What's new

Pakistan urges India to join Iran gas network

but that is not possible because even with that way India will be using Pakistani Sea :) - so she will still have to pay transit fee to Pakistan and secondly its difficuilt to lay a pipeline in Sea than comparing to Land and if there is any technical faults its always difficuilt to sort these problems out. There is no way where India can bypass Pakistan if she wants to bring this gas pipeline to India meaning the idea of first taking this pipeline to Gujarat and then diverting to Karachi makes no sense to all three parties.


Here you are getting all wrong. The proposed pipeline will pass through international waters. Estimated cost 3X the land pipeline. No technical difficulty as such.

Source :- GOI estimate.

And it certainly makes sense as India will be free from all dependencies and possible pak blackmailing etc in event of hostility. The only problem India has with Iran pipeline is pakistan. Money and technicalities are certainly not the problem.

In present scenario only US pressure is detering India from going forward and nothing else.
 
Last edited:
.
Here you are getting all wrong. The proposed pipeline will pass through international waters. Estimated cost 3X the land pipeline. No technical difficulty as such.

Source :- GOI estimate.

And it certainly makes sense as India will be free from all dependencies and possible pak blackmailing etc in event of hostility. The only problem India has with Iran pipeline is pakistan. Money and technicalities are certainly not the problem.

In present scenario only US pressure is detering India from going forward and nothing else.

i guess you are taking it wrong my friend,

See there are lot of disadvantages of this deal for example

1) Its not viable for Pakistan - as Pakistan wants to divert this gas to Balochistan and Sindh province (that is very near to Iran) and if it first reaches to India meaning the gas will first bypass both provinces to reach India and then gas will be diverted back to Sindh and finally reaches to Balochistan province. This way its all LOSE-LOSE for both Pakistan and Iran as Pakistan will be paying transit fees to India and India will be paying transit fees to Pakistan. Where in fact Pakistan does not need to pay anything to India

2) It will be more costly as the route will be longer to reach Delhi with a lot more hurdles

3) Taking first two points in mind Only two countries will go ahead Iran + India and the cost of this project will be divided among two countries only - and India will have to pay Transit fees to Pakistan for using its sea route - Pakistan will not participate in such project (that is highly unlikely by Iran as it will be too costly)

4) Even if Pakistan go ahead which is impossible, The gas will be diverted at too many places i.e. South Pars, Bandar Abbas, One more iranian province, Indian Gujarat, Diverting to New Delhi and another pipeline divertin to Karachi and from there to balochistan. This one pipeline will be shaped into several pipelines meaning more hurdles at every desitination it reaches

========

If india wants to use the sea route the only option they got is go for seperate pipeline project and pay Pakistan transit fee for using sea route. Then use the gas as they desire - Pakistan will only have to bother about the transit fee and in exchange provide security to this pipeline from Pakistani sea route. But then this project will be very costly
 
.
i guess you are taking it wrong my friend,

See there are lot of disadvantages of this deal for example

1) Its not viable for Pakistan - as Pakistan wants to divert this gas to Balochistan and Sindh province (that is very near to Iran) and if it first reaches to India meaning the gas will first bypass both provinces to reach India and then gas will be diverted back to Sindh and finally reaches to Balochistan province. This way its all LOSE-LOSE for both Pakistan and Iran as Pakistan will be paying transit fees to India and India will be paying transit fees to Pakistan. Where in fact Pakistan does not need to pay anything to India

2) It will be more costly as the route will be longer to reach Delhi with a lot more hurdles

3) Taking first two points in mind Only two countries will go ahead Iran + India and the cost of this project will be divided among two countries only - and India will have to pay Transit fees to Pakistan for using its sea route - Pakistan will not participate in such project (that is highly unlikely by Iran as it will be too costly)

4) Even if Pakistan go ahead which is impossible, The gas will be diverted at too many places i.e. South Pars, Bandar Abbas, One more iranian province, Indian Gujarat, Diverting to New Delhi and another pipeline divertin to Karachi and from there to balochistan. This one pipeline will be shaped into several pipelines meaning more hurdles at every desitination it reaches

========

If india wants to use the sea route the only option they got is go for seperate pipeline project and pay Pakistan transit fee for using sea route. Then use the gas as they desire - Pakistan will only have to bother about the transit fee and in exchange provide security to this pipeline from Pakistani sea route. But then this project will be very costly

One can appreciate your insiting on India having to pay Transit Dues to Pakistan even if India opts for the Deep Sea Pipe Line.

