Value Collector
Have courage, and be kind.
- Joined
- 13 January 2014
- Posts
- 12,497
- Reactions
- 8,867
three points on a pipeline though,I wasn't thinking of LNG so much as a direct pipeline.
I'm not saying it will happen, but I'm always cautious of any situation where someone has a "big gun" in whatever context that could be used if they really wanted to.
If they really wanted to build a pipeline, it's possible, it could be done.
I'm not saying avoid investing in Woodside, just that the geopolitical aspect of oil and gas is always something to keep a watch on with any related company in my view. Bearing in mind there's the potential for impacts in either direction - eg if Russian oil production drops, that's bullish for price, etc.![]()
1. Any potential pipeline is many years away from completion, because they haven’t even started building it yet, and would be harder than you think.
2. The cost of building and running such a long pipeline, would still probably be much more expensive than the cost of shipping LNG from Western Australia,
3. They already have many pipelines that were delivering gas into the international markets prior to the Ukraine war, at volumes larger than any pipeline to China would have ,and the Australian LNG market was doing just fine.
So the “threat” is not really will Russia build a pipeline to China, but instead will the Europeans tensions ease enough that Russian exports to Europe recover. But even then, Woodside made money before the Ukraine War and I believe it will after.