You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Israel-Palestine-Jordan
Israel's Game Changing Gas Discovery Dealt Another Blow
2016-03-29
The massive Leviathan gas field was discovered in Israel’s offshore Levant Basin over six years ago, and while it theoretically puts Israel on the global energy map for the first time and could change the geopolitical dynamics of the entire Middle East, the Israelis themselves seem to be doing everything in their power to keep it from coming online. Its owners--U.S.-based Noble Energy and Israeli partner Delek Group--along with their shareholders are probably wondering if gas is ever going to come out of this giant of giants.

At stake is a massive gas field worth $5-$6 billion and believed to contain some 22 trillion cubic feet of gas, slated to begin extraction by 2019.

The latest disappointment came this weekend when the Israeli High Court dealt another serious blow to the project with a ruling that promises to cancel the offshore gas extraction deal entirely in a year if a clause in the natural gas rules isn't changed or voided.
Posted by:Thing From Snowy Mountain

#11  Look, your lordship, [Israeli] High Court is just being obstructionist --- that's that they do.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2016-03-29 18:29  

#10  it wouldn't be too hard to come up with an alternative stability clause, say giving regulatory change authority under specified conditions

but who knows
Posted by: lord garth   2016-03-29 18:25  

#9  Will somebody rid us of this troll?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2016-03-29 18:18  

#8  
Posted by: Lampedusa Creretch3679   2016-03-29 18:13  

#7  Fracking has changed the game. The world has plenty of natural gas from suppliers who you wouldn't mind doing business with. If Israel doesn't want to play, well, we don't need them.
Posted by: Iblis   2016-03-29 11:25  

#6  Thank goodness *we* don't have the problem of our government acting against our national interests.
Posted by: SteveS   2016-03-29 11:19  

#5  And here I thought they [Highs] did it just to be difficult.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2016-03-29 08:48  

#4  A major utility holding company in the United States bought out several utilities in Great Britain when the Tories deregulated and privatized many publicly held companies. The US utility moved in, kicked out the dead wood, imposed their standards and methodologies, and began to turn a profit. Then Labor took over, unilaterally rewrote the contracts, and demanded that the utility pay the "true value" of the utilities (based on the value AFTER the improvements were put in place). The Utility got out of those markets with a loss, spun off all their foreign holdings (whose countries began to imitate Great Britain and rewrote the contracts), and now concentrates in their home territory. (The CEO resigned under a cloud. In his "honor" the company named a gas turbine peaking power plant after him)


The clause was put in because of the above experience. Apparently, the court wants to leave open the ability of future liberal/labor governments to claw back improved investments. Scr*w them!
Posted by: ptah   2016-03-29 08:15  

#3  “We have decided to cancel the gas deal because of the stability clause” that would have barred future governments from altering the deal, the High Court panel said, according to the Times of Israel.

More specifically, the High Court of Justice judges wrote, "The stability clause has been set without authority and its legality is repealed. This is because it has been passed in contradiction to the basic rules of administrative law in a way that prohibits restricting the considerations of the (Antitrust) Authority."

Granted, I'm not a lawyer, but this is bullshit of the highest order. Israeli courts invalidating contracts because the government can't alter the deal down the road? Since when does a party to a contract get to rewrite it once it's signed on a flimsy justification?
Posted by: Raj   2016-03-29 01:56  

#2  Bribes not yet paid.
Posted by: jvalentour   2016-03-29 00:41  

#1  Oy vey! *facepalms*
Posted by: Nguard   2016-03-29 00:11  

00:00