Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wyätt Gwyön who wrote (3830)	4/7/2004 3:13:35 PM
From: reaper	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

Darffot -- forgive if this detail is included in the articles you linked (haven't read them yet) but... (i) i read a lot about the likely difficulties in siting re-gas terminals, but they are generally just statements (i.e. "it will be hard"), generally citing NIMBY, as opposed to anything offering evidence that it is difficult. i know the potential project in Maine was shot down, but wasn't one in Lousianna just approved? and i thought there was some progress on a couple of sites in Baja. plus aren't we expanding 3 of the 4 existing facilities, including my local one here in Everrett MA? (ii) not enough new supply projects in the Atlantic basin -- does that matter? it is my understanding that at a natgas domestic price of $4-ish the economics for shipping all the way from Qatar (where there is a huge field that i believe XOM is developing?) work perfectly fine. i sure don't think LNG is going to be any panacea, but my understanding is that it would likely keep the long-run equilibrium price in the $4-5 area (obviously quite a lot higher than the prior prevailing equilibrium of $2, but not an unmitigated disaster either). Cheers