A secret energy treaty that protects oil companies...

M

Mike Monett VE3BTI

Guest
Here is a secret treaty that protects fossil fuel companies. How many more
secret treaties are there? It pays to uncover these things. Our future is
at stake.

The Guardian reports:

France has become the latest country to pull out of the controversial
energy charter treaty (ECT), which protects fossil fuel investors from
policy changes that might threaten their profits. The Guardian reports:

Speaking after an EU summit in Brussels on Friday, French president,
Emmanuel Macron, said: \"France has decided to withdraw from the energy
charter treaty.\" Quitting the ECT was \"coherent\" with the Paris climate
deal, he added. Macron\'s statement follows a recent vote by the Polish
parliament to leave the 52-nation treaty and announcements by Spain and the
Netherlands that they too wanted out of the scheme.

The European Commission has proposed a \"modernization\" of the agreement,
which would end the writ of the treaty\'s secret investor-state courts
between EU members. That plan is expected to be discussed at a meeting in
Mongolia next month. A French government official said Paris would not try
to block the modernization blueprint within the EU or at the meeting in
Mongolia. \"But whatever happens, France is leaving,\" the official said.
While France was \"willing to coordinate a withdrawal with others, we
don\'tsee that there is a critical mass ready to engage with that in the EU
bloc as a whole,\" the official added.

The French withdrawal will take about a year to be completed, and in that
time, discussion in Paris will likely move on to ways of neutralizing or
reducing the duration of a \"sunset clause\" in the ECT that allows
retrospective lawsuits. Progress on that issue is thought possible by
sources close to ongoing legal negotiations on the issue.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/21/france-becomes-latest-
country-to-leave-controversial-energy-charter-treaty

Energy Charter Treaty

The Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) is an international agreement that
establishes a multilateral framework for cross-border cooperation in the
energy industry, principally the fossil fuel industry. The treaty covers
all aspects of commercial energy activities including trade, transit,
investments and energy efficiency. The treaty contains dispute resolution
procedures both for States Parties to the Treaty (vis-a-vis other States)
and as between States and the investors of other States, who have
madeinvestments in the territory of the former.[3]

Initially, the Energy Charter process aimed to integrate the energy sectors
of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe at the end of the Cold War into the
broader European and world markets. Its role, however, extends beyond
east–west cooperation and, through legally binding instruments, free trade
in global energy markets and non-discrimination to stimulate foreign direct
investments and global cross-border trade.

Awards and settlements of the international arbitrations put forward by
breaking the law of the Energy Charter Treaty are sometimes in the hundreds
of millions of dollars. In 2014, the Yukos cases were decided in favour of
the claimants on the basis of the treaty with a record-breaking US$50
billion award, although appeals continue in courts in the Netherlands.

In recent years, the Energy Charter Treaty has been criticized for being a
significant obstacle to enacting national policies to combat climate
change, and that it actively disincentivizes national governments from
compliance with recent international climate treaties such as the Paris
Agreement due to the threat of significant financial loss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Charter_Treaty




--
MRM
 
On Saturday, 22 October 2022 at 07:05:23 UTC+1, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:
Here is a secret treaty that protects fossil fuel companies. How many more
secret treaties are there? It pays to uncover these things. Our future is
at stake.

It doesn\'t look very secret to me. You can download it here:
www.energycharter.org/process/energy-charter-treaty-1994/energy-charter-treaty/

John
 
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 2:05:23 AM UTC-4, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:
Here is a secret treaty that protects fossil fuel companies. How many more
secret treaties are there? It pays to uncover these things. Our future is
at stake.

The fact the proceedings of the investor-state arbitration courts established under the ECT are \"secret\" does not mean the ECT itself is secret, it is not. And there is no such thing as an international treaty for economic cooperation that does not have protections for investors against loss due to changes in laws by investee states. Because without that there won\'t be any investment. The E in ECT means energy so the majority of its authority is over fossil fuel industry concerns, duh.

Your thought for the day:

A wise old owl lived in an oak.
The more he saw the less he spoke.
The less he spoke the more he heard.
Why can\'t we all be like that wise old bird?
 
On Sat, 22 Oct 2022 07:36:31 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 2:05:23 AM UTC-4, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:
Here is a secret treaty that protects fossil fuel companies. How many more
secret treaties are there? It pays to uncover these things. Our future is
at stake.

The fact the proceedings of the investor-state arbitration courts established under the ECT are \"secret\" does not mean the ECT itself is secret, it is not. And there is no such thing as an international treaty for economic cooperation that does not have protections for investors against loss due to changes in laws by investee states. Because without that there won\'t be any investment. The E in ECT means energy so the majority of its authority is over fossil fuel industry concerns, duh.

