India falls behind on biogas production plans

Market: LPG, Natural gas
02/06/21

India is far behind in its plans to set up 5,000 compressed biogas (CBG) production plants, with only two so far operational and foundation stones laid for five others. The delay in replacing transport fuels with cleaner biogas imperils the country's energy security and makes it more dependent on imported crude.

Five plants are coming up in Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh and Punjab that will use agricultural residues — currently being burnt by farmers, raising pollution levels — cattle dung and municipal solid waste. Two CBG plants in Hyderabad and Punjab are operational, with state-run refiners opening CBG retail outlets in Hyderabad and Ludhiana in Punjab.

India's Satat scheme, launched in October 2018, aims to set up CBG plants with a production target of 15mn t by 2023. But the government will miss the target by a mile, as it is impossible to add 4,998 plants in two years when it has taken nearly 2½ years to commission two projects.

"The CBG programme under Satat has gained momentum but growth has to be exponential, not incremental," said oil minister Dharmendra Pradhan at an event launching the CBG plants. The government via state-controlled refiner IOC has signed initial agreements with companies including JBM, Adani Gas, Torrent Gas and Petronet LNG for 1,500 CBG plants in an effort to cut India's dependency of around 85pc on imported crude and over 50pc on imported LNG.

Pradhan claims there is a large potential to harness usable hydrogen from CBG. The government has allowed CBG to be shipped via natural gas pipelines to industrial consumers. The fuel will also substitute compressed natural gas (CNG) and auto LPG at retail outlets.

India's Covid-19 battle and resulting lockdowns have crippled economic activity since March 2020, with the ongoing second wave of the pandemic leading to record cases and casualties. The economy shrank by 7.3pc in the 2020-21 fiscal year ending in March, with growth expected to rebound by a little over 9pc this fiscal year, according to Moody's Investors Service, revising its forecasts downward from 13.7pc.

Ethanol blending with gasoline was 8.2pc in April at 247mn litres and 7.4pc in the December 2020-April 2021 period at 1.3bn l, according to the oil ministry. This compares with 5pc blending, or 1.73bn l, over the entire December 2019-November 2020 ethanol supply year.

India's gross gas production reached 2.65bn m³ in April, steady from March but up from 2.16bn m³ a year earlier.

Total gas consumption of 5.24bn m³ in April fell from 5.58bn m³ in March but rose from 3.9bn m³ a year earlier.

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News

03/01/25

Eni ready for FID on Mozambique’s Coral Norte FLNG

London, 3 January (Argus) — Italian energy firm Eni is ready to take a final investment decision (FID) on its planned 3.4mn t/yr Coral Norte floating liquefaction (FLNG) terminal in Mozambique, should the project receive authorisation from the country's government, the firm has told Argus . Eni said it expects the government's approval to be "imminent", although it did not provide a more detailed timeline. The firm said in June 2023 that it planned to start operations at the FLNG in the second half of 2027. Eni already operates Mozambique's 3.4mn t/yr Coral Sul FLNG, which started operations in late 2022 and is at present the country's only LNG terminal. Coral Norte is set to be installed 20km north of Coral Sul. There are also two onshore terminals planned for Mozambique — the TotalEnergies-led 13.1mn t/yr Mozambique LNG project and ExxonMobil's 18mn t/yr Rovuma LNG project. Both are located in the Cabo Delgado province and have been halted because of security concerns. TotalEnergies reached a financial close on their Mozambique project in 2019 and declared force majeure in 2021, though project partner Bharat Petroleum (BPCL) said in late October 2024 the force majeure could be lifted in January or February this year because of an improvement in the security situation. And ExxonMobil said in November last year it was planning to take FID on the Rovuma project at the start of 2026. By Cerys Edwards Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more