Sorry to shatter your Dreams :

Oman to India Pipeline Route Survey

Here is the Pipe Line Route :



I agree fully with you that the idea of the Natural Gas being delivered to India by a Deep Sea Pip Line and then "transported" to Pakistan is "Ridiculous" - and that is putting it mildly!
 
.
I must say,zaki has a point there..

A pipeline through Pakistan will be mjuch easier to make,easier to maintain and economically beneficial to all the parties involved.What is necessary is a little trust and security....easier said than done,but ,lets hope for the best,atleast for the sake of mutual benefit
 
.
[QUOTE
I agree fully with you that the idea of the Natural Gas being delivered to India by a Deep Sea Pip Line and then "transported" to Pakistan is "Ridiculous" - and that is putting it mildly![/QUOTE]

Writing that something is ridiculous without knowing the facts is ridiculous.

Looking at the map you can see the way a pipeline can run. Once it reaches Gujrat, splitting of from there is simple. Look at these facts:

http://s916.photobucket.com/albums/ad8/alex_sqi/?action=view&current=pipeline.jpg

I cannot seem to get this picture up so follow the link.

1) Initial cost of an underwater pipe line is way more expensive but over a 25 year time lifespan is 15% less. Global Insight // Same-Day Analysis

2) Neither Iran or Pakistan has the hard currency needed to finish this pipeline in a timely manner, unless India comes up with the money.

3) Once the pipe line is developed by India, any incentive to develop a pipeline by Pakistan diminishes.

4) India will control a safe transit corridor to its east and north.

5) The distance from the pipeline in Gujrat to Karachi (where the greatest demand in Pakistan is) will be minimal.

6) If the pipeline is laid outside Pakistan's territorial water limit of 12 miles transit costs may not have to be paid (though i am not sure of this).

7) Even Pakistan would not pay for a pipe line that can be blown up regularly. Why do you think China is not jumping on this bandwagon.

So take your "ridiculous" statement and stick it where it is not so ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
.
No joint venture with Pakistan. They have history of back stabbing when and where it hurts more.

Ex: Kargil
 
. .
Sea route is the best option for India.

how about air route?????Jokes aside.....

BTW When reliance can own and maintain worldwide under sea internet cable link then i think i must not be big problem for them to maintain undersea gas pipeline ,if indian govt. goes in partnership with reliance.As far as i know the pipeline to gujrat coast will extend to jamnagar and reliance will be the major customer of the gas.So its quite possible that india will go ahead with undersea pipeline rather than overland through hostile territory of which india cant even have guarantee of security.As can be seen from the case of sui gas pipeline which gets regularly blown up.

flagnetworkbig.gif
 
.
India, Turkmenistan explore energy cooperation
In a sign of continuing interest in the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline, New Delhi has offered to host a technical meeting of experts under the aegis of the Asian Development Bank.

India has shown interest in the possibility of Turkmenistan exporting some of the gas to northern Iran. It could then be swapped with gas from Iran's southern seaboard into an under-sea pipeline, obviating the need for a surface Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline.

The SAGE (South Asia Gas Enterprise Pvt. Ltd.) project envisages a Middle-East natural gas gathering system connecting gas sources to the coast of the Arabian peninsula. From there, the SAGE family of pipelines plans to follow a route surveyed 15 years back and declared unviable as techniques of deepwater pipe-laying and manufacturing had not matured.