Your thought for the day:

A wise old owl lived in an oak.
The more he saw the less he spoke.
The less he spoke the more he heard.
Why can\'t we all be like that wise old bird?

The economic optimum is generally an open competitive market where
supply and demand self-adjust around price. We have antitrust laws to
keep that mechanism working, but there are no international anti-trust
laws, so we get cartels like OPEC.

It\'s ironic that most western governments have declared war on fossil
fuels, and deliberately act to push prices up, and whine when the
price goes up.

The US can avoid the cartel monopoly easily. Just drill, equivalent to
joining OPEC but without price collusion.

European governments want high fuel prices, but they want the cost to
be mostly in taxes. Paying OPEC (or the USA) cuts into their margin.
 
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2022 07:36:31 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 2:05:23 AM UTC-4, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:
Here is a secret treaty that protects fossil fuel companies. How many more
secret treaties are there? It pays to uncover these things. Our future is
at stake.

The fact the proceedings of the investor-state arbitration courts established under the ECT are \"secret\" does not mean the ECT itself is secret, it is not. And there is no such thing as an international treaty for economic cooperation that does not have protections for investors against loss due to changes in laws by investee states. Because without that there won\'t be any investment. The E in ECT means energy so the majority of its authority is over fossil fuel industry concerns, duh.

Your thought for the day:

A wise old owl lived in an oak.
The more he saw the less he spoke.
The less he spoke the more he heard.
Why can\'t we all be like that wise old bird?
The economic optimum is generally an open competitive market where
supply and demand self-adjust around price. We have antitrust laws to
keep that mechanism working, but there are no international anti-trust
laws, so we get cartels like OPEC.

Looks like they let all that open competition stuff slide when it comes to a critical resource without which their entire civilization collapses. Like OPEC doesn\'t know this...


It\'s ironic that most western governments have declared war on fossil
fuels, and deliberately act to push prices up, and whine when the
price goes up.

The US can avoid the cartel monopoly easily. Just drill, equivalent to
joining OPEC but without price collusion.

European governments want high fuel prices, but they want the cost to
be mostly in taxes. Paying OPEC (or the USA) cuts into their margin.

Right now U.S. has this 100 year old law called the Jones Act which pretty much monopolizes the delivery of U.S. LNG to Europe. More than a few proposals have been made by nations like U.K. to provide shipping to get that resource to Europe, but the Jones Act makes it impossible to do.

The world is changing too fast for who knows how much archaic business and trade regulation to adapt. One thing for sure is a lot has changed in the past 100 years, so what seemed like a great idea back then is turning into a disaster in modern times.
 
On Sat, 22 Oct 2022 09:44:03 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2022 07:36:31 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 2:05:23 AM UTC-4, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:
Here is a secret treaty that protects fossil fuel companies. How many more
secret treaties are there? It pays to uncover these things. Our future is
at stake.

The fact the proceedings of the investor-state arbitration courts established under the ECT are \"secret\" does not mean the ECT itself is secret, it is not. And there is no such thing as an international treaty for economic cooperation that does not have protections for investors against loss due to changes in laws by investee states. Because without that there won\'t be any investment. The E in ECT means energy so the majority of its authority is over fossil fuel industry concerns, duh.

Your thought for the day:

A wise old owl lived in an oak.
The more he saw the less he spoke.
The less he spoke the more he heard.
Why can\'t we all be like that wise old bird?
The economic optimum is generally an open competitive market where
supply and demand self-adjust around price. We have antitrust laws to
keep that mechanism working, but there are no international anti-trust
laws, so we get cartels like OPEC.

Looks like they let all that open competition stuff slide when it comes to a critical resource without which their entire civilization collapses. Like OPEC doesn\'t know this...

Many countries are morally opposed to drilling and fracking in their
own territories, so buy at cartel prices and suffer Russian blackmail.

That would be funny if not so painful for the citizens.

It\'s ironic that most western governments have declared war on fossil
fuels, and deliberately act to push prices up, and whine when the
price goes up.

The US can avoid the cartel monopoly easily. Just drill, equivalent to
joining OPEC but without price collusion.

European governments want high fuel prices, but they want the cost to
be mostly in taxes. Paying OPEC (or the USA) cuts into their margin.

Right now U.S. has this 100 year old law called the Jones Act which pretty much monopolizes the delivery of U.S. LNG to Europe. More than a few proposals have been made by nations like U.K. to provide shipping to get that resource to Europe, but the Jones Act makes it impossible to do.

