• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Private Content
Gas to Liquids – The Stealth Utilization Alternative?

Gas to Liquids – The Stealth Utilization Alternative?



Navigant Director Rick Smead focuses on the potential for gas-to-liquids conversion (GTL) to provide new natural gas demand to help support sustained development of our natural gas resources.

Navigant Director Rick Smead focuses on the potential for gas-to-liquids conversion (GTL) to provide new natural gas demand to help support sustained development of our natural gas resources.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Gas to Liquids – The Stealth Utilization Alternative? Gas to Liquids – The Stealth Utilization Alternative? Document Transcript

    • A publication by Navigant’s Energy Practice » February 2013Contents Lessons from the Natural Gas Market1 Lessons from the Natural Gas Market Gas to Liquids—The Stealth Utilization Alternative? – Gas to Liquids—The Stealth Utilization Alternative? There has been a robust debate over the use of the nation’s natural gas abundance to5 Natural Gas Market Charts support LNG exports. As my colleague, Gordon Pickering, and I have explained ex-8 Legislative and Regulatory Highlights tensively in past issues of NG Market Notes, and, as the Department of Energy appears to now recognize, the value of stable, growing demand such as LNG destined for in-10 About Navigant ternational markets is essential to stabilizing the course of development of the major shale gas plays. Along the same lines, for many years the industry has been working to displace oil-based fuels to by advancing natural gas vehicle (NGV) technologies and design. Both initiatives have found some hurdles to overcome. In the case of LNG exports, the major hurdle is resistance from industrial users worried that the added demand will raise prices, as well as from opponents of natural gas development who argue that no national purpose is being served if development impacts are incurred simply to export a money-making product. In the case of NGVs, the major hurdle is the need to change the refueling infrastructure and the vehicle fleets themselves, in or- der to use the fuel—changes that are much more practical to accomplish in large fleets or for long-haul trucks than in the nation’s vast population of private vehicles. Cer- tainly, advances in vehicle design and particularly in home refueling have made light- duty NGVs a more robust alternative than in the past, but could there be additional ways to extend the benefits of abundant natural gas into transportation? For a long time, some sectors have advocated for a different use of natural gas, con- verting it chemically to oil-type fuels and using it directly in existing engines—“gas to liquids,” or “GTL.” I say, “a long time” in that the core technology involved, Fischer- Tropsch reformation, has been around in its basic form since the 1920s. Many advances were made in the technology (which can also be used to convert coal to oil) by nations that could not obtain the oil they needed. Over the last couple of decades, some very large and pretty small companies have undertaken serious initiatives to bring the tech- nology into the 21st Century. Two of the leading big companies have been Sasol and Shell. And, so far, a common element between them has been the active endorsement and par- ticipation of Qatar Petroleum (QP), the national oil and gas company of the State of Qatar. I recently was honored to speak at the first World GTL Congress, in Doha, Qatar under the sponsorship of the Energy Minister. The Congress provided an in-depth and in- sightful view at the present state of GTL development, and it has changed significantly.
