Energy Sector Thread - Operators, Engineers, Technicians Et Al

[Numb3r4]

Shell and BP have had very long histories here, very long.

Maybe Shell has their eyes on the refinery, they had one here before mush small but they had one...who knows...

Maybe PNM didn't mess up anything, those 2 companies you mentioned have had a long history of practices that notoriously dis-advantaged the countries they operated in.

[sMASH]

negotiations coudl last years, with ngc playing hardball, swinging supply up and down and up and down and up and down to pressure them to take a price.

[Redman]

Nice to see that you started reading..but you need to do more.
The real issue is the transfer pricing and the rules that enable BP and Shell to avoid sharing revenue based on related parties sales etc.


This is you below.

Also splits are still going to be based on shareholdings, so a unitary position would only get us the gas to run Train 1, [b]not "increase our take" The GORTT of T&T has historically placed us in the bottom feeder positions of any industries that have come here.[/b]

Our shareholding is not going to get us more revenue/increase our take if there is:
1) No gas for Train 1, yet to be addressed
2) Train 1 runs at lower capacity, which is also yet to be addressed.
3) A $300M albatross of a fully funded TAR around our necks.
Keep trying though, the deeper you go, the more amused I get, especially when you're trying to be condescending but talking stuff that belongs in a septic tank.

You asked.me to show you where you made the stupid shareholding point...I did...yuh still vex.
I see you move the goalposts on that one.Normel.

Articles and Poten and Farrel detail why and how thing are and a structured way forward....that the GORTT seems to be following...you eh studying that, PNM don't follow reports....like the WFO you gloss over the summary without going any further.

Trains 2,3 and 4 come off contract in the next few years starting next year...all of the commercial structures being renegotiated....you still sure that it wrong.
But having train 1 run up and running while the others come off and gas frees up for renegotiation certainly is still a bad thing in your mind having already decided the TAR should wait until you ready.
You have zero knowledge about the return of the 300M...what it brings us back in return for making the commitment..yet it's an albatross....theonly certainty here is that you remain ignorant of the details to make a real judgement on the prudence and benefits of the 300M.

The simple fact that BP and Shell stated recently that gas supplies will improve 2022 ish means that things can and probably will improve gas wise...

All of this has to be taken in the context of an entire restructuring of the way TnT monetizes it's NG resources..is there risk?...of course...but that's the nature of it.We feeling the hurt from previous admins doing nothing.
BP/Shell have committed to this process...the GORTT is involved since 2015.....unlike your party who just saw money and spent it despite having knowledge of the issues.

And you still blathering.

Chupidee, at the rate which companies are packing up and leaving, there will be no one to sell it to
All that drivel you typed there and you're still just defending arseness. You have NO idea how the PNM royally facked up the nat gas industry in T&T for everyone EXCEPT BP/Shell.
Where are the companies rushing to sign up after their contracts expire? Leaving!

the companies have plants all over the world and shift operations tactically and strategically.

Methanex shuts in plants and restarts based on as do all the multinational players that are here.
So enough with the melodramatic noise.

[De Dragon]

Nice to see that you started reading..but you need to do more.
The real issue is the transfer pricing and the rules that enable BP and Shell to avoid sharing revenue based on related parties sales etc.


This is you below.

Also splits are still going to be based on shareholdings, so a unitary position would only get us the gas to run Train 1, [b]not "increase our take" The GORTT of T&T has historically placed us in the bottom feeder positions of any industries that have come here.[/b]

Our shareholding is not going to get us more revenue/increase our take if there is:
1) No gas for Train 1, yet to be addressed
2) Train 1 runs at lower capacity, which is also yet to be addressed.
3) A $300M albatross of a fully funded TAR around our necks.
Keep trying though, the deeper you go, the more amused I get, especially when you're trying to be condescending but talking stuff that belongs in a septic tank.

You asked.me to show you where you made the stupid shareholding point...I did...yuh still vex.
I see you move the goalposts on that one.Normel.

Articles and Poten and Farrel detail why and how thing are and a structured way forward....that the GORTT seems to be following...you eh studying that, PNM don't follow reports....like the WFO you gloss over the summary without going any further.