News

Q&A: EU biomethane internal market challenged

02/01/25

News

02/01/25

Q&A: EU biomethane internal market challenged

London, 2 January (Argus) — The European Commission needs to provide clearer guidance on implementing existing rules for the cross-border trade of biomethane to foster a cohesive internal market as some EU member states are diverging from these standards, Vitol's Davide Rubini and Arthur Romano told Argus. Edited excerpts follow. What are the big changes happening in the regulation space of the European biomethane market that people need to watch out for? While no major new EU legislation is anticipated, the focus remains on the consistent implementation of existing rules, as some countries diverge from these standards. Key challenges include ensuring mass-balanced transport of biomethane within the grid, accurately accounting for cross-border emissions and integrating subsidised biomethane into compliance markets. The European Commission is urged to provide clearer guidance on these issues to foster a cohesive internal market, which is essential for advancing the EU's energy transition and sustainability objectives. Biomethane is a fairly mature energy carrier, yet it faces significant hurdles when it comes to cross-border trade within the EU. Currently, only a small fraction — 2-5pc — of biomethane is consumed outside of its country of production, highlighting the need for better regulatory alignment across member states. Would you be interested in seeing a longer-term target from the EU? The longer the visibility on targets and ambitions, the better it is for planning and investment. As the EU legislative cycle restarts with the new commission, the initial focus might be on the climate law and setting a new target for 2040. However, a review of the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) is unlikely for the next 3-4 years. With current targets set for 2030, just five years away, there's insufficient support for long-term investments. The EU's legislative cycle is fixed, so expectations for changes are low. Therefore, it's crucial that member states take initiative and extend their targets beyond 2030, potentially up to 2035, even if not mandated by the EU. Some member states might do so, recognising the need for longer-term targets to encourage the necessary capital expenditure for the energy transition. Do you see different interpretations in mass balancing, GHG accounting and subsidies? Interpretations of the rules around ‘mass-balancing', greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions accounting and the usability of subsidised biomethane [for different fuel blending mandates] vary across EU member states, leading to challenges in creating a cohesive internal market. When it comes to mass-balancing, the challenges arise in trying to apply mass balance rules for liquids, which often have a physically traceable flow, to gas molecules in the interconnected European grid. Once biomethane is injected, physical verification becomes impossible, necessitating different rules than those for liquids moving around in segregated batches. The EU mandates that sustainability verification of biomethane occurs at the production point and requires mechanisms to prevent double counting and verification of biomethane transactions. However, some member states resist adapting these rules for gases, insisting on physical traceability similar to that of liquids. This resistance may stem from protectionist motives or political agendas, but ultimately it results in non-adherence to EU rules and breaches of European legislation. The issue with GHG accounting often stems from member states' differing interpretations of the IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Some states, like the Netherlands, argue that mass balance is an administrative method, which the guidelines supposedly exclude. Mass balancing involves rigorous verification by auditors and certifying bodies, ensuring a robust accounting system that is distinct from book and claim methods. This distinction is crucial because mass balance is based on verifying that traded molecules of biomethane are always accompanied by proofs of sustainability that are not a separately tradeable object. In fact, mass balancing provides a verifiable and accountable method that is perfectly aligned with UN guidelines and ensuring accurate GHG accounting. The issue related to the use of subsidised volumes of biomethane is highly political. Member states often argue that if they provide financial support — directly through subsidies or indirectly through suppliers' quotas — they should remain in control of the entire value chain. For example, if a member state gives feed-in tariffs to biomethane production, it may want to block exports of these volumes. Conversely, if a member state imposes a quota to gas suppliers, it may require this to be fulfilled with domestic biomethane production. No other commodity — not even football players — is subject to similar restrictions to export and/or imports only because subsidies are involved. This protectionist approach creates barriers to internal trade within the EU, hindering the development of a unified biomethane market and limiting the potential for growth and decarbonisation across the region. The Netherlands next year will implement two significant pieces of legislation — a green supply obligation for gas suppliers and a RED III transposition. The Dutch approach combines GHG accounting arguments with a rejection of EU mass-balance rules, essentially prohibiting biomethane imports unless physically segregated as bio-LNG or bio-CNG. This requirement contradicts EU law, as highlighted by the EU Commission's recent detailed opinion to the Netherlands . France's upcoming blending and green gas obligation, effective in 2026, mandates satisfaction through French production only. Similarly, the Czech Republic recently enacted a law prohibiting the export of some subsidised biomethane . Italy's transport system, while effective nationally, disregards EU mass balance rules. These cases indicate a deeper political disconnect and highlight the need for better alignment and communication within the EU. We know you've been getting a lot of questions around whether subsidised bio-LNG is eligible under FuelEU. What have your findings been? The eligibility of subsidised bio-LNG under FuelEU has been a topic of considerable enquiry. We've sought clarity from the European Commission, as this issue intersects multiple regulatory and legal frameworks. Initially, we interpreted EU law principles, which discourage double support, to mean that FuelEU, being a quota system, would qualify as a support scheme under Article 2's definition, equating quota systems with subsidies. However, a commission representative has publicly stated that FuelEU does not constitute a support scheme and thus is not subject to this interpretation. On this basis, FuelEU would not differentiate between subsidised and unsubsidised bio-LNG. A similar rationale applies to the Emissions Trading System, which, while not a quota obligation, has been deemed to not be a support scheme. Despite these clarifications, the use of subsidised biomethane across Europe remains an area requiring further elucidation from European institutions. It is not without risks, and stakeholders require more definitive guidance to navigate the regulatory landscape effectively. By Emma Tribe and Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Viewpoint: Canadian propane exports poised to rise

