LNG: An Expose`
How tragedy became an opportunity for Sharifs?
In the precarious world
of politics, might is usually right. For Pakistan’s young 66 years, the country
has faced a turbulent history of a ping-pong game of democracy and
dictatorship. Elected governments rule in uncertain situations, stacking up
policy decisions like a house of cards, afraid of the unexpected breath of
military rule blowing it all away.
In May 2013, Nawaz
Sharif’s government was elected to power for the third time in Pakistan’s
history. With great power came the knowledge that the previous government had
left a legacy of corruption that could not so easily be scrubbed away. Mr. Ten
Percent, as he was colloquially called, had seemed to strike again, as wads of
cash were unaccounted for. There was the sneaking suspicion that even the
Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline had the highest portion of payments reserved for the
former President.
However, Pakistan’s new
government and bureaucracy promised transparency and accountability in the
PML-N manifesto. Government officials were quick to criticize the corruption of
their predecessors. Time and time again they made sanctimonious statements
denouncing the earlier system of venality, showcasing themselves as the light
at the end of the tunnel, promising a new regime: hope.
Dark clouds, though, have
an uncanny way of casting shadows on even the brightest of days. The new
government was faced with crippling power cuts and a gas shortage of 2bcf/day.
For the common man, it was a scene out of George Orwell’s Animal Farm: the
faces had changed, the problems were the same.
The reality hadn’t
changed much for the Government either. Money was power, and they were running
short on it. Loan payments to the IMF, Circular Debt, dealing with a current
account deficit were just some of the problems. Money wielded political
influence after all, and they needed a way out.
Pakistan had two options
to import natural gas: through pipelines or though LNG. Politics wasn’t letting
the Iran-Pakistan Gas Pipeline through, and
Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) too seemed a distant dream with
an unstable Afghanistan. Then there was liquefied natural gas (LNG)… To the
Minister of Petroleum and Natural Resources, LNG seemed like a breath of fresh
air – a panacea to his problem, and the nation’s.
Caution, however, is
something that’s integral to politics. The Minister, an amateur in the Energy
Sector and born with a silver spoon in his mouth was not wary of the labyrinth
of the oil and gas sector. His industry experience and business acumen had not
prepared him for misinformation in the public sector. On a steady diet of myths
posed as facts on the LNG, he saw LNG as the only route out.
Unbeknownst to the
Minister– a mere pawn in the larger chess of energy politics – even LNG could
be the kiss of death, however. The Ministry was adamant that LNG from Qatar
would be around $17/mmbtu, a high price linked to an oil-index, Brent Crude.
That’s what gave it away, really. The Ministry had not done their homework, and
got caught in the web of numbers – an intricate mesh that reeked of possible
corruption.
With countries importing
natural gas for much lower prices, and under the changing dynamics of the
global natural gas, with the Shale Gas Revolution, India had just made a deal
for $10.50/mmbtu from the US company Cheniere. Pakistan and Qatar had agreed on
a price of $10.3/mmbtu, sources such as the LNG Saga by G.A Sabri said. But if
it was around $10/unit for Pakistan too, where was the figure of $17/mmbtu
coming from? After all, this difference of $7 spelled a loss of about $5
billion every year for the country. Why would a country sign up for a deal that
seemed something akin to Harakiri?
Earning (net profit of PLMN)
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
Annual Saving in Billion Dollars
|
5.11
|
5.84
|
7.11
|
7.7
|
8.03
|
The statements
continued, and the headlines were splashed with LNG. Pakistan would import LNG
from Qatar by November 2014. At what price? $17/mmbtu, said the Ministry: “the
objective would be to get the cheapest possible price but it could be around
$17 per MMBTU[1].” It seemed
like the Minister was already trying to make up the mind of the nation,
preparing them for the worst, while simultaneously sabotaging the bidding
process. The misinformation continued, with false assumptions that a long-term
LNG deal with Qatar can have a price around LNG spot prices. The main point and
purpose of a long-term contract is that a long-term deal is more reliable, and
has a cheaper price. But with LNG spot prices soaring up to around $19/mmbtu,
the figure of $17/mmbtu isn’t too far off. Moreover, there was
misinformation on the cost of transportation. One official in the Ministry was
quoted as saying “We have talked about importing LNG from the US where natural
gas price is in the range of $4-5 per mmbtu, which after gasification is $7.5
per mmbtu, but transporting it to Pakistan and delivering it to the terminal
would cost another $7 per mmbtu.” If Qatar was to get
around $10/mmbtu (Sabri, LNG Saga), from a country that is not too far
(reducing shipping costs), where was the rest of the money going? In somebody’s
pockets. Whose exactly? It’s uncertain at the moment. The facts are there
though: the media was silenced to not draw attention to LNG too much, the
Taliban carried out their farce of creating bloodshed, distracting from the
economy and other problems, paying off American senators and the international
media, and then there was the strategic plan: show the nation a clean face,
talk of transparency, and in the desperate need for natural gas, a few
masterminds were to get away with it all. Until now. Close tracking of the
activities of a few masterminds committed to mint money through the LNG deal
with Qatar had a pattern similar to the PPP regime’s scam in the Iran-Pakistan
pipeline project. The time to act is now.
As the Ministry concentrated all its attention to LNG, other important projects
such as possible Shale Gas development took a backseat. If one looks at the
gravity of the situation, and the $5 billion net annual profit for a two-decade
deal, it is shocking to see that multinational companies earn much lesser every
year.
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Indian Companies Name
|
ONGC
|
Cairn India
|
SBI
|
TCS
|
NTPC
|
Profit in Billion USD
|
3.38
|
2.38
|
2.27
|
2.06
|
2.04
|
International
Companies
|
Net Profit-2013
Billion Dollars
|
Coca-Cola
|
7.57
|
Oracle
|
7.54
|
Hewlett-Packard
|
7.06
|
Occidental
Petroleum
|
6.75
|
Cisco Systems
|
6.46
|
PepsiCo
|
6.41
|
McDonald's
|
5.47
|
UnitedHealth Group
|
5.11
|
United
Technologies
|
4.94
|
American Express
|
4.89
|
Caterpillar
|
4.88
|
Walt Disney
|
4.75
|
Abbott
Laboratories
|
4.67
|
Devon Energy
|
4.64
|
Apache
|
4.52
|
Freeport-McMoRan
Copper & Gold
|
4.49
|
Goldman Sachs
Group
|
4.37
|
Boeing
|
3.95
|
AT&T
|
3.87
|
The table shows that the loss that Pakistan would have
faced at a high priced LNG deal is much higher than the profit earned by
India’s multinational companies. Even top Indian multinational companies can
never think about such a hefty profit, but in one sweeping deal, it seems that
our leaders may sound the death knell of an already weak country. Moreover, even major corporations such as Boeing, earn
profits that are less than this loss that would be incurred by the LNG deal.
Similarly, the major cola companies, with their products available everywhere,
from the smallest general store to major department stores the world over will
have earnings in parallel to this. Abbott Laboratories, with their
indispensable product with an inelastic demand, whose products range in
thousands of dollars, available in almost every medical store and pharmacy
across the globe have a net profit of about $4.7 billion, LESS than what our
folks will be making in this LNG debacle.
This is another industry set up by a few criminal
masterminds. It seems that the Finance Minister Dar nexus with Notorious
Pharmacist Musadik Malik , a possible white-collar crime that would have
been one of the biggest ones in history, hatched the plan. Unless this deal is
stopped, Pakistan may face a loss of 140 billions of dollars over 25 years.
|