Trains 2,3 and 4 come off contract in the next few years starting next year...all of the commercial structures being renegotiated....you still sure that it wrong.
But having train 1 run up and running while the others come off and gas frees up for renegotiation certainly is still a bad thing in your mind having already decided the TAR should wait until you ready.
You have zero knowledge about the return of the 300M...what it brings us back in return for making the commitment..yet it's an albatross....theonly certainty here is that you remain ignorant of the details to make a real judgement on the prudence and benefits of the 300M.

The simple fact that BP and Shell stated recently that gas supplies will improve 2022 ish means that things can and probably will improve gas wise...

All of this has to be taken in the context of an entire restructuring of the way TnT monetizes it's NG resources..is there risk?...of course...but that's the nature of it.We feeling the hurt from previous admins doing nothing.
BP/Shell have committed to this process...the GORTT is involved since 2015.....unlike your party who just saw money and spent it despite having knowledge of the issues.

And you still blathering.

Chupidee, at the rate which companies are packing up and leaving, there will be no one to sell it to
All that drivel you typed there and you're still just defending arseness. You have NO idea how the PNM royally facked up the nat gas industry in T&T for everyone EXCEPT BP/Shell.
Where are the companies rushing to sign up after their contracts expire? Leaving!

the companies have plants all over the world and shift operations tactically and strategically.

Methanex shuts in plants and restarts based on as do all the multinational players that are here.
So enough with the melodramatic noise.

LFDRFD PNM Sheep PRO, these plants have ALWAYS been operating 24/7 before the JUHN and Goebbels "negotiations"
Don't talk bull to try to fool anyone, because even in the 2008 worldwide commodities price tank, they never had to shift "operations tactically and strategically", or at any other times during cyclic commodity price shifts.
Try again.

[Redman]

De Dragon wrote:
LFDRFD PNM Sheep PRO, these plants have ALWAYS been operating 24/7 before the JUHN and Goebbels "negotiations"
Don't talk bull to try to fool anyone, because even in the 2008 worldwide commodities price tank, they never had to shift "operations tactically and strategically", or at any other times during cyclic commodity price shifts.
Try again.

What you said about talking bull?
https://www.icis.com/explore/resources/ ... e-in-2012/

Since early 2011, methanol, ammonia and other chemical producers in Point Lisas have experienced natural gas curtailments ranging from 10-30%, occasionally resulting in plant shutdowns.

Ammonia producer Yara, for example, operates four ammonia plants in Point Lisas and has found it more economical on occasion to shut down one of the plants and keep three operational than to operate all four plants at 75% of capacity because of limited natural gas availability.

Only an complete idiot would think that the industry worldwide remains the same as it was previously.

Asian markets are more relevant to commodity demand and supply,
There is more diverse supply of both NG and the downstream commodities,
Our production profile has changed-as ALL resource supply

So the downstream multinationals have ALWAYS shifted their production where they see fit.
Methanex alone-shut Titan, and a plant in Chile last year-reduction in demand and gas supply.
They just shut down and restart plant in Egypt 2014 New Zealand. etc

[De Dragon]

De Dragon wrote:
LFDRFD PNM Sheep PRO, these plants have ALWAYS been operating 24/7 before the JUHN and Goebbels "negotiations"
Don't talk bull to try to fool anyone, because even in the 2008 worldwide commodities price tank, they never had to shift "operations tactically and strategically", or at any other times during cyclic commodity price shifts.
Try again.

What you said about talking bull?
https://www.icis.com/explore/resources/ ... e-in-2012/

Since early 2011, methanol, ammonia and other chemical producers in Point Lisas have experienced natural gas curtailments ranging from 10-30%, occasionally resulting in plant shutdowns.

Ammonia producer Yara, for example, operates four ammonia plants in Point Lisas and has found it more economical on occasion to shut down one of the plants and keep three operational than to operate all four plants at 75% of capacity because of limited natural gas availability.

Only an complete idiot would think that the industry worldwide remains the same as it was previously.

Asian markets are more relevant to commodity demand and supply,
There is more diverse supply of both NG and the downstream commodities,
Our production profile has changed-as ALL resource supply

So the downstream multinationals have ALWAYS shifted their production where they see fit.
Methanex alone-shut Titan, and a plant in Chile last year-reduction in demand and gas supply.
They just shut down and restart plant in Egypt 2014 New Zealand. etc

Fool, the only time plants in TRINIDAD ever shutdown is for trips, emergencies and planned outages.
No plant in Trinidad has ever shutdown prior to now because of that nonsense you spouting.
Even old arse plants like M1 only were taken offline to maximise the gas to the bigger ones like M5.

