What's new

India to Go Undersea for Gas Transit from Qatar to India?

xataxsata

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
India to Go Undersea for Gas Transit from Qatar to India?

underwater_oil_pipeline.jpg


Proposed pipeline from Qatar would be an alternative to Iranian gas

With India’s demand for gas expected to burgeon, the country is looking for new options overseas to plug the gaps – possibly through an undersea pipeline from Qatar that would get Delhi out of US gunsights over the import of Iranian gas.

Sources in India’s oil ministry have told Asia Sentinel that diplomatic efforts are now underway to implement the undersea project from Qatar via Oman and across the Arabian Sea to Maharashtra or Gujarat.


Plans have long been stalled for a US$7.5 billion Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline by the threat of United States and European Union sanctions as western governments seek to thwart suspected Iranian plans to acquire nuclear weapons. Driven by US and more recently EU demands, India has been seeking ways to cut down on energy imports from Iran and to build on relationships with Saudi Arabia as well as other parts of the Middle East and Africa. New Delhi’s other efforts to procure natural gas via pipelines from Iran, Myanmar or Turkmenistan are also stuck due to multiple reasons related to security, transit fees, competition from China and strategic factors. New Delhi has considered turning to Israel for gas supplies as well.

The country is faced with an energy quandary. Despite its rapid decade-plus of economic advancement, some 404 million of its 1.2 billion people are without power. It produces only about half the natural gas it needs.


New Delhi is making quiet moves to push projects to tap other rich Middle East hydrocarbon resources and is also pushing for the implementation of a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline project, known as TAPI. The offshore project would circumvent the need for an above-ground pipeline that would traverse Afghanistan and Pakistan, with attendant security and transit issues.

The sources say New Delhi has already floated the idea with the Turkmenistan government in Ashkhabad during the ongoing pipeline talks, including the possibility of transferring the Turkmen gas via Iran in future if US and EU diplomatic pressure abates.

India’s state-owned gas transport utility GAIL meanwhile has been deputized to deal with South Asia Gas Enterprise Pvt. Ltd (SAGE), which is assessing the feasibility of the 2,000-km Middle East deep-sea gas pipeline. The project is expected to cost US$10-15 billion.

Oil ministry sources say GAIL has built an extensive database from deepwater pipeline specialists on undersea ventures. “Earlier there were issues related to technology. However, with the latest developments the projects seem possible. Thus we have renewed dealing with players who could implement the project,” said a ministry official who did not want to be named.

SAGE is a private sector joint venture between the Siddhomal group and UK-based Deep Water Technology Co. The venture seeks to implement inter-continental pipeline projects independent of state-to-state dealings. One primary focus is a Middle-East natural gas gathering system linking to the Arabian Peninsula in South Asia.

SAGE is reportedly also dealing with the National Iranian Gas Export Company for gas transport via a sea route that would bypass Pakistan and Afghanistan. “Linking the Middle East gas fields with India across the Arabian Sea for an offshore distance of 1300 kilometers and maximum water depth of 3400 meters, the SAGE gas transmission pipeline is designed to transport up to 1.1BSCFD gas into the Indian energy markets, or 8TCF over the next 20 years,’’ the SAGE-India website says.

TAPI Gas

The US-backed US$7.6 billion, 1700 km TAPI gas pipeline is making progress, though Afghanistan could opt out of the project.

Ahead of talks in Kabul this week, the Indian financial daily Economic Times has reported that natural gas from Turkmenistan would be delivered to India at US$10 per mmBtu, including US$3 per mmBtu as transportation and transit fee.

This would make it cheaper than the price of imported LNG, which costs US$14-16 per mmBtu. In previous talks, India has pushed for the landed TAPI gas price to be less than cost of LNG to make the project viable.

The Economic Times has quoted a government official attending the Asia Gas Partnership Summit in New Delhi last month as saying: “we have arrived at an understanding with Turkmenistan over its gas price. A GSPA will be signed only after it is approved by competent authorities of the two countries.”

Earlier this year, the additional secretary in India’s oil ministry Sudhir Bhargava told Asia Sentinel: “The transit fee should be reasonable. For this it is important that the three nations (Pakistan, Afghanistan and India) put up a joint front in our discussions with Turkmenistan to ensure that the price of landed gas in India from the proposed pipeline remains below the imported LNG costs. Otherwise the project will not be feasible.”

The TAPI pipeline is proposed to run from Turkmenistan's Yoloten Osman gas field to Afghanistan (Heart, Kandahar), Pakistan (Quetta, Multan) to India (Fazilka, Punjab).

Turkmenistan holds the fourth largest gas reserves in the world, including the Yoloten-Osman Gas field with an estimated potential to deliver 13 trillion cubic meters of gas.

A total of 90 million standard cubic meters a day (mscmd) of gas is to be supplied via the TAPI pipeline. India is expected to receive 38 mscmd, Pakistan an equal amount, while the rest will go to Afghanistan.

However, in a setback, Pakistan’s petroleum secretary Ejaz Chaudhary told reporters last month that Kabul has decided to opt out of purchasing the TAPI gas although it will allow transit to earn revenues. Ejaz also said that Russian major Gazprom has expressed an interest in the construction of TAPI.

Kabul’s position is due to a mix of factors relating to security, price and recent differences with America over security matters. In such a scenario, Afghanistan’s gas share would be distributed between India and Pakistan, the two main markets. In January this year, India and Pakistan agreed on a uniform transit fee to transfer natural gas from Turkmenistan.

