It would be instructive enough to recall the Nabucco gas pipeline project that was but a rival to the South Stream gas project.  MORE

The agency reports that Samaras aimed at convincing Aliyev that Greece is committed to concluding TAP, which would bring gas extracted from Azerbaijan's Shah Deniz natural gas field to Europe.

The pipeline would pass through Greece, Albania and Italy.

TAP AG is a joint venture company based in Baar, Switzerland, with branch offices in Athens, Rome and Tirana. Its three shareholders are Swiss Axpo (42.5%), Norwegian Statoil (42.5%) and German E.ON (15%).

Earlier this month the European Commission formally approved the Trans Adriatic Pipeline’s application for Third Party Access (TPA) exemption for the initial capacity of 10 bcm.

Having relocated to Poland during the last four years, Buggenhagen developed San Leon’s portfolio and exploration team in Warsaw.

Bloomberg reports today that Buggenhagen reiterated also yesterday his concerns about the Polish Government taxes.

“Who is going to come and invest billions of dollars to monetize this gas if the government is talking about taking huge profit margins away from the companies?” said recently Buggenhagen to the news agency.

Exxon Mobil left Poland in June after the country scaled down the estimates of shale gas deposits, Talisman followed early this month and Marathon Oil said that it would exit the country soon.

San Leon, like Chevron and Total, retains its position in Polish shale gas. Two weeks ago, the company acquired the interests of Talisman Energy at a number of key sites in Poland.

San Leon wrote that Buggenhagen left for personal reasons and will continue to serve as an advisor to the Board on strategic decisions. 

The O-15 well was drilled as a directional well to evaluate the potential of the Bashkirian R30c and Serpukhovian S5 reservoir sands to further develop the gas production capability of the Olgovskoye Field. Well logs indicated up to 9 metres of potential gas pay in the R30c and up to 6 metres of potential gas pay in the Serpukhovian S5 zone. Potential gas pay was also encountered in the B3 (5 metres) and R22 (3 metres) zones.

Gas was initially discovered in the S5 zone in the Makeevskoye-16 ("M-16") well, located approximately 13 kilometres to the southeast of O-15, which was tested in April 2013 at 4.3 million cubic feet per day ("MMcf/d").

The O-15 well is operated by KUB-Gas LLC ("KUB-Gas"), a partially-owned subsidiary in which KOV has a 70% effective ownership interest.

The main shareholder of the Company is Kulczyk Investments S.A., an international investment house founded by Polish businessman Dr. Jan Kulczyk.

The Company plans to collect the final data from the downhole pressure gauges and finish completing the well for production.

“The Tuchola-3K test raises the real possibility of opening a significant new exploration play for us in Poland,” said David Pierce, President and CEO of FX Energy. “We intend to follow up the successful test with 3-D seismic acquisition covering approximately 100 square kilometers and drill one or two more wells this year in the Edge concession area in north-central Poland where the Tuchola-3K is located. The additional seismic and drilling will help us to determine the potential of this area and specifically the reserves in the structure where the Tuchola-3K well is being completed for production.”

FX Energy is the operator and owns 100% of the working interest in the Tuchola-3K well and the four Edge concession blocks, which cover 880,000 acres or 3,567 square kilometers.

Vsevolod Cherepanov, head of Gazprom's production department,  said natural gas output forecast at Bovanenkovo would be reduced by almost one-third.

Cherepanov said that 2013 production would reach 29.5 billion cubic meters, not the 46 billion cubic meters initially forecast.

Increased competition from liquefied natural gas (LNG)  and cheap coal imports has impacted European demand from the giant field, which began in production in October 2012.

The 27-nation bloc finds itself looking on with envy as its biggest economic rival, the United States, exploits vast reserves of shale gas, delivering drastically reduced fuel costs.

While Europe has shale plans of its own, there is as yet no unified EU policy. The reserves will be far harder to extract than in the United States and the final cost to consumers is likely to be substantially higher so Europe will not be able to free itself of dependence on gas imports from Russia any time soon.  MORE

Of 39 wells planned for 2013, just two were drilled by May, Environment Ministry data show. The government plans to require that explorers take a state-run company as a production partner. It has also proposed raising taxes to almost 80 percent of profit, according to Ernst & Young estimates. The measures, announced in October, haven’t become law.