[Redman]

So you’ve gone from ALWAYS operating 24/7 to M1 being taken off line to divert gas.
Sounds like taking M1 offline due to limited gas.

The 2012 link quotes Yara...shutting one plant cuz of gas shortages....optimizing their business,
And it generally identifies the truth about conditions then.

But let’s take Dragons word since he wok dey.

Lol

[sMASH]

those amonia and methanol plants cant really run with a reduction of ng lower than 90% max rates. i out of the system long, could stand a correction, but its a very small room to deviate. its either on or off, no real direct linear operation per unit gas available. m1 process was a bit less efficient and economical ,but it allowed the plant to be comparatively easily shut half way down and restarted when conditions became more favorable. so, therefore its the best one to take down if u have to take down, to allow the the other plants to remain safe, PROCESS wise.


its only really in the last decade that plant rates were volatile cause thier supply was variable. before that, they ran more or less 24/7. have gas will convert.

world prices took a hit when shale gas became a thing, cuase it allowed more competition. so the getting jam on the selling side, cuase the market get flooded, they have no control over that. and the last decade they getting jam with their supply side, wanting to charge more. and as the contract mature, they get chance to renegotiate, they got chance to work on the cost of input.

many of them have interests in the regions closer to their markets, and also closer to the cheap shale gas. they will be weighing if the profit they make from operating in trinidad is worth the headache.
its a buyers market for the longest while, and ngc is playing hardball as a seller, without much reliable product to sell.

that dont make sense.


we understand what u trying to say, ngc trying to get a better margin for their gas. all we saying is, the only thing forcing them to stay is a profit margin, and if it not easy to get, well, the world's thier oyster.

[Redman]

It's not just more for their gas that they sell to PTL.

It's already acknowledged that we have lost billions usd to transfer pricing.
It's already acknowledged that curtailments have been an issue since 2010.

It's already acknowledged that BP and Shell steered gas to suit their interest, since forever.

We all know BP and Shell ain't the only ones that use transfer pricing to increase their profits.
All within their contractual obligations

Markets have changed and Henry Hub, like WTI are no longer suitable reference prices for our downstream output.

As advised by anyone worth listening to the GORTT had to start at the top and come down in order to solve the multitude of issues that confronted the gas supply chain, the liabilities for shortages and participation in the final sale of output.
The above results in us getting more from the total value chain beyond the price of gas.

[sMASH]

not if they pack up they rig and go.

[Redman]

That could happen anytime....all the owners have mothballed and restarted plants all over the world.

It's the nature of the business.... cyclical and competitive.

[DreamWeaver]

Extracted from Methanex's 2020 Q4 statement transcript:

Nelson Ng -- RBC Capital Markets -- Analyst

My first question relates to Trinidad. In terms of the CGCL methanol plant being fully commissioned, does that materially reduce the availability for natural gas potentially for Titan or any other facilities or needs in Trinidad? I was just wondering in terms of, like, you recently put Titan -- you idled Titan indefinitely, but I'm just wondering if conversations are still taking place and whether the outlook has -- so it doesn't look very favorable there.

John Floren -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Yes. So I've mentioned before the upstream and the government are negotiating different terms of what they are today. The terms that there are today don't allow us to run that Titan plant through the cycle. So we kept it down and ready to go for eight months and had those solutions. We decided to isolate more on an indefinite period. The supply demand balance of gas fitted out is really a factor of price. And we don't know where the gas is coming from the new plant, but obviously, it will impact the overall supply demand balance. But many of our -- other people on the site, ammonia and methanol, have also experienced the same thing we have and shut down capacity. So there's a lot of capacity in ammonia methanol that's not running. And I think we're going to need to see more gas development and get back to a balanced market there. So it's complicated, and we were unsuccessful and some of our people that manufacture ammonia have been unsuccessful and made the same decision we did. So we continue to talk to the government, and here's something that makes sense on a medium-term basis. We'll have to restart that plant, but it will take capital as well. So not too dissimilar to what we're seeing in Waitara Valley. We'll have to spend money and hire people, and that takes time.

https://www.fool.com/earnings/call-tran ... transcrip/

[Numb3r4]

^^^ Could someone translate that please?