“Technology has made this feasible now,” said an official. The SAGE has finalised a MoU with National Iranian Gas Export Company for developing gas exports through this route, bypassing the territory of Pakistan. The Gas Authority of India Limited has also entered into a “principles of cooperation arrangement” for this sea route. However, the pipeline would pass on Pakistan's continental shelf.


the time has come to seriously invest in deep-sea pipeline. Earlier, towards the end of last century, India investigated three options for evacuating gas from Iran to India (apart from LNG using ships). One was deep-sea (with some stretches around 3200 metres depth) from Oman to India (with another pipeline from the South Pars field of Iran to Oman), the second was a shallow and coast-hugging pipeline within the territorial waters of Pakistan along the Makran coast and the third was the landline through Balochistan etc. The deep-sea pipeline was dropped after some studies as the cost and technological challenges were found to be not worth it, especially crossing the Dalrymple trough. The shallow water line within the territorial waters of Pakistan could not even start because of Pakistani objections. The landline therefore appeared to be the only feasible route.

The deep-sea at that point of time was very challenging though it was not considered impossible. The deepest at that time was the still-under-construction Bluestream project which was at depths of ~2200 metres carrying gas to Turkey across the Blacksea. Since then, as oil&gas explorations at deeper oceans proliferate in search of new fields and as technologies improve, the Oman-India gas pipeline does not appear as challenging as it was a decade back. In fact, gas collecting pipelines regularly operate at >2500 m depths in the Gulf of Mexico and even in KG Basin oil fields to collect gas from wells, though they may not traverse great distances. In East Timor field, the pipeline is being considered at depths of 3500 metres. Pipelaying barges are available today that work beyond 3500 m depths, they have more accurate positioning capability so that pipelines can be laid exactly over the chartered route and pipes can be built to withstand the pressure requirements.

As distances increase, pipelines become very cost effective and attractive. Unfortunately, with practically no possibility of either IPI or TAPI, due to unsettled situations in Pakistan and Afghanistan for the foreseeable future, the Oman-India deep-sea pipeline must be immediately revived for India's energy security with Iran linking to the Oman pipeline.
 
.
I agree fully with you that the idea of the Natural Gas being delivered to India by a Deep Sea Pip Line and then "transported" to Pakistan is "Ridiculous" - and that is putting it mildly!

Writing that something is ridiculous without knowing the facts is ridiculous.

Looking at the map you can see the way a pipeline can run. Once it reaches Gujrat, splitting of from there is simple. Look at these facts:

pipeline.jpg picture by alex_sqi - Photobucket

I cannot seem to get this picture up so follow the link.

1) Initial cost of an underwater pipe line is way more expensive but over a 25 year time lifespan is 15% less. Global Insight // Same-Day Analysis

2) Neither Iran or Pakistan has the hard currency needed to finish this pipeline in a timely manner, unless India comes up with the money.

3) Once the pipe line is developed by India, any incentive to develop a pipeline by Pakistan diminishes.

4) India will control a safe transit corridor to its east and north.

5) The distance from the pipeline in Gujrat to Karachi (where the greatest demand in Pakistan is) will be minimal.

6) If the pipeline is laid outside Pakistan's territorial water limit of 12 miles transit costs may not have to be paid (though i am not sure of this).

7) Even Pakistan would not pay for a pipe line that can be blown up regularly. Why do you think China is not jumping on this bandwagon.

So take your "ridiculous" statement and stick it where it is not so ridiculous.

We are very intelligent arn't we?

1. I believe "Deep Sea" Pipelines have a life cycle of 50-60 Years. Please check as I am not an authority.

2 & 3 : That is not India's problem.

4 & 5 : It would be stupid - and that is putting it mildly - for Pakistan to get Iranian Natural Gas via India! Remember, not only India does not trust Pakistan but more so Pakistan will not Trust India.

6. Please read my post of Yesterday (25th May 2010) 08:41 PM. The Pipe Line enters the Arabian Sea from Oman.

7. China is Pakistan's all time tested friend. However, China NOT importing Iranian Natural Gas via a Pipe Line going through Pakistan is not for Strategic Reasons but COMMERCIAL. Be rest assured that Terrorists in Pakistan will blow up a Pipe Line carrying Gas to India BUT NEVER TO CHINA!
 
.
If india wants to use the sea route the only option they got is go for seperate pipeline project and pay Pakistan transit fee for using sea route. Then use the gas as they desire - Pakistan will only have to bother about the transit fee and in exchange provide security to this pipeline from Pakistani sea route. But then this project will be very costly

1) Yes I mean seperate project involving India and Iran only.

