Enron Mail

From:margaret.carson@enron.com
To:john.goodpasture@enron.com, vince.kaminski@enron.com
Subject:Re: Presentation slides
Cc:james.steffes@enron.com, stephanie.miller@enron.com, julie.gomez@enron.com
Bcc:james.steffes@enron.com, stephanie.miller@enron.com, julie.gomez@enron.com
Date:Tue, 14 Nov 2000 01:36:00 -0800 (PST)

Hi John and Vince I had an opportunity to review the slide presentation
of EP and here is my
assessment. Bottom line: Too robust by 2005 on merchant plants being
built; up and running baseload and
too optimistic about offshore gas volume growth by 2005 as well.

WESTERN MARKETS
EP forecast is way too high by 2005 by their assuming 1.4 BCFD of new
power generation gas demand
could be in place in the west in such a short time..This means ..they may
be forgetting to consider the tough
NIMBY siting hurdles that stalled all but 550 MW of the current
10,000 mw of planned capacity in the West.....EP is assuming not only
do 80 percent of these planned plants get built but then they l run
baseload...which is
very unlikely. Most shall be peaking or intermediate load in the start
years which trims that gas use by 50 to 85 percent.
WEFA and ENE Corp. thinks the area gas use growth will be more like
3.2/ 2.9 BCFD BY 2010 -- but 80 percent of this gas use happening
late -- not early -- in the time period out to 2010. I foresee the EP
scenario as unrealistic given NIMBY and enviro siting limitations short term
in the West.

WEST SO CENTRAL TX/LA

EP sees the area at 2.7 bcfd by 2005; way too high compared to
WEFA and ENE at -400 mmcfd and +500 mmcfd, respectively BY 2010
and even prematurely high by PIRA's robust standard of 3.5 bcfd by
2010 .
EP like PIRA assumes the gas thermal demand stays on even as merchant
plants get built; ENE and
WEFA assume merchant kwhs and lower variable costs and better heat rates
shut in the thermals or cause them to be repowered as combined cycles.
Given where EP's pipes are located in the West and Texas and up the
Northeast this demand scenario fits their wants...so I can see why they
like this scenario but it assumes power generators will not act
economically rationally.

NORTHEAST
EP sees 2.7 bcfd by 2005 vs WEFA, PIRA and ENE seeing 2.3/2.5/2..6
bcfd by 2010 .Way premature for this area to see such growth as 385
mmcfd annually. They are real robust on offshore gas being there to
fill this need too.

GAS SUPPLY
Offshore supply, which has fallen 2.4 bcfd since 1995 is
expected to grow in EP's forecast by 3.6 bcfd by 2005...extremely
unlikely given the slow start Shell and Texaco and Exxon offshore has
been showing us so far. I was burned in my supply analysis work in
1999 by Shell's forecasts of their adding alone 2 bcfd to offshore
deliverability by 2000 which never happened -- it fell 500mmcfd
instead !! so I do not give a lot of hope right now for 3.6 bcfd
incremental gas by 2005 per EP. Cambridge Energy says if all goes
well the Offshore overall will be up 1.1- 1.7 bcfd by 2005..way less
than EP is showing.