[sMASH]

that john floren sounds like a canadian. they use a lot of words to say simple things in an effort to be polite.

nelson observed that cgcl, the mitsubishi plant down labrea or whereever, had been commissioned. he asked if that will cause gas to be less available to the titan plant or any others, as he also observed that methanex had shut down the titan plant.

floren was responding to their preivous convo that he was telling him that the upstream, which is the bg and shell and who ever extracts the nat gas, were renegotiating thier gas supply contracts with govt. what ever deal they come up with, it didnt allow titan to be run profitably, and thats why they opted to shut it down. (they might have had gas to run the plant every so often, but shutting down and starting up a plant costs money, and wear and tear, so u opt not to do that if u can. and if they forecast that they cant get the gas steadily to make enough profit to cover potential outages and repair, it would be cheaper to leave it down, than go through the head ache of up and down and up and down and blow out and fix.... not every body does think like a ph taxi and wuk down they car till the last)
he continued that the other methanol and ammonia seeing the same gas trouble and some of their plants are also shuttered.
unless they get a steady supply of gas for a good price, they and the other plants would remain down, cause thats how the methanol and ammonia business is. they also going through the same motions at another site called Waitara Valley... i suppose somewhere northamerica.
he concluded that since they sent people home, if they do get a good deal, they will have to rehire and retrain people.... and that costs a lot.

as i and dragon know, one does not simply restart a process plant. it takes years to learn a plant from scratch. if ur a higher level, it will still take susing out the manuals and the intricacies of that specific group of equipment.

but that is if u do get people. usually, people will not be jumping around too much if they get paid well and are competent at a site. especially now, they looking at job security. they will hadda try to pull men from other places, and that does usually mean a big salary.

[Numb3r4]

Waitara Valley is in New Zealand, or so Google says...

Can't they take advantage of of the younger workers, yes not experienced but after being underemployed or just plain unemployed they may be willing to work for a less while still being able to learn the plant as it were. Is that an option?

Does anyone know what in the "upstreamers" contract makes the pricing uneconomical, I assume they want more per unit of gas or are there other terms and conditions?

If we have no choice or agree to accept the higher price then do we get any other perk or condition like an agreement to push into the deep water blocks or some such condition or is it for just plain price increase take it or leave it.

How does NGC factor in all of this, can they subsidize the cost for the guys at Pt. Lisas do they have the luxury of doing that?
Or is it that there just isn't enough gas (quantity) to distribute?

Also how much say do the "upstreamers" have in where/to who the gas goes to or is sold? Once NGC buys the gas couldn't they distribute as they see fit?

[sMASH]

extraction is from deep water feilds. as well as reduced amount in the finds. so there is just simply less gas to find, and they have to look for it in the harder places to get it.

the extractors get the gas fromthe feilds, channels it to NGC, who is a middle man between the upstream and down stream. they then have to sell that gas to the down stream users, the plants, powergen etc. so, the off shore companies have some sort of price they will hadda charge, that ngc will hadda pay, and, then ngc hadda resell that gas to the down stream.

ngc cant really subsidize, cause thats how imburt getting money to pay they bills. all the social programs like cepep and road building comes from this as a major source.


wrt to how much influence the upstreamers have over where the gas goes, well, they have shares in certain plants. and u kinda done know how trinidad does operate. i made a comment on a topic like this on fb, hinting that bg and who ever would try get the gas they extract to the plants they have shares in in preference to the other pt lisas plants, and lo and behold kevin ramnarine had liked that comment. nothing else in my post was novel enough to stand out to him, so i suppose that salacious link i made would be the only thing that not on paper.

wrt to retraining people, is like learning to drive by only reading the instructions. the black and white can only inform u of that much.

what people dont understand about operations is that the operator to be effective has to have a doctor level knowledge of the plant, a military precision and pace execution of the procedures, a police patience in managing with the plant and the people, a lawyer degree attention to details and documentation.
ancillary, but can come all too relevant, u need to know and understand the chemistry of at least the chemicals that ur around, the hazardous materials operations for them, first responder wrt medical and environental emergencies, disaster zone management.
some things will be like the difference between a corrolla and a sentra, minor but decipherable. that is where experience pays dividends. but some times the difference is like b13 to tug boat. and when u need to make split second decisions, u have no time to be figuring out things on the fly. u need the expert detailed knowledge at the back of ur mind, all the time cuase an emergency can pop up any time.
when things going smooth it can have little to do, but they dont pay ur for when the place smooth. they pay u to correct the deviations and get it back to optimal production. that may be a deviation from a production specification, or somebody tryin to launch the converter.
it can be the second most stressful job, only second to air traffic control.

when u lose and operator and have to retrain, it tends to be costly in terms of money and time.