31/12/24

News

31/12/24

Viewpoint: Canadian propane exports poised to rise

Calgary, 31 December (Argus) — Canadian propane exports to Asia are expected to continue growing in 2025, driven by increased export capacity and natural gas liquids (NGL) production, as producers ramp up drilling to meet rising demand ahead of the LNG Canada export facility start up. Propane and butane exports from Canada to Asia average about 153,000 b/d in the third quarter of 2024. AltaGas exported 128,272 b/d of propane and butane to Asia during the quarter, with about 50,000 b/d leaving its Ferndale, Washington, terminal and 70,000 b/d from the Ridley Island Propane Export Terminal (RIPET) in British Columbia (BC). Additional exports came from Pembina's 25,000 b/d propane export terminal at Watson Island near Prince Rupert, BC. Midstream operators are investing in an additional 70,000 b/d of propane and butane export capacity in the next few years. AltaGas is advancing the construction of its Ridley Island Energy Export Facility (REEF) adjacent to RIPET, which will have an export capacity of 55,000 b/d in its first stage, potentially operational by 2028. Pembina is also considering a 15,000 b/d expansion of its propane export terminal, but a final investment decision (FID) has not yet been made. Another potential increase in export capacity could come if Trigon Terminals repurposes its 18mn t/yr coal export terminal on Ridley Island for NGL exports. There has been no FID on this project, and the company is in litigation with the Prince Rupert Port Authority (PRPA) over export rights. If approved, the project could be operational by 2028, according to the company. The growth in export capacity is driven by rising natural gas production, stemming from expectations of increased LNG exports from Canada. The 14mn t/yr LNG Canada export terminal began commissioning in late August and is expected to start shipping LNG cargoes by mid-2025. Located in Kitimat, BC, it is only 120km from the country's Pacific coast LPG export hub near Prince Rupert. Another LNG facility under construction is the 2.1mn t/yr Woodfibre LNG export terminal near Squamish, BC, north of Vancouver. This joint venture between Canadian midstream operator Enbridge and Singapore-based Pacific Energy is expected to be completed in 2027. Additionally, the Indigenous Haisla Nation and Pembina Pipeline reached a final investment decision for their 3.3mn t/yr Cedar LNG floating facility in Kitimat, which is set to open in late 2028. Fractionation capacity also grows The increase in natural gas production will result in higher NGL output, with about 90pc of Canada's NGL production coming from natural gas. This has driven increased demand for fractionation services in western Canada. Keyera plans to debottleneck its second fractionation unit at Keyera Fort Saskatchewan (KFS) in Alberta, adding 8,000 b/d of capacity to the existing 66,000 b/d. Keyera expects to make a final decision early next year, with potential completion by late 2026. The company has also secured customer backing to build a third KFS fractionator, which it hopes to commission in 2028. Pembina continues to advance its 55,000 b/d Redwater IV fractionation facility at its Redwater complex (RFS) in Alberta, which is expected to be online in the first half of 2026. Currently, RFS has three fractionators with a total capacity of 210,000 b/d. Calgary-based Wolf Midstream reached an FID in July to build phase two of its NGL North complex, which will include a 90,000 b/d fractionation facility, including 60,000 b/d of ethane capacity. Canadian propane exports increased to 64.9mn bl in January-October, compared with 58.7mn bl during the same period in 2023. By Yulia Golub Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Viewpoint: US Supreme Court tees up more energy cases