    • February 2013In 2008, Oryx GTL, a partnership of These successes in Qatar have pro- Which brings us to the U.S. Until re-Sasol and QP, reached full produc- vided an important diversification to cently, GTL has been greeted with ation with the first large GTL plant in the nation, which had emerged as the high degree of skepticism in the U.S.Qatar, a 34,000 barrel-per-day plant largest exporter of LNG in the world. natural gas industry. As recently asin Ras Laffan Industrial City. It con- The abundance afforded by U.S. shale 2011, when attending global GTLverts about 350 MMcf-per- day of gas development is having profound meetings in London, I observed verynatural gas from Qatar’s enormous impacts on world markets, impacts little interest in the development ofNorth Field reserves in the Arabian that do not have to await actual U.S. U.S. GTL. However, some changesGulf into up to 34,000 barrels-per- exports to occur. This is because, up may be sneaking up on the industry.day of diesel, jet fuel, and other use- until 2008, the U.S. was expecting to In terms of large projects by the majorful chemical products. The plant has be importing as much as 25 percent players, in December 2012 Sasol an-been in operation now for more than of its supply from LNG exporting nounced that after a year of feasibilityfive years and its success has been nations such as Qatar, but the emer- studies, it will be moving ahead withhighly publicized by QP and other gence of the U.S. abundance pushed a very large facility in Lake Charles,Qatari entities such as Qatar Airways all of that LNG back onto world Louisiana, that will be a combination(who has demonstrated blending of markets. At the same time, of course, GTL plant and ethane cracker. Thethe jet fuel in wide-body flights back shale gas is being examined for possi- total investment is expected to costand forth to London). ble development in a number of coun- between $16- $21 billion, of which tries. Thus, it was critical for Qatar to $11-$14 billion will be for a 96,000More recently, in a project that just find some diversified applications for barrel-per-day GTL facility. The plantreached its full ramp-up schedule last its natural gas abundance, and GTL is expected to start the first phase of itsyear, Shell partnered with QP to build has provided an important one. operations in 2017 and is said to be thePearl, a 140,000 barrel-per-day facility largest single manufacturing invest-also in Ras Laffan. The plant, along Qatar has a couple of major advan- ment in Louisiana history, accordingwith the offshore natural gas plat- tages. First, the government is not to Governor Bobby Jindal. Meanwhile,forms and pipelines to feed it, cost in only supportive, but through its state- Shell has indicated that it is reviewingexcess of $20 billion, and carries some owned oil company, is actually a part- various possibilities for GTL develop-really impressive statistics, based on ner in both plants. A major user of the ment in the United States.various presentations by Shell. For output, Qatar Airways, is also state-example, spanning more than 600 controlled. Meanwhile, there are the Can this work when the feedstock isacres, its land footprint is as large as North Field reserves in the Arabian not free, when the plant will have toHyde Park and Kensington Gardens Gulf. The North Field has virtually compete with other users of naturalin London, which actually makes it no lifting cost. As one Shell executive gas and probably with LNG exportlarger than the entire Principality of put it, the economics of the projects facilities for market supply? SasolMonaco. At one point, it had 52,000 are driven strictly by the incremental certainly seems to think so. Obvious-employees on-site, who formed their capital, not by an intrinsic cost of the ly, the price spread between naturalown municipal government. Shell in- natural gas. Put more simply, these gas and oil is the critical driver of thedicates that just as the Oryx plant was projects have demonstrated that with economics. For example, oil at $100able to do for Sasol, Pearl represents a free feedstock, it is feasible to make per barrel is $17.24 per million Btus,platform for continuing development the economics work. as compared with natural gas in theof the technology underlying GTL single-digits—say, $4.50 per millionproduction, helping to find options Btus. That would then be an oil-gasfor increasing efficiency while reduc- spread of $12.74 per million Btus,ing capital cost and operating cost. 2