“What’s been done here is what Poles call dividing up the bear hide before you’ve shot the bear,” said Tom Maj, who led the Polish operations of Talisman Energy Inc. (TLM), the Canadian explorer that pulled out of Poland earlier this month. “This has been hugely damaging to the shale gas project as evidenced by the negligible number of wells of the past few months.”  MORE

Georgian Energy Minister Kakha Kaladze announced on May 6 that the country should diversity its energy partners, noting that there is still a need for more suppliers – including Russia.

Reaction to his comment, however was swift: Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili stated the idea of “considering Russia as a serious alternative for energy supplies means fundamentally reviewing Georgia’s independence.”

Tbilisi’s ability to free itself from Russian gas has long been viewed as a major victory for the country and its quest to carve out a future outside of Moscow’s orbit.

Georgia switched to Azerbaijani gas in 2006, after Gazprom increased prices and a series of mysterious blasts halted gas shipments from Russia at the height of one of the country’s coldest winters in memory.

Today, Georgia receives most of its gas from Azerbaijan, both from the Shah Deniz pipeline as in-kind payments for transit, and from SOCAR, the Azerbaijani government energy giant. SOCAR is also heading up gasification in Georgian rural communities.

Reportedly ten percent of the country’s gas needs are met by Russian gas, but the government does not pay for it; the gas is part of Georgia’s transit fee for Moscow to use the country’s North-South Pipeline to ship natural gas to Armenia.

Kaladze appeared motivated to diverse Georgia’s dependency on Azerbaijani energy, not revert to the days before the Shah Deniz pipeline, when Georgia depended on Russia for nearly all of its gas needs.

In a statement on posted on his official facebook page in response to critics, the energy minister underscored that any energy partner would have to offer good deals and good conditions to get Georgia’s business.

“Our government is focused on economic development, people's well-being is our top priority, and therefore cooperation and relationship with all the countries in which it would help us,” his statement read.

“That's why I can say with regard to the import of natural gas that we want to diversify, and if any other country, including Russia, too, of course, offered … terms and conditions and prices of the Azerbaijani gas to enter the market, it is clear that our state will not refuse. At this point I have not made any concrete talks with the Russian side.”

Analysts like Murman Margvelashvili, the director for Energy Studies at World Experience for Georgia, said diversifying energy suppliers is generally a good strategy, assuming “these sources are transparent, that you are paying only what you are paying in money and you increase your energy security with that.”

“The situation now might be better than the situation back in 2004 when we were solely dependent on Russia but at that time the Shah Deniz gas was still not operating,” Margvelashvili noted, adding that the original deal to bring gas to Georgia via the Shah Deniz pipeline was signed under the Shevardnadze government in the late 1990s.

Georgia will receive even more gas from the second stage of Shah Deniz once it goes on line.

He noted, however, that what Georgia really needs is better energy strategy.

“[I]t is not a big issue actually to have two suppliers once you balance your interests… The big question is how well prepared is the ministry to engage in serious negotiations. In absence of energy policy, and I have mentioned this many times on many different occasions, there is a big danger that we will not get the full benefit of potential and may get into agreements that may not be optimal,” Margvelashvili said.

“You don’t build strategic capacity in one month or one year. You need to grow the people, you need to grow the groups, you need to have planning capacity, interaction between politicians and specialists and you need experience…”

Molly Corso

No fewer than 38 out of 62 MPs in the region have land with existing oil and gas drilling licenses – and 35 of them are Conservatives – according to data from Decc, the energy department.

Senior cabinet ministers are pushing hard to accelerate the arrival of fracking in the UK. David Cameron told a New York business audience last week: “Frankly, I am pretty jealous of your fracking success here in the US.”  MORE

The Commissioner made the comments in an interview with German newspaper Die Welt, and on the eve of a major hydrocarbon energy conference in Brussels.

Oettinger repeated his earlier warning that Germany should not be too quick to reject fracking as an option, according to Die Welt, saying the country "should see the potential that shale gas has and create the necessary legal framework for demonstration projects and practical tests." He had warned his native country that Germany could lose her competitive edge if she failed to exploit the advantages of shale gas, as other countries are doing.

"If we allow test drilling we will be much smarter in a few years and know more about the costs, too. That would be very advisable for an engineering country like Germany," the Commissioner told Die Welt.

Bavarian prime minister Horst Seehofer and Hesse state leader Volker Bouffier supported Oettinger's stance, but said a moratorium on fracking should be in place until after the federal election, in September.