31/12/24

News

31/12/24

Viewpoint: US Supreme Court tees up more energy cases

Washington, 31 December (Argus) — The US Supreme Court is on track for another term that could significantly affect the energy sector, with rulings anticipated in the new year that could narrow environmental reviews and challenge California's authority to set its own tailpipe standards. The Supreme Court earlier this month held arguments in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v Eagle County, Colorado , a case in which the justices are being asked to decide whether federal rail regulators adequately studied the environmental effects of a proposed 88-mile railway that would transport 80,000 b/d of crude. A lower court last year found the review, prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), should have analyzed how building the project would affect drilling and refining. Business groups want the Supreme Court to issue an expansive ruling that would limit NEPA reviews only to "proximate" effects, such as how rail traffic could affect nearby wildlife, rather than reviewing distance effects. The court recently agreed to hear a separate case that could restrict California's unique authority under the Clean Air Act to issue its own greenhouse gas regulations for newly sold cars and pickup trucks that are more stringent than federal standards. Oil refiners and biofuel producers in that case, Diamond Alternative Energy v EPA , say they should have "standing" to advance a lawsuit challenging those standards — even though they could now show prevailing in the case would change fuel demand — based on the alleged "coercive and predictable effects of regulation on third parties". These two cases, likely to be decided by the end of June, follow on the heels of the court's blockbuster decision in June overturning the decades-old "Chevron deference", a foundation for administration law that had given federal agencies greater flexibility when writing regulations. Last term, the court also limited agency enforcement powers and halted a rule targeting cross-state air pollution sources. This term's cases are unlikely to have as far-reaching consequences for the energy sector as overturning Chevron. But industry officials hope the two pending cases will provide clarity on issues that have been problematic for developers, including the scope of federal environmental reviews and the ability of industry to win legal "standing" to bring lawsuits. Two other cases could have significant effects for the oil sector, if the court agrees to consider them at a conference set for 10 January. Utah has a pending complaint before the court designed to force the US to dispose of 18.5mn acres of "unappropriated" federal land in the state, including oil-producing acreage. Utah argues that indefinitely retaining the land — which covers about a third of Utah — is unconstitutional. In another pending case, Sunoco and other oil companies have asked for a ruling that could halt a series of lawsuits filed against them in state courts for alleged damages from greenhouse gas emissions. President-elect Donald Trump's re-election could create complications for cases pending before the Supreme Court, if the incoming administration adopts new legal positions. Trump plans to nominate John Sauer, who successfully represented Trump in his presidential immunity case, as his solicitor general before the Supreme Court. By Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Viewpoint: US LPG exports to LatAm poised to grow