    • February 2013which one would think could fund a and home refueling, but it might notpretty expensive plant to turn natural hurt to have an additional avenue GTL Chemistry and Processgas into petroleum products. How- for getting natural gas into transpor- Since fuels from the GTL process areever, losses in the conversion pro- tation markets. If natural gas can be cleaner than conventional refinery fuels,cess, energy and other operating-cost turned into liquid fuels that can be they present two main advantages overinputs, and the simple fact that the distributed through the existing infra- conventional refinery fuels: a higherprice spread between two commodi- structure and blended to burn in the performance (better thermodynamic ef-ties is always uncertain, all constrain same vehicles, the progress in the use ficiency of combustion) and lower pollu-how much one would be willing to of natural gas in transportation can tion. They are, in fact, sometimes blendedinvest for a 20-year life. Thus, it is be much faster—and it can get into with refinery fuels to improve their quality.extremely important to have some aviation markets as well. These advantages arise from the require-means of stabilizing the economics, GTL is also much cleaner than tra- ment of the GTL production process thatwhether through ownership of natu- ditional liquid fuels. Without get- sulphur, among other elements, be re-ral gas reserves, long-term contracts, ting into the chemistry specifics, it’s moved from the natural gas feed streamor financial instruments. It would apparent just by looking at it. At the to avoid catalyst fouling which could leadseem that, just as with QP’s involve- aforementioned World GTL Congress to premature catalyst deactivation.ment in Qatar, this would be a natu- in Doha, Qatar, the major GTL compa-ral investment for a producer. If the More on GTL Chemistry and Process nies showed samples of their variousnatural gas price is low, the producer products to compare with traditionalcould make money on the upgrade curacy or inaccuracy of the negative petroleum-based diesel fuel, naphtha,to oil products, and if the natural impact claims, it would seem to be chemical waxes, etc. Unlike the tra-gas price is high, the producer could much more compelling to be able to ditional products, the GTL productsmake money on the natural gas itself. say that the natural gas produced is were crystal clear, looking more like directly displacing imported oil, as itAside from the basic economics of the grain alcohol or spring water than would be in the case of GTL produc-currently large oil-gas price spread, something to go in your gas tank. The tion. This nexus to national secu-there are other reasons that the time reports from every utilization sector rity is certainly important enough tomay have come for large-scale GTL in are glowing, including increases in warrant very serious considerationthe US. First, it could be a more effec- engine life, extended maintenance in- of large-scale GTL development. Itive way to use our natural gas abun- tervals, and reduced emissions. would emphasize that GTL is not adance to fuel light-duty vehicles than Another significant reason for the replacement for LNG exports, as theit would be to wait for the whole con- U.S. to consider GTL as a comple- U.S. needs both to bring supply andsumer fleet to change to compressed mentary alternative to LNG exports demand back into balance and sup-natural gas (CNG). CNG works well is the relationship to concerns sur- port sustained development of thein fleets, and LNG is making prog- rounding development impact. In U.S. natural gas resource.ress in the heavy trucking market. the case of LNG exports, many inHowever, most observers expect the Moving away from the large, multi- the environmental community wholight-duty vehicle market to be the billion dollar installations, such as have opposed hydraulic fracturinglast one penetrated, and to be subject Lake Charles and the Qatari plants, and other developmental impacts op-to intense competition from electric, there is a robust and growing popula- pose the exports on the basis that thehybrid, and high-efficiency gasoline tion of small, modular GTL develop- economic benefit of the export rev-and diesel engines, all of which can ers. These approaches vary from each enues is not, in their view, importantrefuel from the existing infrastruc- other, driven by startup companies, enough to outweigh what they seeture. As noted earlier, a lot of prog- entrepreneurs, and venture capital. as the negative impacts of the devel-ress is being made in vehicle design Each tends to work in the small, 1,000 opment. Without getting into the ac- 3
