China looks like big winner in landmark gas deal; U.S., Canada may be losers


The dust has settled on Russia’s landmark gas supply deal with China, with the lack of details released about the price making it difficult to determine who wins and loses.

Gazprom (OGZPY) CEO Alexei Miller said the contract is worth $400B over its 30-year life, which suggests an implied price for the gas of ~$350 per thousand cubic meters; at that price, China may have gained the upper hand.

The deal is a potential "economic game changer" for PetroChina (PTR), which lands a deal at a price that carries as much as a 40% discount to current LNG market prices.

In addition to the sub-prime return for Gazprom, developing the pipeline to China and the fields needed to supply it will cost ~$55B before the gas starts flowing in four to six years.

The accord may also mean liquefied natural gas export projects are less likely to be built as the additional Russian pipeline gas pressures prices, and gives China greater leverage to secure better pricing deals with Canadian and other exporters looking to capture a slice of the Asian market.

Some say the U.S. is a loser too, as the deal could spell "the end of the American Century" and shines a harsh light on U.S. energy policy.

ETFs: UNG, DGAZ, UGAZ, BOIL, GAZ, FCG, GASL, KOLD, UNL, GASX, NAGS, DCNG

From other sites
Comments (55)
  • David at Imperial Beach
    , contributor
    Comments (4381) | Send Message
     
    US loses? Only if we were planning to export LNG to China, and that still had a lot of politics to work through. The American consumer likely wins if it means less political pressure to build pipelines to export LNG.

     

    More likely, Europe loses since they aren't the only market for Russian natural gas any more, so they have to pay higher prices for any they do buy.
    22 May 2014, 07:53 PM Reply Like
  • dieuwer
    , contributor
    Comments (2931) | Send Message
     
    The endless lecturing of Russia by Europe finally backfired.
    Instead of investing in their own backyard and taking care of their own, the cry babies in Europe continuously run to daddy US to fix their problems. Well boys, time's up! Now you wish you drilled and had fracked away!
    22 May 2014, 08:45 PM Reply Like
  • nemonemo
    , contributor
    Comments (338) | Send Message
     
    Shale is already a bust due to lower natural prices. News does not highlight how many private companies filed bankruptcy due to lower NG prices.
    22 May 2014, 08:48 PM Reply Like
  • mapodga
    , contributor
    Comments (7576) | Send Message
     
    Now you come to tell us this.

     

    We in Europe didn't start this mess in Ukraine. Remember what Obama advisory Nuland tell about EUrope "f..k the Europe" and then made the entire mess there.

     

    And after entire hell break out US seen that it hasn't any economic leverage and comes to Europe to push Russians because we import and export there 15 times more.
    For Europe is bigger problem of loosing Russia market then this NG stories. They are really good market and we haven't anything to be replaced if Chinese would take over.
    25 May 2014, 05:49 PM Reply Like
  • 8747S1115R
    , contributor
    Comments (275) | Send Message
     
    Companies in the U.S. produce LNG at a 75% discount to the price of Asian markets. We should be shipping out to the far east and will be before they can develop their pipeline. The U.S. is already a step ahead, Russia is desperate. Free market capitalism, enough said.
    22 May 2014, 07:59 PM Reply Like
  • Sakelaris
    , contributor
    Comments (2648) | Send Message
     
    But will the US be able to line up LNG sales to China if we are backing the position of Japan over some little islands?

     

    Years of careful diplomacy by Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush I served to separate China from its association with the Russians and this helped to play a role in wining the Cold War. But in the years of Clinton, Bush II, and Obama, we have managed to little-by-little, to squander our victory in the Cold War and to antagonize both Russia and China over territorial disputes that we should have realized were in their backyards and thus not a proper matter for our involvement.
    22 May 2014, 08:24 PM Reply Like
  • Marek
    , contributor
    Comments (1516) | Send Message
     
    Absolutely correct. Absolutely on target.
    23 May 2014, 12:01 AM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    China will buy NG from the US or Canada or any other country if available at reasonable price. China need to get away from coal as much as possible.
    28 Jun 2014, 09:49 AM Reply Like
  • Nettligent
    , contributor
    Comments (1346) | Send Message
     
    Both Russia and China are the winners.
    22 May 2014, 08:07 PM Reply Like
  • Stone Fox Capital
    , contributor
    Comments (9882) | Send Message
     
    Yeah lets see this get built first before making any conclusions. Not to mention, with no details on price I find it hard to even bother speculating.
    22 May 2014, 09:36 PM Reply Like
  • Rope a Dope
    , contributor
    Comments (708) | Send Message
     
    SFC, this pipeline does not require Obama's approval and will not require a 5 year 'study'. I would also guess anyone protesting the pipeline risks getting double-tapped.

     

    Apparently Americans are getting really used to dragging anchors around and think the behavior of our government is normal. Our government is the primary reason the US is in severe distress right now and most likely headed for a complete economic collapse.
    23 May 2014, 03:55 AM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    China is no stranger in building pipelines or any other infrastructure. China and Russia will work out a deal that will benefit both sides.
    28 Jun 2014, 09:59 AM Reply Like
  • donzoamania
    , contributor
    Comments (871) | Send Message
     
    Russia selling for well below mkt prices is the clear loser here
    22 May 2014, 08:08 PM Reply Like
  • canb888
    , contributor
    Comments (668) | Send Message
     
    Would you call Suadi a loser for selling their crude oil below $2 a barrel for decades (cheaper than distilled water) until the Middle East War? Russia's cost to produce may give them a gross margin of 50+% which may be better than what Exxon get. Would they be better off not selling at all?
    22 May 2014, 09:30 PM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    China sold below market prices and got very, very rich at the same time.
    28 Jun 2014, 05:30 AM Reply Like
  • leopardtrader
    , contributor
    Comments (3702) | Send Message
     
    Russia and China big winners especially politically. There would be almost life-critical alliance between Russia and China for a long time.

     

    China wins lower and reliable supply for decades. Russia uses same leverage ( pipeline) to supply other Asian countries South Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia..Philippines.... even down to India

     

    Big loser Middle East as they could lose critical Asian market considering inherent instability. USA wont be big buyers anymore as it is becoming energy independent. Europe is likely to keep ties with Russia regardless of current rantings in preference to Middle East.

     

    Europe loses political leverage but not economic. They can buy from anyone..Middle East, Russia or USA. But in the end Russia is should be cheaper and more reliable. Business trumps politics so they say.

     

    Throw in massive jobs for citizens and businesses for this massive pipeline projects.

     

    Overall Russia biggest winner all round
    22 May 2014, 08:39 PM Reply Like
  • Jason Merriam
    , contributor
    Comments (960) | Send Message
     
    China will be so hungry for natural gas going forward that almost any gas producing/export country is potential beneficiary. It will depend on how genuine and quickly China moves to address pollution, climate change and displace coal.
    22 May 2014, 08:45 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4420) | Send Message
     
    Gotta do your business, or get off the pot. Go big, or go home. U.S. and Canada are too busy dragging environmental and safety concerns over the coals, while China and Russia go full steam ahead, darn the torpedoes.

     

    http://bit.ly/1jZOQ4p

     

    That commercial was chilling when it first came out. It continues to become moreso as time goes on.
    22 May 2014, 08:48 PM Reply Like
  • deercreekvols
    , contributor
    Comments (9602) | Send Message
     
    Couldn't agree more JohnBinTN.

     

    How could anyone believe that a pipeline in Russia or China would be held up by environmental concerns?

     

    US had its Industrial Revolution and now other countries are stepping up to the plate.

     

    Investing in these could prove to be fruitful.
    22 May 2014, 08:59 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4420) | Send Message
     
    If either of those countries wasn't so... "financially sketchy", I'd be all over their stocks.

     

    In the time the U.S. has hemmed and hawed over the Keystone, we could have built a trans-oceanic pipeline direct from Shaletown, USA to Beijing.

     

    Rubber will hit the road sometime, in the future, and the U.S. will get a rude slap to the face and we might start acting right. That slap is going to come from one of those two countries - you can bank on it.
    22 May 2014, 09:15 PM Reply Like
  • Stone Fox Capital
    , contributor
    Comments (9882) | Send Message
     
    Why would the US want to sell that much gas for $3.5???
    22 May 2014, 09:38 PM Reply Like
  • deercreekvols
    , contributor
    Comments (9602) | Send Message
     
    Just a thought...selling that much gas for $3.5 would show China and Russia that the US is still "a player."