30/12/24

News

30/12/24

Viewpoint: US LPG exports to LatAm poised to grow

Houston, 30 December (Argus) — US LPG exports to Latin America are expected to rise in 2025 because of ongoing efforts by governments to transition low-income residences away from cooking with firewood. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates in 2023 more than 70mn consumers across Latin America lacked access to clean cooking fuel. Industry groups promote the use of LPG as an alternative to firewood owing it its lower emissions and ease of transport into remote regions unable to be served by electricity or natural gas. Much of the LPG consumed in Latin America is imported from the US, and US exports to the region stood at around 10.6mn metric tonnes (t) from January to mid-December 2024, already surpassing the 10.48mn t shipped from the US in 2023, according to data from commodity tracking firm Vortexa. The largest demand center for US LPG in Latin America was Mexico, accounting for 35pc of US shipments to the region, down by 2.2 percentage points from 2023. The Dominican Republic accounted for 12pc of shipments, Ecuador 11pc, and Chile took 9pc. Brazil was among countries seeing the largest increase in its share of US LPG supplies, rising by 2.6 percentage points to 8.7pc this year. The Brazilian government is working to expand subsidies for LPG, also known as cooking fuel, by another 20mn low-income households next year. If the bill is passed, the measure could increase Brazil's LPG consumption from 7.6mn t to 7.7mn t next year. An estimated 5.4mn households currently benefit from the existing LPG subsidy program. LPG restrictions in Brazil — which limit the use of LPG in saunas, pool heating, commercial boilers, and as autogas in vehicles — may soon change, under a measure under consideration by Brazil's hydrocarbons regulator, ANP . Brazilian LPG association Sindigas expects a 5pc boost to LPG demand in the next five years if restrictions on commercial uses are lifted. The prospect of additional LPG demand in Brazil has already spurred investments in new infrastructure, including two new import and distribution terminals. Brazilian LPG distributor Copa Energia is part of a consortium of companies investing in a new 71,000t LPG storage facility in Suape on the country's northeast coast. Brazilian fuel distributor Ultrapar has also applied to antitrust regulators to build a new LPG terminal in Pecem port, in northeastern Ceara state, with 62,000t of storage, tentatively planned for operations in 2028. In Colombia, LPG import are also forecast to grow, largely due to its own diminishing production at Ecopetrol's Cusiana and Cupiagua fields. Colombia's LPG imports are forecast to increase to an average of 22,000 t/month in 2025, based on demand growth of 0.6pc per year, up from the average 6,900 t/month imported in January-June, Gasnova president Alejandro Martinez told Argus earlier this year. Colombia, like neighboring Brazil, is gearing up to accommodate growing demand. LPG distributor Colgas has started building a terminal at the existing 16,000 t/month Okianus port in Cartagena, scheduled to be ready in late 2025. Canadian oil company Frontera and Chilean LPG supplier Gasco plan to build a $50mn-$60mn LPG terminal at the Caribbean port of Puerto Bahia, which will include 20,400t of storage capacity and will be able to offload two very large gas carriers (VLGCs) a month. In Guatemala, Mexico's Grupo Tomza subsidiary Tropigas opened a new 1.3mn USG (31,000 bl) LPG storage and distribution facility in Escuintla in November to accommodate growing demand in the region and mitigate logistical disruptions. The Planta Palin facility in Escuintla comprises 20 storage tanks for propane and butane, and will be supplied from seaborne shipments arriving at Guatemala's Santo Tomas and Honduras' Omoa ports. Latin American LPG importers may also benefit from expanding dock capacity in the US. Both Enterprise and Energy Transfer projects are expected to add a combined 550,000 b/d of LPG export capacity out of Houston and Nederland, Texas, by the end of 2026. Enterprise's new Neches River terminal project near Beaumont, Texas, will add another 360,000 b/d of either ethane or propane export capacity. The US projects will ease tight dock capacity and the premiums for spot cargoes of propane and butane at the US Gulf coast are expected to wane by the end of 2025, incentivizing buyers in Latin America to purchase more US sourced LPG supplies. The curve ball Yet US LPG exports to Latin America could be stymied by growing supplies from Argentina, home to the prolific Vaca Muerta shale formation that holds an estimated 308 trillion cf of shale gas. Natural gas production in Argentina increased to 138mn m³/d in October, up from 130mn m³/d a year earlier, according to the latest Argentinian government data. Argentina exported 591,000t of LPG from January to mid-December, with nearly 85pc of it routed to Brazil. But Argentina also exports LPG to Brazil by tanker truck, which could also weigh on seaborne arrivals. By Giovann Rosales Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more