Thursday, November 14, 2013

Buru’s oil boom back on track

Buru’s oil boom back on track
Thursday, 14 November 2013
David Upton

Yulleroo tailings dam from fracking photo taken 8th Nov2013
AFTER an agonising delay of 12 months, Buru Energy is finally set to answer one of the biggest questions on the Australian oil patch: how big is Ungani?
The question has been hanging since Ungani-1 intersected a 50 metre oil column in a previously unrecognised carbonate reef play two years ago. 

Buru moved quickly to drill Ungani-2 and Ungani North-1, as well as going into the field with 3D seismic survey of the surrounding area of 240 square kilometres.

However, the survey was voluntarily suspended in October last year after traditional landowners reported the seismic crew had disturbed an Aboriginal heritage site.

A lengthy investigation by WA’s Department of Aboriginal Affairs cleared Buru and its contractors last month of wrong-doing, finding no evidence of any disturbance to an Aboriginal heritage site.

While no harm was done to Aboriginal heritage, there had been plenty of damage on the sharemarket, with Buru’s share price halving over the 12-month delay period to about $1.50.

Buru reached agreement with traditional owners in July on all aspects of exploration and development at Ungani, allowing a restart of clearing for the 3D survey.

Shooting the survey began in early September and was completed just three weeks ago.
In a statement earlier this week Buru managing director Keiran Wulff was able to provide shareholders with some encouraging early results.

He stated the preliminary data suggested Ungani was at least as big as Buru’s median case of 10 million barrels of recoverable oil, and could have significant upside.

“Interestingly, [the 3D survey] also shows some other prospects in that immediate vicinity that look like very attractive Grant closures above and just to the side of the field,” Wulff said.

“The final processing of the seismic data is still not quite completed, but we are pleased by the quality of the data and most importantly the clarity of the structural definition.

“The data received so far has enabled us to delineate our next drilling locations and we will be preparing the well sites ahead of the rig arriving in mid to late December.”

All of the data from the 3D survey is due to be processed by the end of next month, which will be a big step towards answering the question about the size of the Ungani field.

It is hoped the Ungani-3 appraisal well, which is due to spud next month, will provide confirmation of the interpreted size of Ungani, although it is possible a further well will be needed to provide enough certainty.

The high case for Ungani in previous assessments has been 20 million barrels of recoverable oil.

If the actual size approaches this figure, Buru can expect a whole new wave of excitement about the discovery.

Then, if there are multiple Ungani look-alikes in the vicinity of the original discovery, Buru could even find itself be at the centre of a new boom in Australia’s onshore oil production.

Unfortunately for other explorers Buru and its partner Mitsubishi have a tight grip on all the acreage over the Ungani oil trend, which extends over an area of 40 kilometres by 120 kilometres.

A recent research update from Deutsche Bank, which underwrote Buru’s $35 million placement with institutional investors in August, stated that “we understand the next two-plus exploration wells will target prospects with recoverable oil potential of over 30 million barrels each”.

The potential of Ungani is also hinted at in recent production forecasts by the company.
Phase 1 of the Ungani development is expected to produce between 1000 and 2000 barrels per day gross.

Buru and Mitsubishi are equal partners in the field.

Phase 1 is an extended production test that is due to restart later this month following a workover of Ungani-2, the upgrade of production facilities and the construction of an oil export facility at the Port of Wyndham.

Phase 2 is the full field development, including horizontal wells, and is planned to boost production to 5000 barrels per day by the end of next year.

With Phase 3 will come the development of new discoveries as part of an Ungani cluster. Buru believes there is potential in this phase for gross production to 15,000 barrels per day from the end of the following year.

In phase 3, Buru’s net production would total more than 2.5 million barrels per annum. This would make the company one of Australia’s top 10 oil producers, based on current rankings.

With so much at stake, the news from Buru will be closely watched over the next few months.


  1. Costs threaten $20bn LNG plant


    From: The Australian November 15, 2013

    THE $20 billion Arrow coal-seam gas project in Queensland has been told to sharpen its cost structure or it will not go ahead, raising further doubts about the nation's future LNG investment. The ultimatum, from Arrow owners Royal Dutch Shell and PetroChina, comes as the International Energy Agency downgrades long-term Australian LNG export forecasts because of the surging costs of every big development approved in the past decade.

