here, it is not going to be for Tanzania alone, we will export the product to other East African countries and rest of Africa …. In other words, it must be a large-scale fertiliser-plant. That’s why we have to be satistified with the availability of raw material (natural gas),” observed YARA country director.

“Yes, we have such plans in future, but we need to make thorough assessment of natural gas situation before venturing into that (setting up fertilisers factory),” said Stormorken

[warbaby43] 11/6/2016 08:39

With a hat tip to tli8jaguar over on the BLVN board, herewith an interesting Bloomberg piece on FLNG, the gas glut and gas pricing:


Energy World's Newest Supership Misses the Boat on LNG Pricing
by Dan Murtaugh & James Paton Bloomberg
June 10, 2016

Printer Friendly Version
Email this Page
Save to Favorites
Share on Social Bookmarking Sites
(Bloomberg) -- It’s longer than three soccer fields, heavier than two aircraft carriers and powerful enough to chill gas into liquid colder than the surface of Jupiter.

And its maiden voyage couldn’t have come at a worse time.

The world’s first modern vessel for producing liquefied natural gas was ordered by Petroliam Nasional Bhd in 2012 when LNG traded for more than $15 per million British thermal units. It was launched last month, with prices down by about two-thirds. Royal Dutch Shell Plc faces a similar problem with its version of a floating LNG plant, which will be larger than any ship ever built.

“At $15 and above you can do anything, so everyone went and did everything,” said Trevor Sikorski, a natural gas analyst for Energy Aspects Ltd. in London. “Now all these projects start to come online at the same time, and all of a sudden you have all this supply and now your margins are next to nothing.”

The plight of the PFLNG Satu, as the first vessel is known, reflects the larger struggle facing all producers. Projects approved years ago when energy prices were high are coming online now, adding to a global supply glut that has pushed spot LNG down to $4.62 per million Btu this week.

Annual LNG demand is forecast to increase by 140 billion cubic meters (5 trillion cubic feet) from 2015 through 2021, which isn’t enough to absorb almost 190 billion cubic meters of new capacity slated to become operational, the International Energy Agency said in its Medium-Term Gas Market Report 2016 published Wednesday.

“LNG projects take four to five years to get delivered,” said Prasanth Kakaraparth, Wood Mackenzie Ltd.’s LNG supply analyst for Southeast Asia. “By the very nature of these long delivery periods, they get hit quite a bit by these commodity cycles.”

Petronas, Malaysia’s state-owned energy company, is betting the cycles will even out over the long run. PFLNG Satu will produce about 1.2 million tonnes of LNG annually for the next 20 years from the Kanowit gas field, which is located about 180 kilometers (112 miles) north of the coast of Borneo.

“We are taking a long-term view for this project,” Petronas said in a written statement. “In terms of profitability, the project is still viable as an additional supply point within our larger portfolio of LNG assets.”

Some Advantages

Floating LNG has some advantages over land-based liquefaction, Rafael McDonald, the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based global director of gas and LNG for IHS Inc. It eliminates the need for pipelines to connect far-flung fields to shore. Companies also hope that they can better control costs in a shipyard than on a distant construction site, he said.

Putting production on the water isn’t a new idea in the LNG world. In fact, it’s the original idea. The first plant to chill natural gas for transport was mounted on a barge in a Mississippi shipyard in 1954, according to an account from Cedomir “Cheddy” M. Sliepcevich, a chemical engineer instrumental in the birth of the industry. The barge, which was to liquefy gas for shipment to the Chicago Stock Yards, couldn’t operate economically, and the LNG industry moved on shore for the next 60 years.

LNG Movement

The modern LNG movement began in 2011. Crude oil rose back to $100 for the first time since the recession, and the Fukushima nuclear disaster led Japan to shut its nuclear power plants and increase LNG imports for gas-fueled power generation. The fuel in Japan rose from $11 per million Btu at the start of 2011 to nearly $17 by the end.

Shell approved its facility, called Prelude, in May 2011. The platform will produce three times as much LNG as Satu and also extract condensate, an ultra-light form of crude oil, and liquefied petroleum gases. Shell says it’s not technically a ship because it won’t propel itself between destinations. Prelude is expected to be generating "material" cash by 2018, Shell Chief Executive Officer Ben Van Beurden said in April.

Current prices have dampened demand for floating LNG projects. Petronas has delayed its second floating liquefaction plant by two years. The ship had its keel-laying ceremony at a South Korean shipyard at the end of April and is expected to be operating by 2020. Colombia’s Pacific Exploration & Production Corp. terminated in March a contract to lease a floating liquefaction facility from Exmar NV. Shell, Woodside Petroleum Ltd. and other partners in March shelved a $40 billion project in western Australia.

“The fact that we have not gone ahead with that project at this stage as a consortium doesn’t mean the concept of floating LNG doesn’t work,” Van Beurden said at a conference in Perth in April. “It does mean that the commodity cycle makes projects of that scale and investment level uninvestable at this point in time.”

To contact the reporters on this story: Dan Murtaugh in Singapore at [e-mail], James Paton in Sydney at [e-mail]. To contact the editors responsible for this story: Ramsey Al-Rikabi at [e-mail], Dan Stets

[warbaby43] 10/6/2016 19:16

"with a route to market for any new discovery" while much is being made of these assertions of the availability of a local market the question must be "wot local market" bearing in mind that (a) even just N-1's 20mm cfd is a lot of gas in current Tanzania terms and (b) M&P/WRL were not able to sell that amount even including their supply to the local Mtwara power plant. I would welcome correction but I am unaware of any major gas/power consuming centres in close proximity to the west or north of Ntorya.

Worth remembering too is that supply to local markets might be easily said but that collecting payment from same might be a rather different matter.

I remain sceptical but there again I am sceptical over owt coming out from this gang.

[stinkypeet] 10/6/2016 18:52

And the "truth" is somewhere between the two....

[vike1] 10/6/2016 15:44

That equates to $25m in cash flow in two years, which is less than they need to pay off Argo and drill NT2. With infrastructure and GSA already in place.

And is 50% depletion, though I get the feeling scare mongering over facts is more your thing.

[ngms27] 10/6/2016 14:37

KN-1 will be 70% depleted in two years whose going to lend against that?

[vike1] 10/6/2016 13:39

Company not looking to dilute. KN-1 commissioning opens up the option of Reserve-based lending at more reasonable rates. That asset provides very good collateral. I suspect this will provide the cheapest cost of capital in the near-term.

Farm-out of course remains an option. However, if AEX can appraise Ntorya to prove up Ruvuma's potential, it would have much stronger leverage to negotiate farm-out terms and de-risk the project.

This type of financing arrangement is my preferred option.

[gerryjames] 10/6/2016 11:02

Shareholders, it would be great to get a chance at a meaningful discounted lump at this stage...last chance. I'm sure we'd all agree.

[blackgold00] 10/6/2016 10:20

Financier's or maybe a farm-in partner? who knows, but if the work program/prospects/appraisal wells can offer a good chance of success plus with a route to market for any new discovery, then the funds will be there.

[bigsi2] 10/6/2016 09:38

Where will the cash come from to appraise??AEX don't have enough cash to make it through the next 90days liabilities even with expected income from Kiliwani

[tmmalik] 09/6/2016 17:28

Solo tweet