How are austerity measures affecting the economy and the people in Jordan?

Jordan witnessed a series of protests. They began in January 2011 and resulted in the firing of the cabinet ministers of the Government.The protesters' demands escalated following the Government’s announcement of hiking in the price of fuel on 13 November 2012. Jordan is preparing another hike in electricity prices in June in line with a fuel subsidy costs imposed as a condition for a $2 billion IMF loan. The country is in a very unstable situation and given the turbulence in the region, we are worried about the situation in Jordan. The energy crisis is hitting the average consumer. Many households are using blankets rather than heating. Energy and water are vitals for the stability of the society and for sustainability of continuous economic development.. However, the various energy projects initiated by the Jordanian Government will benefit Jordan on various levels: the balance of payments will improve, we will see a reduction in electricity prices and Jordan will achieve energy security.

Jordan is currently developing various projects in its quest to achieve energy security: oil shale, nuclear, wind and solar, the Iraq-Jordan pipeline. However, they are all medium/long term plans What can be done in the short term? Is Jordan considering exporting gas from Israel?

I am not aware of any decision involving gas imports from Israel. I personally think that such decision entails a big political risk. The average Jordanian will not accept such a solution. The peace process between Israel and Palestine has been in a stalemate creating a lot of political discontent between the Kingdom and the Israeli Government. Israel is continuing its expansion policy and I personally am against putting our energy security in the hands of a foreign country - especially not Israel. In the short term, energy efficiency is key. The creation of national resources supply will take a while, so in the meantime the Jordanian Government is tackling the domestic demand by introducing energy-saving light bulbs in public buildings for example. The Government  plans to raise electricity tariffs this summer. Another short term solution would be to build an LNG terminal to import gas from Qatar. We expect it to be operational by 2014 allowing the Government to reduce its energy bill.

How do you think Jordan can benefit from the development of hydrocarbon resources in the other eastern mediterranean countries?

If Lebanon, Cyprus, or later on Syria are successful in developing their offshore hydrocarbons, importing their natural gas to Jordan could be an effective short term solution to the energy crisis in the Kingdom. Exporting gas to Jordan would be a simple endeavour given the existence of the Arab Gas Pipeline that was previously used to export Egyptian natural gas to Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. Therefore, the infrastructure is already in place and importing gas from our Eastern Mediterranean neighbours will only be contingent to the political stability. As an energy expert, I would be open to the idea of importing energy from Lebanon, Syria, Cyprus, Iraq but reluctant to import it from Israel.

How likely is the fruition of the Iraqi-Jordanian pipeline?

Amman and Baghdad have signed an agreement to construct a 1,680 km pipeline that will run from Iraq’s southern oil-producing region, Basra, to Anbar province and then to Jordan’s port city of Aqaba. The USD 18 billion costing pipeline will supply Jordan with 850,000 barrels of oil as well as 3.53 billion cubic feet of gas a day and is expected to be fully operational by 2017. The Iraqi-Jordanian pipeline is a project of extreme importance. Iraqis want to diversify their export routes from Iraq and Jordan is in a serious need for energy. It is therefore a win-win situation for both parties. Iraq will diversify its export routes and Jordan will receive oil in exchange of passage fees. However, such a project is tied to a lot of politics and needs stability to progress. The present government in Iraq supports the construction of the pipeline but the development of the project will depend on regional stability. 

Is jordan doing all it can to solve its energy crisis?

Yes. Jordan was trapped in very unfortunate situations. It was the victim of major energy shocks: one in 1990 when Iraq occupied kuwait causing Jordan to lose a lot of the oil coming from the Gulf. The second shock was the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. The third shock is more recent: Jordan suffered from the disruption of Egyptian gas after Mubarak was forced from office in 2011. Jordan was hit hard by these severe and serious events. Nevertheless, Jordan was able to maintain its resilience despite its lack of natural resources. The Kingdom started to work on different medium and long term energy projects (oil shale, nuclear, wind and solar, the Iraqi-Jordanian pipeline, the LNG plant) and I am confident it will succeed in completing them. Jordan will have to go through more difficult times until 2017 when we will start receiving some of the fruits. As a matter of priority, Jordan should accelerate its pace in the construction of the LNG terminal in Aqaba so it can import LNG from Qatar and international markets. Importing LNG will allow Jordan to cut on its losses while it develops its own resources. I am very optimistic about the path Jordan is taking given it is working on various projects simultaneously and is serious about each one of them. Jordan will move away from a long history of energy dependence and finally become energy self-sufficient. I truly believe the Kingdom can even become an energy exporter by 2025-2030. The situation of Jordan is no doubt difficult today but we have survived difficult times and we have sailed through hurricanes so we can certainly make it today. We need resilience, long term strategic planning and most importantly, continuity in planning. Only systematic and sustained efforts will lead us to a threshold that would allow Jordan to take off. Continuity means that the projects should be transgovernmental for them to be sustainable. 

Part I of the interview: Jordan’s Efforts Towards Energy Security

Karen Ayat is an analyst focused on energy geopolitics in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Follow Karen on Twitter: @karenayat

Dr. Khaled Toukan is Chairman of The Jordan Atomic Energy Commission, Chairman of Higher Ministerial Nuclear Steering Committee and served previously as the Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources (2011), 

Dr. Toukan was the President of Al-Balqa Applied University (1997-2001), Jordan; he also held the position of Dean of Faculty of Engineering & Technology and Professor of Industrial Engineering at the University of Jordan; Research Scientist at Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Germany; and Associate Research Scientist at the University of Petroleum and Minerals, Saudi Arabia.  He is a Member of the International High Level EFA Group, a member of H.M. King Abdullah II Economic Consultative Council and presently is Director of SESAME and serves also as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of University of Jordan.

Nabucco has attracted strong interest from a variety of shippers, including firms that are not part of Nabucco, the Shah Deniz consortium or its buyers.

"We are very pleased at the sustained interest in the Open Season from potential shippers. The high levels of interest clearly show the demand for the opening of the Southern Gas Corridor connecting European markets to Caspian gas, and also for Nabucco, as the flagship project of the Southern Gas Corridor," said Reinhard Mitschek, chief executive of the Nabucco company, in a statement.

The shareholders in the EU-backed Nabucco gas pipeline project are Bulgarian Energy Holding, Austria's OMV, Turkey's Botas, Romania's Transgaz and Hungary's FGSZ, a subsidiary of MOL.

A decision on whether Nabucco or the rival Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) gets the contract to pipe gas from the Shah Deniz II field offshore in Azerbaijan is expected by the end of June.

MORE

The company said net sales of gas decreased by 6%, although domestic sales increased by 3%, in a statement of accounts on its website.  But net profit fell from  €33.3 billion to €30.07bn ($38.6bn).

Lower gas sales in some markets and one-off payments to consumers dragged down the accounts. Alower volume of gas was sold to European countries, down to 151 billion cubic metres (bcm) from 156.6 bcm in 2011.

Net sales of gas to FSU countries decreased by 107,662 million Russian rubles, or 17%, to 529,516 million (€13.1 bn) in the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the year ended December 31, 2011. Gazprom said this was "partially compensated by the increase of the average realized prices in RUB terms (including customs duties) by 12%".

The company, the world’s largest producer of natural gas, has been criticised for ignoring falling gas demand in its major export markets and for charging monopolistic prices, says the Financial Times. 

He began, "Natural gas has been championed, and rightly so, as a cost effective bridge to a low carbon economy for Europe. Gas supports sustainability and represents the quickest way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It's the most efficient form of power generation, flexible for intermittent renewable power generation, as a fuel for more efficient heating applications and as a clean alternative to the European transport sector's dependency on oil."

Mr. Schaefer added that gas ensured security and for decades provided a highly reliable source of energy for hundreds of millions of end users across Europe, and would continue to be reliable and secure in the coming decades. As LNG developed further, he said, natural gas was becoming increasingly diverse as a global market.

"Gas was and is competitive," he stated. "Competition has even increased quite a bit across European markets between players, but also because the hubs have developed and the majority of gas in Europe is bought and sold on those increasingly liquid hubs, which has provided big advantages to end users."

But if there were no caveat, there would be no reason for a debate, he admitted.

"Gas and the gas-to-power market certainly are now facing more dark and uncertain times ahead," he commented. "The rise of renewables in Europe and the general view of flexible gas-fired generation as an ideal partner was, not long ago, seen as a positive development for natural gas in Europe and encouraged significant investment in combined cycle gas turbines (CCGT) across the continent in the last decade."