[Redman]

BP and Shell supply LNG directly and have been steering gas to trains 2,3 and 4

NGC is the middle man for all the rest for supply to PTL etc.

BP and Shell have no liability for shortages to PTL or any one else.

So formerly bp and Shell have been favoring LNG since that gives them the best return...we are.in the middle of sorting that out via the renegotiating.

MOE website has the Poten and Assoc doc linked...and Farrell s point of inflexion both go into detail as to where we are,how we got here and what we need to do.
Just read past the exec summary.

[De Dragon]

So you’ve gone from ALWAYS operating 24/7 to M1 being taken off line to divert gas.
Sounds like taking M1 offline due to limited gas.

The 2012 link quotes Yara...shutting one plant cuz of gas shortages....optimizing their business,
And it generally identifies the truth about conditions then.

But let’s take Dragons word since he wok dey.

Lol

Like you're not getting the simple fact that these plants ALWAYS ran prior to JUHN and Goebbels "negotiations"
Curtailment plus increased gas price saw the measures that have taken place being necessary. You think any operator makes the decision to shut down a plant easily?
You can insist all you want on lionizing JUHN and Goebbels, but they facked up royally, and agreements like those are generally for quite some years, so essentially we're screwed for quite a while.

[DreamWeaver]

https://trinidadexpress.com/business/lo ... ium=social

Touchstone's gas addition to NGC for the 2nd quarter is 10mmscf/d. Can't really do anything with that tbh. The 4th quarter addition is estimated at 100mmscf/d bit more reasonable. Could actually run some plants with that but by 4th quarter, the other mature fields would have progressed in their decline. I honestly don't see their input being more than just trying to stem the decline. we need drastic increases. Then again, plants are closing because of gas price, not gas availability.

[sMASH]

10????
that wouldnt even raise the line pressure.
they need 2025 to come fast

[Redman]

So you’ve gone from ALWAYS operating 24/7 to M1 being taken off line to divert gas.
Sounds like taking M1 offline due to limited gas.

The 2012 link quotes Yara...shutting one plant cuz of gas shortages....optimizing their business,
And it generally identifies the truth about conditions then.

But let’s take Dragons word since he wok dey.

Lol

Like you're not getting the simple fact that these plants ALWAYS ran prior to JUHN and Goebbels "negotiations"
Curtailment plus increased gas price saw the measures that have taken place being necessary. You think any operator makes the decision to shut down a plant easily?
You can insist all you want on lionizing JUHN and Goebbels, but they facked up royally, and agreements like those are generally for quite some years, so essentially we're screwed for quite a while.

Uh you're the only one focusing on individuals in the middle of what is a decades long process that came to a head


Contracts signed in the 90s under in a different world are now being renegotiated under entirely different conditions
curtailments started in 2010.
BP/Shell seeing about their business and want more for gas they produce.

Downstream seeing about theirs


Poten says up to 6B USD per year was lost to transfer pricing.
BP and Shell were the beneficiaries.


We need to see about ours and that process is being dealt with.

[De Dragon]

So you’ve gone from ALWAYS operating 24/7 to M1 being taken off line to divert gas.
Sounds like taking M1 offline due to limited gas.

The 2012 link quotes Yara...shutting one plant cuz of gas shortages....optimizing their business,
And it generally identifies the truth about conditions then.

But let’s take Dragons word since he wok dey.

Lol

Like you're not getting the simple fact that these plants ALWAYS ran prior to JUHN and Goebbels "negotiations"
Curtailment plus increased gas price saw the measures that have taken place being necessary. You think any operator makes the decision to shut down a plant easily?
You can insist all you want on lionizing JUHN and Goebbels, but they facked up royally, and agreements like those are generally for quite some years, so essentially we're screwed for quite a while.

Uh you're the only one focusing on individuals in the middle of what is a decades long process that came to a head


Contracts signed in the 90s under in a different world are now being renegotiated under entirely different conditions
curtailments started in 2010.
BP/Shell seeing about their business and want more for gas they produce.

Downstream seeing about theirs


Poten says up to 6B USD per year was lost to transfer pricing.
BP and Shell were the beneficiaries.


We need to see about ours and that process is being dealt with.