     

    Lose some money on one deal and make a profit on the next 10.
    22 May 2014, 10:00 PM Reply Like
  • geo689
    , contributor
    Comments (26) | Send Message
     
    This is just a thought - but it comes out of the ground for almost FREE once its tapped into
    22 May 2014, 10:55 PM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    To be rich is glorious-Deng Xioaping.
    To get rich, one has to work hard and save.
    China is not there yet, but China is getting there. It may take 20 years, it may even take 30 years.
    Anyone think China will never get rich is delusional.
    29 Jun 2014, 10:57 AM Reply Like
  • Shaduc
    , contributor
    Comments (2984) | Send Message
     
    "Anyone think China will never get rich is delusional."

     

    That's because the rich in Cn are ready or have emigrated.
    29 Jun 2014, 05:31 PM Reply Like
  • omarbradley
    , contributor
    Comments (966) | Send Message
     
    You mean "the American people lose." The USA is the world's largest energy producer by far. The only problem are with the people destroying the dollar "and blaming it on the people who pay taxes and work for a living."

     

    The Seeking Alpha editorial board by all means can move to Russia anytime they want. "They only love us for our freedoms" and the fact that they can lawyer up better I guess.

     

    Now lets see what a 40 billion dollar a year defense budget looks like...shall we?
    22 May 2014, 08:50 PM Reply Like
  • geo689
    , contributor
    Comments (26) | Send Message
     
    Don't forget - That 40 Billion dollar defense budget ... 20 billion is borrowed from China.
    22 May 2014, 10:57 PM Reply Like
  • deercreekvols
    , contributor
    Comments (9602) | Send Message
     
    China and Russia deal shows that the world will not wait for the US to bless deals.
    China doesn't operate under US regs and neither does China. To believe so is simply being misinformed.
    It's a big world out there and many countries are looking out for their own interests.
    Proof is in the pudding, so to speak.
    22 May 2014, 08:53 PM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    US defense budget is about $ 600 billion a year. $ 40 billion last 24 days.
    29 Jun 2014, 11:02 AM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    China does not operate under US regs, but China needs the US for its market.
    29 Jun 2014, 11:04 AM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1773) | Send Message
     
    About 2x+ Henry Hub prices in about 5 years after $55B gets spent to build a pipeline, assuming the deal holds together. No NG for Ukraine and EU in 5 years?
    22 May 2014, 09:32 PM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    Russia has enough NG for China, Europe, and Ukraine if they can afford it.
    30 Jun 2014, 08:19 AM Reply Like
  • SoldHigh
    , contributor
    Comments (991) | Send Message
     
    By default, Arab Oil is the energy policy of Obama and his green-backers
    22 May 2014, 10:00 PM Reply Like
  • Capt Jack Daniels
    , contributor
    Comments (1466) | Send Message
     
    I doubt that price is going to remain permanent and anyways it will probably take a good ten years for them to run any pipe. What good is a price if you can't get the product ?
    22 May 2014, 10:06 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4420) | Send Message
     
    It would take us 10 years to maybe think about running pipe. The Chinese probably have assets in place, ready to go, and will have it up and running toot sweet.
    22 May 2014, 11:02 PM Reply Like
  • FitzGerald
    , contributor
    Comments (76) | Send Message
     
    The global environment wins. The faster China replaces its use of coal with NG the better we all will be. I just hope that the deal does not slow China's renewable efforts.
    22 May 2014, 10:49 PM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    China is attacking coal on all fronts. It will be 20 years before China can reduce the reliance of coal down to 50%.
    29 Jun 2014, 11:08 AM Reply Like
  • novin
    , contributor
    Comments (11) | Send Message
     
    Well said
    23 May 2014, 12:11 AM Reply Like
  • LFTR
    , contributor
    Comments (10) | Send Message
     
    The real loser here certainly Russia. In the long term, China's voracious appetite for energy will suck them dry. How easily they forget they will need that gas someday.
    23 May 2014, 12:11 AM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    The present NG reserve in Russia last 66 years. That is not counting future findings.
    28 Jun 2014, 05:40 AM Reply Like
  • Patent News
    , contributor
    Comments (1475) | Send Message
     