True, but facilities on both ends are probably the real limits on our
keeping europe illuminated.

The world is changing too fast for who knows how much archaic business and trade regulation to adapt. One thing for sure is a lot has changed in the past 100 years, so what seemed like a great idea back then is turning into a disaster in modern times.

What hasn\'t changed is Economics 101. The big disasters come from
idiot politicians messing with the natural equilibrium.

What we have in excess supply now is politicians. That should make
them cheap but doesn\'t seem to somehow.
 
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 1:01:23 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2022 09:44:03 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2022 07:36:31 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 2:05:23 AM UTC-4, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:
Here is a secret treaty that protects fossil fuel companies. How many more
secret treaties are there? It pays to uncover these things. Our future is
at stake.

The fact the proceedings of the investor-state arbitration courts established under the ECT are \"secret\" does not mean the ECT itself is secret, it is not. And there is no such thing as an international treaty for economic cooperation that does not have protections for investors against loss due to changes in laws by investee states. Because without that there won\'t be any investment. The E in ECT means energy so the majority of its authority is over fossil fuel industry concerns, duh.

Your thought for the day:

A wise old owl lived in an oak.
The more he saw the less he spoke.
The less he spoke the more he heard.
Why can\'t we all be like that wise old bird?
The economic optimum is generally an open competitive market where
supply and demand self-adjust around price. We have antitrust laws to
keep that mechanism working, but there are no international anti-trust
laws, so we get cartels like OPEC.

Looks like they let all that open competition stuff slide when it comes to a critical resource without which their entire civilization collapses. Like OPEC doesn\'t know this...
Many countries are morally opposed to drilling and fracking in their
own territories, so buy at cartel prices and suffer Russian blackmail.

That would be funny if not so painful for the citizens.



It\'s ironic that most western governments have declared war on fossil
fuels, and deliberately act to push prices up, and whine when the
price goes up.

The US can avoid the cartel monopoly easily. Just drill, equivalent to
joining OPEC but without price collusion.

European governments want high fuel prices, but they want the cost to
be mostly in taxes. Paying OPEC (or the USA) cuts into their margin.

Right now U.S. has this 100 year old law called the Jones Act which pretty much monopolizes the delivery of U.S. LNG to Europe. More than a few proposals have been made by nations like U.K. to provide shipping to get that resource to Europe, but the Jones Act makes it impossible to do.
True, but facilities on both ends are probably the real limits on our
keeping europe illuminated.

The world is changing too fast for who knows how much archaic business and trade regulation to adapt. One thing for sure is a lot has changed in the past 100 years, so what seemed like a great idea back then is turning into a disaster in modern times.
What hasn\'t changed is Economics 101. The big disasters come from
idiot politicians messing with the natural equilibrium.

What we have in excess supply now is politicians. That should make
them cheap but doesn\'t seem to somehow.

It\'s not like these people are not getting enough input from the industrial sector about all the problems and how to fix them. The real problem is political appointees, like cabinet secretaries, not doing anything about it. Too many times these appointees are not the right people for the job. In this case we have a thoroughly unqualified individual obsessed with considerations of diversity through regulation to the exclusion of very important requirements of the national transportation infrastructure, which includes all things maritime.
 
On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 1:01:23 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2022 09:44:03 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2022 07:36:31 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 2:05:23 AM UTC-4, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:
Here is a secret treaty that protects fossil fuel companies. How many more
secret treaties are there? It pays to uncover these things. Our future is
at stake.

The fact the proceedings of the investor-state arbitration courts established under the ECT are \"secret\" does not mean the ECT itself is secret, it is not. And there is no such thing as an international treaty for economic cooperation that does not have protections for investors against loss due to changes in laws by investee states. Because without that there won\'t be any investment. The E in ECT means energy so the majority of its authority is over fossil fuel industry concerns, duh.

Your thought for the day:

A wise old owl lived in an oak.
The more he saw the less he spoke.
The less he spoke the more he heard.
Why can\'t we all be like that wise old bird?
The economic optimum is generally an open competitive market where
supply and demand self-adjust around price. We have antitrust laws to
keep that mechanism working, but there are no international anti-trust
laws, so we get cartels like OPEC.

Looks like they let all that open competition stuff slide when it comes to a critical resource without which their entire civilization collapses. Like OPEC doesn\'t know this...
Many countries are morally opposed to drilling and fracking in their
own territories, so buy at cartel prices and suffer Russian blackmail.

That would be funny if not so painful for the citizens.



It\'s ironic that most western governments have declared war on fossil
fuels, and deliberately act to push prices up, and whine when the
price goes up.

