Deputy Lubienė – openly about the LNG terminal and the purchase of natural gas: let’s see where the costs are lowest

Called too big and too expensive a purchase

Last year, it was possible to hear speeches about the barely packed Achema company. Its shareholder and chairwoman of the board, Lidija Lubienė, pushed the doors of the Ministry of Energy in an attempt to settle the allegedly excessive maintenance costs of the LNG terminal, a significant part of which was and is borne by this company.

Later, L. Lubienė stated that it was the maintenance of the terminal that posed a risk to the survival of the country’s largest gas consumer and criticized the government for not supporting national capital companies.

Delfi discussed the issue of the LNG terminal with Gintaras Balčiūnas, vice chairman of the Achema Group Lidija Lubienė board, and Ramūnas Miliauskas, CEO of Achema. As G. Balčiūnas emphasized, the company’s position is often presented incorrectly, because the company is certainly not against the LNG terminal.

According to him, at the beginning of the discussion on the issue of the emergence of the LNG terminal, the Achema Group had prepared up to 13 studies, which explained where said terminal could be located, what type it would be, etc.

“And another more expensive option was chosen. Sometimes we don’t talk to the State about it, because the decisions that are made sometimes have no economic logic, and economic logic is very important in our country, “he added.

According to G. Balčiūnas, today the LNG terminal is too big and too expensive for Lithuania.

“We know how much the Poles who built a bigger terminal paid. It was cheaper, part of the money came from the European Union (EU).

There is the problem that, in my subjective opinion, those who work in public institutions have little economic thinking and look more at personal political objectives than the economic side, or do not understand some things and implement those measures that can be implemented cheaper.

That way, all consumers, of course, and us (Achema – ed.) Would pay less taxes than what we pay now, ” he said openly, and when asked what the position of the company was before they took decisions, they replied that they were simply nobody. Without listening.

“There were some questions about whether we wanted to contribute, then we asked for information about the terminal as a business model, that no one gives that information. <...>

We had suggestions when it was decided to buy the terminal, we reported how much those ships cost, both new and second-hand, and which ships can be bought, but our opinions were not taken into account.

“Consultants were hired, and the consultants supposedly gave independent conclusions, but those conclusions are strange,” he said.

When asked how much Achema contributes to the maintenance of the terminal today, G. Balčiūnas assured that in 2019, the tributary company of the LNG terminal alone paid around 24 million LTL. EUR.

“We offered cheaper options, those amounts vary significantly. According to my estimates, a total of about 800 million will be paid for the terminal. Eur, when a terminal of this size costs much less. The Poles built a terminal for 390 million. EUR.

At the moment, the maintenance costs of the terminal have been reduced, but they have been extended over time due to the contracted loan ”, he said.

Buy gasoline where it is cheapest

“Lithuania buys gas from Russia” Novatek “- headlines of this kind and the like appeared some time ago in the international media. Delfi also wrote about that.

According to the Reuters news agency at the time, as early as April 2019, three gas carriers had arrived in Lithuania and the Russian gas buyers were allegedly the Lithuanian state-owned company Ignitis (formerly Lietuvos Energijos Tiekimas (LET)). ) and Achema, one of the largest gas consumers and fertilizer producers in Lithuania. Both companies were reportedly buying natural gas from Russia’s largest private gas company Novatek, which is linked to the environment of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

It is true that the directors of Achema, Delfi, commented that the gas does not come from this company.

“I will specify that we are not buying from Novatek, another company that has the word Novatek in its name, but it is not a Novatek company, there are other shareholders,” said Ramūnas Miliauskas, CEO of the company.

“The amount that is bought from that company is absolutely minimal. These are small boats, they are cheaper and that is why we can buy cheaper gas, ”added G. Balčiūnas.

When asked if the company was simply looking to save costs, he confirmed it.

“Yes, we really look at this place where the costs are lower. We don’t really buy gasoline where it is most expensive. And that’s a political thing, we don’t buy from Novatek.

We have to watch the economy, we have to try to buy gas as cheaply as possible, ”he said.

When asked to specify exactly which companies the company buys from LNG, Novatek Gas and Power Asia Pte. Limited. Singapore, a branch of Zug which, as can be seen from Novatek’s official disclosure table, is a subsidiary of Novatek.

“Natural gas represents the majority of the cost of the product, so, like other producers, Achema buys gas from the supplier that offers the lowest price in the market at that time. Based on prices on the stock market At that time, the company purchases both the pipeline and LNG from suppliers in various countries. A small percentage of them are Novatek Gas and Power Asia Pte, a Swiss subsidiary of the Singapore company. Limited. Singapore, the Zug branch “sells LNG “, clarified R. Miliauskas.

Speaking about the purchase of LNG from Russian companies and the ideology of such a solution, G. Balčiūnas hinted that then we should discuss not only natural gas, but also other products imported from this country.

“Then we should talk about not buying anything else from there, right?

Especially if there is cheaper. Now, as I understand it, they are buying wood, grain, the same fertilizers that Lithuania does not produce. This, perhaps, is the kind of state policy that is necessary, but it is hard for me to imagine that it is possible not to trade with Russia and that there is probably no country in the world that does not. The same Germany, America, France.

We try to avoid political connections or some kind of political stuff. We do not do politics, we are a commercial company ”, he commented.

Orinta Barkauskaitė, Communications Manager of Klaipedos Nafta (KN), responsible for the operation of the LNG terminal, assured Delfi that last year the gas from the LNG terminal Russia’s LNG represented the total amount of gas delivered to the Klaipėda LNG terminal.

“70 percent. The amount of gas delivered to the Klaipėda LNG terminal was LNG from Norway, 16 percent. LNG from the US, about 14 percent. LNG from Russia,” he said.

During the mentioned period, according to her, the services of the LNG terminal were used by companies from Lithuania and Estonia: Achema, Ignitis, Imlitex, Eesti Energia, Elenger.

PSO compared to tomatoes and VAT

G. Balčiūnas agreed to explain the situation related to services of public interest (PSO) in more than 11.6 million. Achema’s debt to the state seeking Eur.

“We cannot take advantage of the PSO benefit because we have a dispute with the state, which has been going on since 2011, when our own electricity was taxed.

We understand this in the same way that you would grow tomatoes in a greenhouse, eat them yourself, and the tax office would say that you would pay value-added tax (VAT) because you grew and ate them.

It’s not just that we don’t agree with that. “PKN Orlen, Lifosa, the large consumers who have built their own power plants, are challenging this state decision, so while the dispute is before the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Commission, the state treats us formally as in debt. ” – He said, assuring that in his opinion there should be no PSO, or it should be minimal for the energy produced.

Speaking of PSO’s debt, R. Miliauskas added that the total debt today is 11.6 million. EUR. It is true that during the past year, the company, as clarified, lost 2.8 million for not granting. EUR.

The situation in Belarus did not affect the group

Delfi also asked about the impact of the political situation in Belarus on the Achema Group’s revenue today.

“We just realized that the political situation in Belarus does not affect us. We have little to do with Belarus.

Our company Gaschema supplies carbon dioxide to the Lydos Alaus factory, but we continue working.

Achema himself has nothing to do with Belarus. Due to handling in port, KLASCO basically has several Belarusian cargoes, but so far those flows have been uninterrupted and continuous, ”said deputy L. Lubienė.

The UAB Achemos grupė company owns companies such as AB Achema, UAB Renerga, UAB Grand SPA Lietuva, AB Klaipėdos jūrų krovinių kompanija (KLASCO), UAB Krovinių terminalas, AB Kruizinių laivų terminalas, UAB Klaipedos Pilies Port, etc.