    • February 2013Mcfd/100 barrel-per-day context, in be collected and handled. In many than it has been in past years. Withproducing areas themselves. The pur- countries, such flaring is no longer the Sasol plant moving forward as apose for these small modular instal- permitted, and in the middle of this major first step, it could be that GTLlations is to be able to handle asso- decade the same will be true in the is stepping into an unanticipated ma-ciated natural gas that is produced U.S. for new wells. jor role in helping the US get the mostwith oil, either offshore or in remote out of its natural gas abundance. For Thus, developing small, relativelyareas where there is not another way that to be true and sustainable, con- flexible facilities that can be built on-to capture the natural gas, or when it tinued advances in capital cost reduc- site close to one or more oil wells, canis simply not commercially attractive tion, operating efficiency, catalyst life, collect the associated natural gas andto do so. The standard practice from and the environmental footprint of turn it into GTL that can be blendedtime immemorial has been for oil pro- the plants themselves will be essen- with the oil as it is carried away, isducers, anxious to produce their oil, tial, but this is a sector worth watch- taking on an increasingly high prior-to simply flare the associated natural ing closely. ity. The highest level of activity in thegas—this was the reason that until past has been in offshore situations, — Rick Smead1947, one could drive across Texas at but the nature of the rapidly expand-night without headlights. The same About the Author » Rick Smead is a Director in ing U.S. shale oil development could Navigant’s Energy Practice.thing has been happening in produc- make modular GTL highly important.ing regions such as the Bakken shale I have noticed that when I participate The opinions expressed in this article are those of thein North Dakota, where prodigious authors and do not necessarily represent the views ofamounts of oil are being produced in global GTL discussions, the North Navigant Consulting, Inc.before the associated natural gas can American presence is much greater 4
    • February 2013Natural Gas Market Charts MONTHLY GAS INDEX PRICE DAILY GAS PRICE $10 $22 $20 $8 $18 $16 $14 $6 $12 $/MMBtu $/MMBtu $10 $4 $8 $6 $2 $4 $2 $0 $0 Jan-11 May-11 Sep-11 Jan-12 May-12 Sep-12 Jan-13 Jan-11 May-11 Sep-11 Jan-12 May-12 Sep-12 Jan-13 Chicago Opal New York Chicago Opal New York Sources: Navigant/Gas Daily Sources: Navigant/Gas Daily AECO-C SoCal Gas Henry Hub AECO-C SoCal Gas Henry Hub Monthly index gas prices fell last month, with Henry Hub decreasing The daily spot prices ended the month about even with December, 9% to $3.35/MMBtu for January from $3.71 for December. with Henry Hub at $3.44/MMBtu. NYMEX FUTURES SETTLEMENT PRICES AT CLOSE MONTHLY PRICES: OIL AND NATURAL GAS GULF COAST $5 $24 Feb Dec $18$/MMBtu Jan $/MMBtu $4 $12 $6 $3 $0 Dec-12 Mar-13 Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Dec-08 Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Dec-12 WTI (Cushing, OK), Crude Oil Sources: Navigant/NYMEX Henry Hub - Natural Gas Sources: Navigant / Platts The average 12-month strip price increased to $3.70/Mmbtu from Most recent comparison shows an increasing monthly price spread, $3.58. with Henry Hub natural gas price at $3.35 versus WTI crude oil price at $14.03, an equivalent energy ratio of 4.2 times. 5
    • February 2013Natural Gas Market Charts U.S. DRY GAS PRODUCTION U.S. WELLHEAD SHALE GAS PRODUCTION 68 30 66 25 64 20 62 Bcf/day Bcf/day 60 15 58 10 56 5 54 52 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Dec-11 Feb-12 Apr-12 Jun-12 Aug-12 Oct-12 Dec-12 Marcellus Eagleford Woodford Sources: Navigant 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Fayetteville Haynesville Barnett Shale / LCI Sources: Navigant / EIA Other U.S. dry gas production continues above 66 Bcfd. Total U.S. shale gas production continues strong at just over 29 Bcfd. U.S. WEEKLY NATURAL GAS RIG COUNT U.S. GAS STORAGE 1,400 4,500 4,000 1,200 3,500 1,000 3,000Rigs 800 2,500 Bcf 2,000 600 1,500 400 1,000 200 500 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Range (2003-2012) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Sources:Navigant/ Baker Hughes Sources: Navigant / EIA U.S. natural gas rig count dropped slightly to 429. U.S. storage levels are now within the 10-year range for January. 6
    • February 2013Natural Gas Market Charts CANADA GAS STORAGE U.S. MONTHLY NATURAL GAS DEMAND 750 100 650 90 550 80 450 Bcf/dBcf 70 350 60 250 150 50 50 40 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Range (2007-2012) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Sources: Navigant / Enerdata Sources: Navigant / EIA Canadian storage inventories are now within the 5-year norm for Demand is showing a normal seasonal increase, and exceeds the this time of year. average level of the prior four years at this time by about 6%. U.S. TEMPERATURE OUTLOOK NAVIGANT PRICE PREVIEW 2013 Price Forecast Source (Nominal $/MMBtu) EIA $3.74 Barclay’s $3.70 Goldman $3.75 Raymond James $3.25 Jeffries $3.40 BNP Paribus $3.50 Survey Average $3.56 Navigant $3.45 Sources: Navigant Survey/Navigant The temperature outlook is for above normal temperatures for much Price forecasts average about $3.50 for 2013. of the southern U.S. except for the Southeast, as well as for Pennsyl- vania through the Northeast, and for below normal temperatures for the upper Great Plains and Rockies, as well as the Pacific Northwest. 7