Indeed, even as the TAPI negotiations enter the final phase, the biggest hurdle remains security. Given recent tenuous relations between Kabul and Washington and threats from the Taliban, the TAPI pipeline has some way to traverse.

Asia Sentinel - India to Go Undersea for Gas Transit?
 
.
Undersea, oversea, Underground overground etc etc nothing is going to work as long as there is terrorist threat .... best among existing options is by SEA
a) because u can provide better protection and cover against pirates and terrorists .
b)If relationship between the supplier country and us turns sour in future its easier to switch to other suppliers and existing infrastructure does not go waste (so no pipelines)....

so my advise is invest in huge oil tankers and provide better cover to oil routes !!!
 
.
If we can do this with Qatar why not with Iran it will no doubt be more $$ but at least we can do a feasibility study to find out.
 
. .
By making it under sea we can make it more secured but one small disaster will be a great loss to environment and wastage of billions of $$$
 
.
Undersea from qatar is not feasable,...
pipeline from land countries are ok...
But pipeline, it costs more.... :no:
 
.
By making it under sea we can make it more secured but one small disaster will be a great loss to environment and wastage of billions of $$$

How is it more secured ? a determined terrorist attack be able to blow up the pipeline spread thousands of kms easily... the losses would be tremendous !
 
.
How is it more secured ? a determined terrorist attack be able to blow up the pipeline spread thousands of kms easily... the losses would be tremendous !

No terrorist attack ( determined or, for fun ) can blow this under sea pipeline. The under sea pipelines are built at great depth.
 
.
Undersea from qatar is not feasable,...
pipeline from land countries are ok...
But pipeline, it costs more.... :no:

But beneficial in long runs.

Through land is quite not possible in present conditions and more risky and extra expenses like transits.

Undersea are laid where even submarines cant dive.. so forget the bunnies or adventurist KABOOM guys.
 
.
But beneficial in long runs.

Through land is quite not possible in present conditions and more risky and extra expenses like transits.

Undersea are laid where even submarines cant dive.. so forget the bunnies or adventurist KABOOM guys.

But LNG tankers probably would be even better in long run.

It will not tie us down with one supplier and once supplies of Qatar are exhausted,they could be shifted on some different route.

Distance between Qatar and India is quite large and it probably it would be unfeasiable to lay down such a long pipeline.
 
.
But beneficial in long runs.

Through land is quite not possible in present conditions and more risky and extra expenses like transits.

Undersea are laid where even submarines cant dive.. so forget the bunnies or adventurist KABOOM guys.

Suppose there is an explosion like in US or a ship wreck there, its tough to control them!!
We have to take all factors while planning to building them!!
Moreover we should finish land pipelines first...
We can build an undersea pipeline from myanmar to india
 
.
No terrorist attack ( determined or, for fun ) can blow this under sea pipeline. The under sea pipelines are built at great depth.

Do you mean to say its impossible to destroy an oil pipeline undersea by terrorists... considering you know how well these terrorists are backed up by their "handlers" by required resources ?

I dont wish that it happens buddy but i am trying to indicate that possible threat exists even under sea similar to one over land ... even a hostile country can break up the under sea pipeline in guise of terrorists !
 
.
Do you mean to say its impossible to destroy an oil pipeline undersea by terrorists... considering you know how well these terrorists are backed up by their "handlers" by required resources ?

I dont wish that it happens buddy but i am trying to indicate that possible threat exists even under sea similar to one over land ... even a hostile country can break up the under sea pipeline in guise of terrorists !

Yes.. I mean precisely that. An under sea pipeline of this scale is impossible to destroy for terrorists.

However I have my share of doubts regarding any such pipeline.
 
.
But beneficial in long runs.

Through land is quite not possible in present conditions and more risky and extra expenses like transits.

Undersea are laid where even submarines cant dive.. so forget the bunnies or adventurist KABOOM guys.

How about depth chargers.
 
.
By making it under sea we can make it more secured but one small disaster will be a great loss to environment and wastage of billions of $$$

I agree. Usually pipes are not laid down naked like that. We will have to pump in additional money to build concrete 'cover' over the pipelines. As such the pipes would be enduring extreme water pressures at that depth so even a small ship anchor would cause catastrophe.

Though the idea of underwater pipelines is good but we're talking about a shyteload of $$ being put in this... something we've never done before. Wonder if ONGC or GAIL or anyone else has the capability to make something like that. They're good in projects but I have a gut feeling we would need Russian expert advice on this.

There should also be an alternate to TAPI. I think this should becoming TAII for us with the other I being Iran and then underwater and then straight into Gujarat and into heartland of the country.

Becoming alternate to Iran is not good man. They're cordial with us. We might reduce but we must not stop buying from a trusted commercial partner. It sends out wrong signals. We're already involved with them in Afghanistan and also share common interest for a North-South Transit corridor with Iranians and Russians.

Call me alarmist but that figure mentioned there doesn't really look good and is exaggerated. Many countries don't have populations that big and we're talking about people who've no access to gas.


There are a few oil and gas pipelines that we must consider in the near future:

- Qatar_Oman_India (QOI)
- Turkmenistan_Afghanistan_Iran_India (TAII)
- Burma_India (BI)
- Vietnam_Laos_Thailand_Burma_India (VLTBI)

The entire NE is totally dependent on land transport through here in Sikkim..and it costs a bomb to keep the supplies on regularly with such an infested zone.

Wonder why GOI never considered the BI pipelines till date...:what:
 
.
Back
Top Bottom