2) The only reason for India to go undersea is to avoid pakistan. If it can go undersea why would it make its pipeline pass through pakistan waters?? whats the point then?? It will surely pass through International waters. So no transit fees.
 
.
Shale gas, not Iran pipeline, our energy hopeS A Aiyar, 30 May 2010, 01:58 AM IST
External affairs minister S M Krishna visited Tehran in mid-May and said India was still interested in the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline, but expressed reservations on security grounds. However, there is now a more important economic reason to oppose the pipeline.

The IPI gas price has become ridiculously high in the light of new technology for extracting gas from shale, a common sedimentary rock found across the world. The IPI project never made sense from a security viewpoint. It now makes no sense from an economic viewpoint.The US has pioneered shale

gas technology. This has created a glut, sending gas prices plummeting from $13/mmbtu (million British thermal units) four years ago to just $4/mmbtu today, even as the price of oil has more than doubled. By contrast, the IPI formula links the gas price to oil prices. This implies that India will have to pay $10/mmbtu at today’s oil price of $70/barrel, and a whopping $20/mmbtu for gas if oil returns to its 2008 peak of $150/barrel. India cannot possibly accept such a price formula when shale gas technology has sent prices plummeting.

It must insist that the Gulf countries abandon the old price link between gas and oil, and accept the new low prices established at trading hubs like Henry Hub in Louisiana. Iran, Qatar and other Gulf countries are aghast at the emergence of shale gas as a rival, and want to stick to the gas-oil price link. India must refuse to do any gas deals with them until they drop the link.

Indeed, India may need no gas deals at all with Gulf countries for a long time. Gas from the Krishna-Godavari offshore basin is going to flow in huge quantities in the next few years, making India self-sufficient. New gas deposits are constantly being found offshore.

Besides, India also has massive shale deposits, and should give priority to exploiting these over sinking billions into a highly dubious pipeline through Pakistan. Reliance Industries Ltd has been the first to grasp the new opportunity. It has just bought a 40% stake in the operations of a US company, Atlas Energy, in the Marcellus Shale, a huge deposit extending from New York to West Virginia. Reliance is looking for maybe two more shale gas acquisitions in the US, and Essar Oil will probably follow suit. The ONGC, as always, is slow off the mark, but will lumber into this game soon.

Gaining experience and technology in the US can help Indian companies launch a large shale gas programme in India.

Shale has long been known to contain gas, but this does not flow from a normal well since shale is not porous. The new technology cracks open shale with sand and water under high pressure, opening up the formation and allowing gas to flow. The share of shale gas in the US gas production has shot up from zero to 8% in the last decade. One single deposit, the Barnett Shale in Texas, produces 1.1 trillion cubic feet per year, and other deposits (Bakken, Haynesville) could be as productive.

Four years ago, US companies thought a gas price of at least $6/mmbtu was needed to make the extraction of shale gas viable. But as technology has improved, shale gas has become viable in some cases at just $3/mmbtu. Indeed, Anadarko Petroleum thinks it can produce gas from the Marcellus shale at just $2.50/mmbtu. This is well below the $4.20/mmbtu set by the Indian government for offshore gas.

India has huge shale deposits spread across the Gangetic plain, Assam, Punjab, Rajasthan, Gujarat and southern coastal areas. All these are potentially gas bearing. The government has no policy framework for shale gas, and needs to devise one quickly so that exploration can begin. Seismic surveys on a massive scale are needed to produce basic data. If these data are then made available to bidders, prospective shale gas deposits can be put on the bidding block.

In the case of offshore gas, the government has given itself complete powers of price control. This has kept foreign companies away from the last round of bidding. For shale gas, blocks must be auctioned with a clear provision that there will be no price control.

Europe is frenziedly getting into shale gas, hoping to reap a bonanza as in the US, and also free itself from dependence on Russian gas. India needs to provide terms for shale gas blocks that are at least as good as European terms. That alone will attract global firms with the necessary technology.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom