Key Points

Pakistan's massive $5 billion LNG infrastructure investment has dramatically backfired, revealing critical strategic miscalculations. The government's ambitious energy plan, launched in 2014, failed to properly anticipate global market dynamics and demand fluctuations. Long-term contracts with Qatar locked Pakistan into expensive, inflexible agreements that now burden its struggling economy. The project represents a textbook example of high-risk energy infrastructure planning without adequate risk management.

Key Points: Pakistan's $5B LNG Investment Turns Economic Disaster

  • Pakistan signed massive Qatar LNG contracts with risky take-or-pay guarantees
  • Four major RLNG power plants constructed at significant financial cost
  • Total investment estimated between $26-40 billion
  • Chronic power shortage strategy backfires spectacularly
3 min read

Pakistan's $5 billion investment in LNG infrastructure turns out to be a big fiasco

Pakistan's ambitious LNG infrastructure project fails, costing billions and creating supply-demand mismatch in energy sector.

"Rather than delivering energy security, this ambitious initiative has resulted in a costly mismatch between supply and demand - The News International"

New Delhi, Aug 18

Pakistan's massive $5 billion investment in infrastructure to import LNG from Qatar on the basis of a long-term contract has turned out to be huge liability for the country as there is now a mismatch between demand and supply due to the high cost of the natural gas, according to a report in the country's largest English daily, The News International.

Pakistan embarked on a large-scale LNG-based energy initiative beginning in 2014, under which construction of four major RLNG plants, port facilities and a pipeline network for supplying gas to consumers was carried out. A decade down the line, this has proved to be a massive fiasco.

The report in Pakistan's prominent newspaper highlights that "there is a disconnect between the Power Division and the Petroleum Division. Rather than delivering energy security, this ambitious initiative has resulted in a costly mismatch between supply and demand and is now a multi-billion-dollar drag on Pakistan's economy."

The report points out that the government overcommitted to 'take-or-pay' contracts without securing demand guarantees and failed to anticipate global LNG price volatility and underestimated the risks of market exposure.

According to it, to supply fuel for the LNG power plants, Pakistan signed two long-term LNG contracts with Qatar, both backed by sovereign 'Take-or-Pay' guarantees. The first agreement, signed in 2016, secured 3.75 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) for 15 years at 13.37 per cent of Brent, with an estimated cost between $16 billion and $25 billion. The second deal, signed in 2021, added 3 mtpa for 10 years at 10.2 per cent of Brent, costing an additional $10 to $15 billion. Together, these contracts represent a financial commitment of approximately $26 billion to $40 billion.

In an ambitious bid to address chronic power shortages, Pakistan embarked on a large-scale LNG-based energy initiative beginning in 2014. This multi-billion-dollar effort included the planning and construction of four major RLNG power plants - Haveli Bahadur Shah, Balloki, Bhikki and Nandipur - as well as the launch of the country's first LNG import terminal.

Based on industry benchmarks for combined-cycle gas turbine (CCGT) plants and partial privatisation data, the total cost of the four LNG power plants is estimated to be between $3.5 billion and $5.5 billion. A reasonable midpoint estimate would be approximately $4.5 billion, according to the report.

In 2014, Engro Elengy Terminal - Pakistan's first LNG terminal - was launched. Industry estimates place the cost of the jetty and short pipeline between $50 million and $100 million. Including the FSRU and associated infrastructure, the total cost is likely in the range of $150 million to $250 million.

The Pakistan GasPort Consortium (PGPC) Terminal - Pakistan's second LNG terminal - has a designed capacity of 600 mmcfd. The project represents an investment of approximately $500 million, covering the cost of the jetty, marine works, a Floating Storage and Regasification Unit (FSRU), and pipeline infrastructure connecting the terminal to the national gas grid.

In addition to the terminals, a billion-dollar pipeline infrastructure was developed to transport RLNG from Port Qasim in Karachi to four RLNG power plants in Punjab. This system began with a 24 km pipeline from the Engro terminal and a 14 km pipeline from the GasPort terminal. Both were integrated into a significantly upgraded SNGPL network, which stretches roughly 1,100 km to Punjab. The total cost of this transmission network is estimated between $800 million and $1 billion, the report explains.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priyanka N
While I'm no fan of Pakistan's policies, we should be careful about celebrating their failures. Energy security is crucial for regional stability. Their economic collapse affects all neighbors. Hope they find a way to restructure these contracts sensibly.
A
Aman W
$40 billion commitment without demand guarantees? This is pure madness! Even a first-year MBA student knows better. Their taxpayers will suffer for decades because of this blunder. Meanwhile, India is making smart moves in renewable energy. 🇮🇳
S
Shreya B
The real tragedy is how ordinary Pakistanis will pay for this through higher electricity bills and taxes. Their leaders keep making expensive mistakes while common people struggle with basic needs. Very sad situation indeed.
V
Varun X
This shows why long-term energy planning is crucial. India has its challenges too, but at least we're diversifying - solar, wind, nuclear along with gas. Putting all eggs in one basket never works, especially with volatile global prices.
N
Nisha Z
The 'take-or-pay' clause is the killer here. Why would any country sign such rigid contracts without proper demand assessment? This is governance failure at multiple levels - technical, financial and political. A case study in how not to manage energy projects.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50