    • February 2013Legislative and Regulatory Highlights ta. Alliance sought to increase the amount of compression on the pipeline to increase capacity from 106 MMcfd to 126 MMcfd, in order to enhance service to shippers from the Bakken shale to the Chicago hub. FERC’s approval found that the amendment would have no adverse effects on ex-National isting customers or on existing pipelinesINGAA Study Finds Pipeline Authorization Times Nebraska Governor Approves Keystone XL RerouteIncreased after EPAct 2005 On January 22, Nebraska governor Dave HeinemanOn January 17, the Interstate Natural Gas Association of notified President Obama and Secretary Clinton of hisAmerica announced the release of its study entitled “Ex- approval of a proposed reroute of TransCanada’s Key-pedited Federal Authorization of Interstate Natural Gas stone XL Pipeline project through the State of Nebraska.Pipelines: Are Agencies Complying with EPAct?”. The The reroute proposal followed the January 2012 denialstudy found that despite the provisions of EPAct 2005 of TransCanada’s Presidential Permit for the Keystoneaimed at expediting federal authorizations for pipe- XL pipeline, which is intended to move oil for process-lines, federal authorizations taking at least 180 days after ing from Alberta’s oil sands to the U.S. gulf coast. TheFERC’s issuance of an Environmental Impact Statement Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality’s Fi-or Environmental Assessment rose from less than four nal Evaluation Report found that the proposed reroutepercent to almost 20 percent after EPAct 2005. The study avoided the Sand Hills and many areas of fragile soils,was based on a survey of 51 pipeline projects from both but would still cross the High Plains Aquifer. Howev-before and after the effective date of EPAct 2005. er, the NDEQ found that with mitigation and commit-BLM Announces Delay of Hydraulic Fracturing Rules ments from Keystone, construction and operation of thefor Public Lands pipeline would have minimal environmental impacts inOn January 18, the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Nebraska. The governor requested that the state’s evalu-Land Management announced that it will delay finaliza- ation be included in the Department of State’s Supple-tion of hydraulic fracturing rules and will release a draft mental Environmental Impact Statement.proposal for public comment during the first quarter of2013. A draft rulemaking was proposed in May 2012, with Pacific Northwestthe initial comment period closing in September 2012. Errata Re: GTN’s Proposed Carty Lateral Project FERC Docket No. CP12-494-000Central U.S. Last month we incorrectly stated that FERC’s Office ofFERC Approves Improvements on Alliance Pipeline’s Energy Projects had authorized Gas Transmission North-Tioga Lateral Serving Bakken Shale west LLC’s request to construct a natural gas pipeline inOn January 17, FERC approved the request of Alliance Morrow County, Oregon serving Portland General Elec-Pipeline to amend the certificate of public convenience and tric Company’s planned Carty Generating Station. Thenecessity issued in September 2012 authorizing the con- correct information was that the Office of Energy Projectsstruction and operation of its Tioga Lateral in North Dako- had issued a favorable Environmental Assessment. 8
    • February 2013 First Nations Regulations Completed for Kitimat LNG Project On January 22, the Government of Canada’s Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development announcedBritish Columbia the completion of regulations for the development of the Kitimat LNG liquefaction terminal project. Along withTransCanada Selected to Build Proposed Pipeline to the Haisla Natural Gas Facility Regulations, an agreementPetronas/Progress Energy’s Proposed LNG Terminal at was also signed by the Haisla Nation and the Govern-Prince Rupert ments of Canada and British Columbia allowing for theOn January 9, TransCanada Corporation announced that monitoring and compliance activities for the LNG facilityit had been selected to design, build, own and operate to be performed and enforced by provincial officials, whothe proposed $5 billion Prince Rupert Gas Transmission have the necessary experience and expertise.project to serve Progress Energy Canada’s recently an-nounced Pacific Northwest LNG project on Lelu Islandnear Prince Rupert. The proposed 470-mile pipeline,with an initial capacity of 2 Bcfd, will transport naturalgas to the LNG project primarily from the North Montneyregion near Fort St. John, B.C. In addition, TransCanadaannounced plans to connect its existing NOVA Gas Trans-mission Ltd (NGTL) system serving the Western CanadaSedimentary Basin to the new Prince Rupert pipeline. 9