    LOVE IT how so many of you jump to huge conclusions without having ANY REAL DATA. nice try though all these hasty political pronouncements are worthless
    23 May 2014, 12:56 AM Reply Like
  • tgar13
    , contributor
    Comments (223) | Send Message
     
    I don't think we can say anything more than Russia plans to sell discounted NG to China in 2018-2020 and may provide up to 10% of their NG needs

     

    I thought we were going to export to other Asian countries

     

    I think the WSJ article was fair enough but the other link was self serving fear mongering pseudo academic hogwash

     

    I see plenty of Nat Gas. Demand and I don't see an End to an American Century
    Then again who knows
    23 May 2014, 01:46 AM Reply Like
  • oscarsolus
    , contributor
    Comments (16) | Send Message
     
    The person writing "the end of the American Century" is more harmful for the American economy than the Russians or the Chinese. The foreign policy of America is based on economics, not freedom or democracy. Even the use of illegal means as done by the NSA, is part of this strategy. The same policy can be seen in Russia and China. There are no good and bad guys as suggested in "the end of the American Century". Own interest controlled by a small group which enrich themselves shamelessly, that is what all these countries have in common.
    23 May 2014, 03:23 AM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    Starting in 2025, China and the US will share the rest of this century. By 2050, India will joint the club if Modis policies survive that long.
    28 Jun 2014, 10:08 AM Reply Like
  • flowerseq
    , contributor
    Comments (51) | Send Message
     
    This entire conversation and comments section is fascinating, and the reason is this--there are so very few comments that are not correct in and of themselves, and sometimes these comments are at cross-purposes of opinion. The reason it's fascinating is because this situation as it plays out is the truest play of Power in the World and the Fight For It, if it were to have a title. There definitely will be winners and losers, and in the end we will all know why. I don't know that it's an investable situation, frankly--human lives, big guns, all sorts of politics and all the Superpowers and Wannabesuperpowers are in this one. Literally anything can happen at anytime with huge consequences for both the winner and the loser.
    23 May 2014, 09:47 PM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    If we can stay away from war, we will all be winners. If we can not, we will all be losers.
    30 Jun 2014, 04:49 AM Reply Like
  • kretikos
    , contributor
    Comments (71) | Send Message
     
    Russia and China two tandem great leaps forward? They are as likely to be at each others throats in 10 years.
    24 May 2014, 11:16 AM Reply Like
  • Shaduc
    , contributor
    Comments (2984) | Send Message
     
    Russia and China have been reproaching since the Jiang Zemin administration 15 years ago.

     

    The USA is what suppliers thought of Microsoft and Intel when the Wintel duopoly existed.
    24 May 2014, 11:20 AM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    China and Russia will be like the US and Canada in the future.
    28 Jun 2014, 10:04 AM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    Xi and Li are students of Chinese history. They know through out Chinese history that peace was needed for prosperity. Wars always brought misery.
    29 Jun 2014, 11:13 AM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    If the devil has its way, we will be killing each other.
    God want peace on Earth.
    30 Jun 2014, 04:54 AM Reply Like
  • ochairman
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Russia is the winner. Russia took the land from China. Russia is selling the gas
    from the land it took from China. Russia will own the whole world soon.
    30 Jun 2014, 11:22 PM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    The US and Canada were at war at one time, 1812.
    The US took California from Mexico.
    We can not live in the past, otherwise we will be like the middle east.
    1 Jul 2014, 04:18 AM Reply Like
  • Ben Gee
    , contributor
    Comments (14278) | Send Message
     
    Russia is an aging country, if it want to develop, it may need Chinese labor.
    If Russia and China can work together, the boundary may not be important. Like the US and Canada.
    1 Jul 2014, 04:24 AM Reply Like
  • Sakelaris
    , contributor
    Comments (2648) | Send Message
     
    Ochairman, the Russia-China border has had general stability for over 150 years and the only time China was part of a really larger entity was when it was part of the Mongol Empire in the 1200-1400 period, and those years were not years of Chinese power.

     

    Will Russia soon own the whole world? I doubt it, but I understand their concern for their kindred people in the eastern oblasts of Ukraine.

     

    It sounds like you are a neo-con trying to stir things up.
    1 Jul 2014, 05:28 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs