Newsletters | Request Trial | Log in | Advertise | Digital Issue   |   Search
  • Upstream
  • Midstream & Downstream
  • Gas & LNG
  • Trading & Markets
  • Corporate & Finance
  • Geopolitics
  • Podcasts
Search
Damon Evans
Singapore
22 May 2015
Follow @PetroleumEcon
Forward article link
Share PDF with colleagues

CBM-to-LNG makes its mark in Australia

Australia's coalbed methane-to-liquefied natural gas (CBM-to-LNG) projects have generally drawn a bad rap from the wider industry. But they are proving more successful than the nation’s conventional LNG schemes, energy research consultancy Wood Mackenzie said

CBM-to-LNG has mainly received a lot of flak because the concept has not truly been tested before, Adele Long, a Perth-based upstream specialist at Wood Mackenzie told Petroleum Economist. There is, comparatively, a higher level of confidence in Australia’s conventional projects, Gorgon, Wheatstone and Ichthys. But so far, the delivery of conventional Australian LNG has been disappointing. All are between at least seven and 18 months behind their original schedule with further delays a real possibility, Wood Mackenzie said in its latest report. By contrast, CBM-to-LNG start-ups remain largely on or close to original guidance. And it may be that the unconventional export schemes’ construction

Also in this section
QatarEnergy and JERA enter new LNG chapter
6 February 2026
The long close relationship between key supplier Qatar and pivotal buyer Japan becomes even deeper following new landmark deal 
Evolving partnerships in LNG
6 February 2026
Partnerships across the LNG value chain have evolved over time, growing in both complexity and importance, according to panellists at LNG2026
Dangote: Big ambitions, harsh realities
6 February 2026
Nigeria's mega-refinery is still trying to solve many challenges, all while its owner talks up expansion
EU methane regulation could backfire
5 February 2026
While broadly supportive of EU efforts to tackle methane emissions, representatives of the gas industry warn it could deter supply contracting if timelines and compliance requirements are not made more pragmatic

Share PDF with colleagues

COPYRIGHT NOTICE: PDF sharing is permitted internally for Petroleum Economist Gold Members only. Usage of this PDF is restricted by <%= If(IsLoggedIn, User.CompanyName, "")%>’s agreement with Petroleum Economist – exceeding the terms of your licence by forwarding outside of the company or placing on any external network is considered a breach of copyright. Such instances are punishable by fines of up to US$1,500 per infringement
Send

Forward article Link

Send
Sign Up For Our Newsletter
Project Data
Maps
Podcasts
Social Links
Featured Video
Home
  • About us
  • Subscribe
  • Reaching your audience
  • PE Store
  • Terms and conditions
  • Contact us
  • Privacy statement
  • Cookies
  • Sitemap
All material subject to strictly enforced copyright laws © 2025 The Petroleum Economist Ltd
Cookie Settings
;

Search