The US can avoid the cartel monopoly easily. Just drill, equivalent to
joining OPEC but without price collusion.

European governments want high fuel prices, but they want the cost to
be mostly in taxes. Paying OPEC (or the USA) cuts into their margin.

Right now U.S. has this 100 year old law called the Jones Act which pretty much monopolizes the delivery of U.S. LNG to Europe. More than a few proposals have been made by nations like U.K. to provide shipping to get that resource to Europe, but the Jones Act makes it impossible to do.
True, but facilities on both ends are probably the real limits on our
keeping europe illuminated.

The world is changing too fast for who knows how much archaic business and trade regulation to adapt. One thing for sure is a lot has changed in the past 100 years, so what seemed like a great idea back then is turning into a disaster in modern times.
What hasn\'t changed is Economics 101. The big disasters come from
idiot politicians messing with the natural equilibrium.

What we have in excess supply now is politicians. That should make
them cheap but doesn\'t seem to somehow.

Interestingly society has been aware of the political parasites for thousands of years.

Excerpt from Locrian code of 7th century B.C.:

\"Anyone who proposed a new law, or the alteration of one already existing, had to appear before the Citizen\'s Council with a rope round his neck.[5] If the Council voted against the proposal the proposer was immediately strangled.[5][7]\"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaleucus
 
On Sun, 23 Oct 2022 07:39:11 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 1:01:23 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2022 09:44:03 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:31:25 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2022 07:36:31 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 2:05:23 AM UTC-4, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:
Here is a secret treaty that protects fossil fuel companies. How many more
secret treaties are there? It pays to uncover these things. Our future is
at stake.

The fact the proceedings of the investor-state arbitration courts established under the ECT are \"secret\" does not mean the ECT itself is secret, it is not. And there is no such thing as an international treaty for economic cooperation that does not have protections for investors against loss due to changes in laws by investee states. Because without that there won\'t be any investment. The E in ECT means energy so the majority of its authority is over fossil fuel industry concerns, duh.

Your thought for the day:

A wise old owl lived in an oak.
The more he saw the less he spoke.
The less he spoke the more he heard.
Why can\'t we all be like that wise old bird?
The economic optimum is generally an open competitive market where
supply and demand self-adjust around price. We have antitrust laws to
keep that mechanism working, but there are no international anti-trust
laws, so we get cartels like OPEC.

Looks like they let all that open competition stuff slide when it comes to a critical resource without which their entire civilization collapses. Like OPEC doesn\'t know this...
Many countries are morally opposed to drilling and fracking in their
own territories, so buy at cartel prices and suffer Russian blackmail.

That would be funny if not so painful for the citizens.



It\'s ironic that most western governments have declared war on fossil
fuels, and deliberately act to push prices up, and whine when the
price goes up.

The US can avoid the cartel monopoly easily. Just drill, equivalent to
joining OPEC but without price collusion.

European governments want high fuel prices, but they want the cost to
be mostly in taxes. Paying OPEC (or the USA) cuts into their margin.

Right now U.S. has this 100 year old law called the Jones Act which pretty much monopolizes the delivery of U.S. LNG to Europe. More than a few proposals have been made by nations like U.K. to provide shipping to get that resource to Europe, but the Jones Act makes it impossible to do.
True, but facilities on both ends are probably the real limits on our
keeping europe illuminated.

The world is changing too fast for who knows how much archaic business and trade regulation to adapt. One thing for sure is a lot has changed in the past 100 years, so what seemed like a great idea back then is turning into a disaster in modern times.
What hasn\'t changed is Economics 101. The big disasters come from
idiot politicians messing with the natural equilibrium.

What we have in excess supply now is politicians. That should make
them cheap but doesn\'t seem to somehow.

Interestingly society has been aware of the political parasites for thousands of years.

Excerpt from Locrian code of 7th century B.C.:

\"Anyone who proposed a new law, or the alteration of one already existing, had to appear before the Citizen\'s Council with a rope round his neck.[5] If the Council voted against the proposal the proposer was immediately strangled.[5][7]\"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaleucus

There have been proposals that political leaders should always be
executed at the end of a fixed term in office. A little less severe
would be term limits, not on just one elected/appointed politicial
office, but a lifetime limit on any.

Our most powerful politicians have never had a real job; they were on
the student council in high school and are now old and have a lifetime
of accumulated corruption.

And got rich somehow.

I should write a book, \"Tribes, or social crystallography.\" Inherent
human wiring makes people form into social pyramids, usually with the
upper layers being thugs. China and Russia are classic warlike
thugocracies, with nuclear weapons.