    • February 2013Fuels Practice About NavigantGordon Pickering, Director Navigant Consulting, Inc. (NYSE: NCI) is a specialized, global expert services916.631.3249 firm dedicated to assisting clients in creating and protecting value in the facegpickering@navigant.com of critical business risks and opportunities. Through senior level engagement3100 Zinfandel Drive with clients, Navigant professionals combine technical expertise in DisputesSuite 600 and Investigations, Economics, Financial Advisory, and Management Consult-Sacramento, CA 95670 ing, with business pragmatism in the highly regulated Construction, Energy,Rick Smead, Director Financial Services, and Healthcare industries to support clients in addressing713.646.5029 their most critical business needs.rsmead@navigant.com2 Houston Center, 909 Fannin Out of its Sacramento and Houston offices, Navigant’s Fuels experts focus onSuite 1900 the North American market offering fuels services to utilities and public enti-Houston, TX 77010 ties, financial services companies, independent power producers, natural gas producers, pipelines, LNG developers, and large industrial end-users. AmongBob Gibb, Associate Director512.493.5407 other tasks performed for clients, the Fuels Practice has performed due dili-bob.gibb@navigant.com gence analyses and market analyses/price forecast studies, provided contract98 San Jacinto Boulevard support (transportation, supply, and storage), developed fuel plans, and pro-Suite 900 vided litigation and regulatory support.Austin, TX 78701Rebecca Honeyfield, Associate Director Featured Brochures: Fuels Services619.546.6492rhoneyfield@navigant.com3100 Zinfandel Drive avigant. com Click on each brochureSuite 600 www.nSacramento, CA 95670 to read more about ERED GY Navigant’s Fuels Services ENER V T DELI I NSIGH SERV ICES (LNG) RAL GAS D NATU LIQUEFIE vide clie nts L GAS & erts pro NATURA G) exp op- l gas (LN ncing, d natura tions, fina to liquefie t transac itions us l gas and ss strategies, projec quely pos ’s natura ctive uni busine l perspe Navigant energy r globa ght into rketing . Ou ertise in: with insi and ma tional exp s, trading interna eration estic and e both dom provid planning tegy and nning » Stra and pla t analysis » Marke NGE ry adviso » Reg ulatory otiation CHALLE EXPOR T ercial neg e » Comm diligenc ION: LNG ENT ndent due NGE DOMIN SM » Indepe CHALLE T IMPAC T ASSES EnErgy EXPOR E: LNG N NG E CHENIER SESSMENT SOLUTIO ’s applica tion CHALLE N NATUR AL IMPAC T AS t of Do minion export au- Natural Gas Market In suppor AMERICA SMENT N long term ntries, NORTH PLY AS SES SOLUTIO a detaile d as- to DOE for LNG -Free Tra de cou assess- M GAS SUP and Scenario Analysis odeling provided . to non a report the U.S thority Navigant lysis of provided act of N and ana , Navigant rket imp SOLUTIO nt exports ma Point, d the first sessme act of LNG nt U.S. gas ’s Cove release natu- rket imp partme ing the minion Navigant erican gas ma rgy’s De from Do assess- In 2008, rth Am ere Ene applica tion exports vigant’s y of No poten- for Cheni export ility. Na rket, major stud izing the (DOE) ort nd fac l gas ma recogn . At a na exp Maryla . natura supply pment of Energy s, Louisia the U.S gas sha le ral gas develo ine Pas ted the ment of rcellus shale gas al wisdom for its Sab conduc y- the Ma market tial for con vention t. Navigant industr including ture d in the en the s a de- projec tary was cap vided time wh l gas wa its proprie n basin, orts pro . natura ed lysis with built upo ture rep t U.S ant defi ana model Model astruc and the was tha e, Navig market etition and infr reports resourc por ted a fifty leading e Comp was a clie nt. Both n Navi- clining and sup s Pipelin analysis to the ed upo tus quo n-pre- the Ga expert were bas erican the sta r the the ) and its ant’s rep ort analysis se ove North Am , t increa tes. Tod ay, (GPCM of Navig li- leading n GPCM percen e estima ponent t. The app gant’s built upo min- resourc mble key com projec model t of Do vailing tes rese t of the is at market estima in suppor eniere in suppor vailing breaking ort by Ch export re filed tion in the pre ground for exp and we applica ’s initial, natura l cation and only LNG export Navigant 8, with e the first E ap- ion’s LNG from 200 ac- this tim ed DO 2011. luation being widely e receiv ntri es. tember eva tion t to hav de cou Sep ndance le produc projec -Free Tra gas abu Gas sha im- to non dged. for LNG proval knowle enough . n robust exports has bee by LNG laced n- be rep a substa ports to played erica’s experts rth Am Na vigant No inning in beg tion. tial role sforma l gas tran naturanavigant.com ©2013 Navigant Consulting, Inc. All rights reserved. Navigant Consulting is not a certified public accounting firm and does not provide audit, attest, or public accounting services. See navigant.com/licensing for a complete listing of private investigator licenses. 10