That's why YOU voted for JUHN Scarfy and Goebbels. To make sure that tide was stemmed, but they haven't done it, not even close have they? As I said, in the rush to pat themselves on the back, and bump up their lying gums, they conveniently forgot to tell us that they capitulated totally, thus the actual closures of process plants began.

[Numb3r4]

After all this what could have been done to stop the closures?

If global prices is the issue then we are very little we could do I imagine.
That being the case what would or could be measures put in place to mitigate or is this just something that comes with the territory? Nature of the industry/market etc. etc.???

Can we put things in place now if so what? Or is it just a waiting game until come back into our favour based on bow we were previously operating?

Can we modify the current industry to take advantage or lessen the fallout of the current situation? How?

Or as we mentioned above just try to "ride it out" as it were?

[Redman]

Numbers you should read the Poten doc and Farrell's point of inflexion to get great high level POV.
Make sure to read past the exec summary.

Dragon remains typically fixated on the PNM...the big picture remains elusive to him.

..BP and Shell demanded higher prices for gas.
...over the last decades, specifically 2010-2014..Poten says we lost billions.

We lost revenue due to their manipulation of the supply chain of LNG.
...We have repositioned and are restructuring the entire commercial side of the gas complex...and have collected some proceeds that we would have missed otherwise.

All of this has been in the press...
It's a tough time...and a complex period.
But it's Rowley and Young fault.

[Numb3r4]

Numbers you should read the Poten doc and Farrell's point of inflexion to get great high level POV.
Make sure to read past the exec summary.

Dragon remains typically fixated on the PNM...the big picture remains elusive to him.

..BP and Shell demanded higher prices for gas.
...over the last decades, specifically 2010-2014..Poten says we lost billions.

We lost revenue due to their manipulation of the supply chain of LNG.
...We have repositioned and are restructuring the entire commercial side of the gas complex...and have collected some proceeds that we would have missed otherwise.

All of this has been in the press...
It's a tough time...and a complex period.
But it's Rowley and Young fault.

Do you have a link?
Went on the MoE site and used the search box and didn't turn up anything? Or the title of the document at least?

[Redman]

Google ..Poten and Partners Gas Plan Trinidad.

That links a download from MoE website

Same for Point of Inflexion Farrell.
Dload from UTT.

[Numb3r4]

Thanks. Got them.

[De Dragon]

Numbers you should read the Poten doc and Farrell's point of inflexion to get great high level POV.
Make sure to read past the exec summary.

Dragon remains typically fixated on the PNM...the big picture remains elusive to him.

..BP and Shell demanded higher prices for gas.
...over the last decades, specifically 2010-2014..Poten says we lost billions.

We lost revenue due to their manipulation of the supply chain of LNG.
...We have repositioned and are restructuring the entire commercial side of the gas complex...and have collected some proceeds that we would have missed otherwise.

All of this has been in the press...
It's a tough time...and a complex period.
But it's Rowley and Young fault.

So BP is just expected to delink from direct supply, and give it to NGC just like that?
Red Kool Aid for Red Plastic Bag.
NOWHERE in Poten's recommendations from their 2015 report is there a easy path to that for T&T, NOWHERE.
This GORTT had an opportunity to use the leverage that we have presently, which is NBP/Shell to NGC sales, and FAILED.

[Redman]

That is the point.
There is no easy path.
Some eggs will have to be broken.

That'll do pig,that'll do.


BP/Shell makes more money from LNG...as a result of their shareholding and the fact that they sell the LNG.

They have no liability to PTL for curtailment.

So if they don't sell to PTL they lose only the profit from the sale.
But of course they still have the gas.

Meanwhile NGC is on the hook for the shortfall.

Where is the leverage?

[De Dragon]

That is the point.
There is no easy path.
Some eggs will have to be broken.

That'll do pig,that'll do.


BP/Shell makes more money from LNG...as a result of their shareholding and the fact that they sell the LNG.

They have no liability to PTL for curtailment.

So if they don't sell to PTL they lose only the profit from the sale.
But of course they still have the gas.

Meanwhile NGC is on the hook for the shortfall.

Where is the leverage?

The GORTT has to pull a Chavez type blowout on them. Our problem was sending two of the possibly worst negotiators who worsened our situation by not using the leverage that we did possess. Pt Lisas still uses enough gas to affect BP/Shell's bottom line. Of course this was before 7-8 plants shut down, possibly for good.