Name and Location
Liquefied natural gas import facility, Western Cape, South Africa.

Client
PetroSA.

Project Description
The facility, should it be built, will enable PetroSA to import liquefied natural gas (LNG) as part of several efforts to supplement dwindling gas reserves at the company’s gas-to-liquids (GTL) refinery, often referred to as Mossgas, at Mossel Bay, in the Western Cape. The GTL refinery is operating at less than 50% of its 42 000 bl/d nameplate capacity, owing to feedstock constraints. The proposal entails importing LNG into Mossel Bay through a floating LNG facility, comprising a breakwater and berth structure, which will allow a permanently moored floating, storage and regasification unit to discharge vaporised LNG into a subsea and overland pipeline to Mossgas.

The decision of whether to include a single or a double-berth facility and whether to site the infrastructure in Voorbaai or Vleesbaai should be made in the coming months.

The project will also include supply to Eskom, which is keen to convert its Gourikwa open-cycle gas turbine peaking power plant, in Mossel Bay, from using diesel to gas and transform the facility into a midmerit electricity plant.

PetroSA and Eskom’s collective gas requirements have been calculated at 1.2-million tons a year.

Value
The project is estimated at between $375-million and $510-million.

Duration
PetroSA is aiming to integrate LNG imports from 2018.

Latest Developments
The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) has issued a notice of suspension to national oil company PetroSA relating to its environmental-impact assessment (EIA) application for the proposed LNG terminal for development in the Mossel Bay area of the Western Cape.

Interested and affected parties have alleged that the EIA is noncompliant with South Africa’s environmental regulations, particularly the National Environmental Management Act regulation stipulating that the environmental assessment practitioner (EAP) be fully independent.

Project opponents have objected to the appointment of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) as the EAP, arguing that the State-owned science council could not be considered as independent, given that government is the sole shareholder in the CSIR and PetroSA. Several other objections have also been raised in correspondence dated November 1, 2013.

The DEA, as the competent authority, is compelled to investigate allegations of noncompliance and it therefore notified PetroSA and the CSIR on November 22 of the suspension and that they could “make representations to the DEA regarding the alleged noncompliance”.

Rescue Vleesbaai Action Group (Revag) chairperson Mareo Bekker has expressed gratitude to the DEA for its intervention. The DEA’s intervention followed the recent termination of PetroSA’s appointment of WorleyParsons to conduct a quantitative risk assessment for the project in parallel with the EIA process. The termination followed Revag’s objection to the assessment being performed by the same company that had already been appointed to conduct the front-end engineering and design (Feed) of the proposed terminal.

PetroSA has not commented on the suspension.

Key Contracts and Suppliers
CSIR (EIA) and WorleyParsons (feasibility study and Feed).

On Budget and on Time?
The project has previously encountered various challenges such as its commercial viability.

Contact Details for Project Information
PetroSA group communications manager Thabo Mabaso, tel +27 21 929 3365 or email thabo.mabaso@petrosa.co.za.
CSIR, tel + 27 12 841 2911 and fax +27 12 349 1153.
WorleyParsons, tel +27 21 912 3000 or fax +27 21 912 3222.