Posted on 05/20/2011 3:29:29 PM PDT by Teflonic
In a hurry to get a low posting number, perhaps?
Okay, I posted before reading as well. Excuse me while I go back and do it right.
Nope, Korea.
I think Japan is a little busy sprucing up right now.
“A South Korean shipyard is due to start building the vessel using five times more steel than was used to build the Sydney Harbour Bridge. It should be finished in 2017.”
There goes their obscene profits.
I suggested this back in 2008, for just the same reason. IE: put a refinery outside of US waters, and the EPA has no authority.
The ability to relocate a billion dollar refinery if the local land-based government decides to nationalize it is a benefit on any continent these days.
I liken that ship to the Hindenberg! I’ll take your word for it of course, but can you imagine being the guy in charge of safety on that thing?
AT $10 billion I wonder how economic it will be.
It may not be very economical period, if shale extraction technology continues to improve.
It must be a day that ends in an "y" here at FR.
Yes, this probably has something to do with the fact that they are building this in Korea and not the United States. Unions have killed the shipyards aside from government contracts.
I think it’s an effort to read between the lines. Is it to reduce costs or avoid regulation. Probably both, but Shell can’t say it’s to avoid regulations. here’s another one, the NY Times is not always telling the truth. Ahhhh.
If you would like to discuss Floating LNG, or to have a broader discussion about technology and natural gas, please visit Shell’s online forum where we are currently discussing ‘How can technology help to unlock the world’s gas resources?’ It would be great to hear your comments.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.