Let\'s hope that the russian nukes are as unreliable as other native
russsian technology. The nuclear test ban treaty was a giant advantage
to the USA; the russians were snookered big time on that one.
 
John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> writes:


Right now U.S. has this 100 year old law called the Jones Act
which pretty much monopolizes the delivery of U.S. LNG to
Europe. More than a few proposals have been made by nations
like U.K. to provide shipping to get that resource to Europe,
but the Jones Act makes it impossible to do.

True, but facilities on both ends are probably the real limits
on our keeping europe illuminated.

Agreed. Freeport, a large domestic LNG liquidifer had a major
FUBAR that was going to take LONG time to rebuild.
<https://www.theenergymix.com/2022/08/21/texas-export-terminal-blames-human-error-for-lng-explosion-fire/>

The other limit would be the number of LNG tankers in the world,
Jones or noJones.


--
A host is a host from coast to coast...............wb8foz@panix.com
& no one will talk to a host that\'s close..........................
Unless the host (that isn\'t close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
 
On 22-Oct-22 5:05 pm, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:
Here is a secret treaty that protects fossil fuel companies. How many more
secret treaties are there? It pays to uncover these things. Our future is
at stake.

The Guardian reports:

France has become the latest country to pull out of the controversial
energy charter treaty (ECT), which protects fossil fuel investors from
policy changes that might threaten their profits. The Guardian reports:

Speaking after an EU summit in Brussels on Friday, French president,
Emmanuel Macron, said: \"France has decided to withdraw from the energy
charter treaty.\" Quitting the ECT was \"coherent\" with the Paris climate
deal, he added. Macron\'s statement follows a recent vote by the Polish
parliament to leave the 52-nation treaty and announcements by Spain and the
Netherlands that they too wanted out of the scheme.

The European Commission has proposed a \"modernization\" of the agreement,
which would end the writ of the treaty\'s secret investor-state courts
between EU members. That plan is expected to be discussed at a meeting in
Mongolia next month. A French government official said Paris would not try
to block the modernization blueprint within the EU or at the meeting in
Mongolia. \"But whatever happens, France is leaving,\" the official said.
While France was \"willing to coordinate a withdrawal with others, we
don\'tsee that there is a critical mass ready to engage with that in the EU
bloc as a whole,\" the official added.

The French withdrawal will take about a year to be completed, and in that
time, discussion in Paris will likely move on to ways of neutralizing or
reducing the duration of a \"sunset clause\" in the ECT that allows
retrospective lawsuits. Progress on that issue is thought possible by
sources close to ongoing legal negotiations on the issue.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/21/france-becomes-latest-
country-to-leave-controversial-energy-charter-treaty

Energy Charter Treaty

The Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) is an international agreement that
establishes a multilateral framework for cross-border cooperation in the
energy industry, principally the fossil fuel industry. The treaty covers
all aspects of commercial energy activities including trade, transit,
investments and energy efficiency. The treaty contains dispute resolution
procedures both for States Parties to the Treaty (vis-a-vis other States)
and as between States and the investors of other States, who have
madeinvestments in the territory of the former.[3]

Initially, the Energy Charter process aimed to integrate the energy sectors
of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe at the end of the Cold War into the
broader European and world markets. Its role, however, extends beyond
east–west cooperation and, through legally binding instruments, free trade
in global energy markets and non-discrimination to stimulate foreign direct
investments and global cross-border trade.

Awards and settlements of the international arbitrations put forward by
breaking the law of the Energy Charter Treaty are sometimes in the hundreds
of millions of dollars. In 2014, the Yukos cases were decided in favour of
the claimants on the basis of the treaty with a record-breaking US$50
billion award, although appeals continue in courts in the Netherlands.

In recent years, the Energy Charter Treaty has been criticized for being a
significant obstacle to enacting national policies to combat climate
change, and that it actively disincentivizes national governments from
compliance with recent international climate treaties such as the Paris
Agreement due to the threat of significant financial loss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Charter_Treaty

Not very secret then.

Sylvia.
 
David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com> wrote:

Agreed. Freeport, a large domestic LNG liquidifer had a major
FUBAR that was going to take LONG time to rebuild.
https://www.theenergymix.com/2022/08/21/texas-export-terminal-blames-hum
an-error-for-lng-explosion-fire/

In its latest news release August 3, Freeport announced it had entered into a
consent agreement to take “corrective measures” to obtain approval from PHMSA
to return to initial operations in early October, and full operation by year-
end.

Full operation in two months is not a long time.



--
MRM
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top