Unfortunately, reported Mr. Schaefer, the prospects for gas had turned dramatically in recent years due to demand destruction from the economic crisis, the rise of renewable production, cheaper coal and energy efficiency measures. Subsidies for renewables had pushed conventional fuels aside in power generation, especially in Germany, where photovoltaics had grown dramatically due to feed-in tariffs.

"Consequently gas has been pushed out of the merit order during summertime," he explained, which depressed the demand for conventional generation.

He recalled, for example, that last year during the first year of July the range of solar and wind power went from zero to 20 gigawatts, challenging fossil-fuel generation. "In one day last summer within 12 hours Germany lost 7 gigawatts of wind and 7 gigawatts of solar."

According to him, despite political consensus on the importance of natural gas in the energy transition, the near zero emissions certificates and cheap coal from the US meant that coal-fired generation was currently favored to compensate for the variable output from renewables in Europe, which had clearly had an impact on the continent's CO2 emissions, raising them.

"This means gas-fired generation, which most of us accept must play a role in the transition, is on its knees. In a study last year from IHS Cera they predicted that more than 110 gigawatts of gas-fired generation is at risk of closure, with up to 25 gigawatts of plants likely to retire in the next couple of years," said Mr. Schaefer, who said that gas's prospects as a low carbon bridge consequently did not look very promising. He said this meant the industry was standing at a crossroads.

He explained, "The European power industry is ready to follow the path of a far-reaching decarbonization of the sector by 2050, but at present is unwilling to mobilize the necessary capital, because at present it is completely uncertain whether the future framework will allow an adequate return."

Policy makers needed to construct consistent energy and climate policies to create a competitive environment in which all low-carbon technologies - including gas - could succeed, said Mr. Schaefer.

Another speaker in the session, Kurt Oswald, Partner, A.T. Kearney, began by stating that the biggest gas consumption in Europe took place in 2008 and since then there had been a decline of around 12-30% up to 2011.

He noted "In Germany in just one year there was a decline in gas consumption for generation of around 28% in 2011-12. These are striking numbers. It's mainly due to a combination of cheap steam coal coming from the US, driven by the shale gas revolution, the low carbon price, and, compared to other commodities, a higher gas price."

Clean renewables had been paired up with dirty coal.

Mr. Oswald continued: "The question is, what is future gas demand? Will it change? I think the picture is somewhat gloomy. I can't draw a rosy picture of gas demand for power generation because of the global supply and demand dynamics and pricing dynamics of gas and coal will not change immediately; the price constellation of these commodities will not change. The low or negative spreads of gas-fired power generation will probably continue."

Meanwhile, renewables looked to continue to grow, and energy efficiencies would increase.

"I think if you don't change the regulatory framework conditions, the market will not heal it, so gas will not catch up in power generation."

Topics to be address, according to him, were the ETS scheme, and capacity markets to give incentives for investments in gas generation, but it was a question as to how such schemes should be designed.

He suggested making renewables accountable for seeing to the challenges of their intermittency. "Let them take over market risks, or be responsible for balancing their portfolio," said Kurt Oswald.

Thierry Bros, Senior Analyst, European Gas and LNG Markets, Societe Generale, tackled the question of what market signals were necessary to make sure that investments in natural gas generation took place in Europe.

He said there were three main barriers to this: the price, the price, and the price.

Mr. Bros explained, "If we want gas to come back into generation in Europe, we need coal prices to go up by 70%, CO2 prices to be multiplied by 13, and gas prices to go down by 40%."

He said the prices for coal and CO2 were out of European hands. "This leave us with the price of gas. Here the market and consumers are aligned: consumers think and want the cheapest as does the market when it comes to a commodity."

In the longer term, Mr. Bros said it was a question what producers should do: sit around and watch the cheap coal from the US, or LNG arriving on their shores?

He suggested a possible linking of natural gas prices, either to coal or the price of electricity. "If you don't give a discount of 40% to the users, then it's not going to be used," he explained, that consumers would instead use coal or renewables.

Were capacity mechanisms to remunerate flexible power generation a remedy to this situation? That question was asked of Klaus-Dieter Borchardt, Director, Internal Energy Market, DG Energy, European Commission.

Admitting that he was a newcomer, he said that capacity markets had been mentioned several times in the first few weeks in his new role. "There are two things that I would rule out completely: that the European Union or the Commission would come up with an EU-wide capacity market model applid cross border to all member states—forget it.

"The other thing I would clearly rule out is that we just sit on our hands and watch member states create their own capacity mechanisms, because this would clearly go against what we all intend to do with the completion of the internal energy market. Twenty-seven different capacity mechanisms, some of them poorly designed, would lead to more fragmentation of the market than to more integration. It would have a negative influence on investment decisions that are to be taken," said Mr. Borchardt, who said the situation was being closely monitored, including frameworks in France and the UK.

He offered that cross-border trade and storage facilities might address some of the problems created by the intermittency of renewable energy source.

More specifically, three themes will be intensely discussed: gas diversification, natural gas security of supply, and pricing, all of which frequently occupy the agenda of European governments and corporations alike.

The EU Commission has already made known that the Union by 2035 will need more than 80 percent of its total energy needs to be imported from abroad, while at the same time the recession in many countries has resulted in a considerable decrease in investments.

EU officials take a neutral stance towards nuclear energy, which is used by 14 member states, although Germany, Austria and Italy are seriously thinking of shutting down their nuclear power plants, thus increasing the need for natural gas power infrastructure, with gas being the only reliable alternative for steady production of clean and almost zero emissions electricity.

According to 2011 stats, 24 percent of the EU's energy consumption derives from natural gas while oil accounts for 35 percent, nuclear energy 14 percent, renewable energy for 10 percent and fossil fuel for 17 percent. The main issue as described in numerous reports by the Directorate-General for Energy is how to swiftly increase both gas and renewables at the expense of oil and fossil fuel, under the assumption that nuclear energy is going to be decreased in usage as well. This task is a gigantic in terms of investments needed and also in terms of technocratic and even geopolitical barriers.

As a result, Brussels will also put forward in the summit the agenda of shale gas potential reserves in Europe and how the US example could or could not be possible in member states as well. Furthermore, the integration of the market which plainly involves the gradual establishment of a common legal framework for natural gas is also going to be discussed, since any energy policy such as the one described above cannot be implemented by one state alone.

Another topic is the increase in consumption of LNG and the plans of the EU to fully develop its infrastructure by creating around 30 more terminals over the coming generation. The main aim is to diversify imports by being able to exploit new sources of gas entering the market from Western and Eastern Africa, the Eastern Mediterranean and prospective Latin American and US fields, in the latter case, from shale gas.

Lastly, the summit will also discuss the establishment of the Southern Corridor where the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) and Nabucco West are competing. It can be safely estimated that the summit will not take the side of any pipeline project and keep a neutral stance, since member states have already started backing individual pipelines and a consensus for a particular candidate will not be an easy one.

The US Department of Energy has authorized Freeport LNG Expansion, L.P. and FLNG Liquefaction, LLC (Freeport) to export LNG to so called non-Free Trade Agreement (non-FTA) countries.  Subject to environmental review and final regulatory approval, Freeport is conditionally authorized to export up to 1.4 (Bcf/d) for a period of 20 years.

In granting Freeport’s application, the DOE addressed a number of issues and factors in its 127-page Order including the impact of the LNG project on natural gas prices, domestic gas supplies and the resource base, domestic natural gas demand, the benefits to the US economy expected to accrue from LNG exports, the impacts on international trade, the global environmental benefits of natural gas, and the benefits to national energy security.   Based on its analysis of these factors, as well as the extensive comments that had been submitted to the DOE, the DOE ultimately concluded that authorizing the Freeport LNG export project was not inconsistent with the public interest. 

While the DOE’s Order will no doubt be scrutinized by a number of organizations, including the Sierra Club, which has petitioned DOE for a formal rulemaking procedure, the Freeport authorization should at least quiet some of the calls from Japan that the US should export LNG to that country since Freeport has contracted for half of its capacity with Japan's Osaka Gas and Chubu Electric. 

The DOE’s full order can be found at:  http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2013/05/f0/ord3282.pdf.

Susan L Sakmar

Susan L. Sakmar is currently a visiting assistant law professor at the University of Houston Law Center and an expert on global gas markets, including LNG and global shale gas development.   She is the author of the latest book on LNG, “Energy for the 21^st Century: Opportunities and Challenges for LNG,” which is now available for pre-order on Amazon.com.   More information about the book as well the approval process for US LNG exports can be found at www.susansakmar.com.