    Shell and PetroChina are understood to have told the Brisbane-based Arrow team that the export LNG project, which is also investigating mergers with under-construction Gladstone projects, is not competing well with other potential investment opportunities.

    "Staff have been advised that we are still looking for more value in the project, including collaboration, in order to offer shareholders (Shell and PetroChina) a more competitive proposition," an Arrow spokesman said yesterday. "Arrow has previously stated that it is results and value-focused and not schedule driven.

    "GRAPHIC: LNG demand forecasts

    The demand for improved profitability comes as Shell chief Peter Voser says the company's oil and gas projects are in the firing line as the company looks to rein in capital spending and sell assets."We are particularly rich in upstream (oil and gas production) options," Mr Voser told Bloomberg this week.

    "At the moment, the pipeline we have is richer than we can do."As reported in The Australian earlier this month, Shell is looking to sell about $US15bn ($16bn) worth of projects as part of a plan to reduce net capital investment.

    Arrow is studying an LNG project at Gladstone's Curtis Island, where three separate projects costing a total of $70bn and that plan to export Queensland's coal-seam gas are already under construction.

    The company was aiming for a final investment decision this year, but Shell had flagged it may delay a decision because of soaring Australian construction costs.It said it was investigating merger opportunities with other projects.

    It now appears the owners have told Arrow, which is led by Shell's Andrew Faulkner, to sharpen its pencil if the CSG fields are to experience the large-scale development either a stand-alone project or expansion of an existing project would require.

    There is also talk that Arrow, which employs more than 1000 people, has been told to trim the fat from its running costs, which has sparked widespread industry speculation that jobs will go.

    Arrow would not comment on whether there would be job losses.

    Shell and PetroChina have spent about $5bn acquiring coal-seam gas ground in Queensland's Surat and Bowen Basins (through the acquisition of ASX-listed Arrow Energy and Bow Energy) and another $2bn-$3bn developing the project and CSG ground.As well as the high cost of working in Australia, Arrow faces more gasfield challenges than its competitors because its Surat Basin resources are beneath higher-quality farmland.

    It is believed Shell is not in a hurry to sell the Arrow ground in the current environment, meaning export options could be mothballed until construction prices come right back and gas prices rise if a suitable development scheme is not found soon.

  2. Costs threaten $20bn LNG plant



    According to its environmental impact statement, Arrow is studying building two LNG trains at Curtis Island as a first-stage project able to export a total of 8 million tonnes of LNG per year.

    On Wednesday night, the International Energy Agency downgraded its long-term forecast for the nation's LNG exports because of a series of cost blowouts at projects in Queensland and Western Australia.

    The downgrade, of about seven million tonnes a year from the IEA's 2035 estimate, is almost the same amount as Arrow is hoping to export.

    "The (cost) increases threaten to hold back plans for additional export projects, especially as there are large investment needs elsewhere in the mining and energy sector," the IEA said in its annual world energy outlook.

    "Commitments to new resource developments in Australia have slowed markedly over the last year or so and the prospects of another round of major Australian LNG projects will depend heavily on how costs evolve, on the deployment of new, potentially less costly technologies such as floating LNG and on competition from other regions, notably North America.

    "The IEA is now predicting Australia will be producing about 108 million tonnes a year of LNG in 2035, up from 24 million tonnes now.

  3. BARNETT is wasting his time - WOODSIDE took a very long look at the conditions at JPP and decided the site is not economically viable for a whole bunch of reasons.

    BARNETT can spin it any way he wants BUT everyone in the industry knows the truth - the site is not suitable for a development of this type.

    The chance that BARNETT will find anyone else as ignorant as "The Don" Voelte was about operating in Australia is a very remote possibility indeed.

    THE TRUTH is JPP would be a very good little earner for the local Indigenous people just as it is,especially now it has achieved world wide fame.

    THE only thing BARNETT will achieve by his incoherent behaviour is scare everyone away to the NT or they will float it.

    Here is a little history................


    "Shares soar as Woodside dumps $45b James Point project
    Woodside Petroleum confirmed rumours today that it was scrapping plans for its $45 billion LNG project at James Price Point in WA's north.

    The stock was $1.21, or 3.4 per cent, higher at $36.49 at 9am Perth time.

    IG Markets market strategist Evan Lucas said the market was responding to the fact that Woodside's capital expenditure would drop away substantially in the short term.

    "There would have been a considerable construction period before it even started production with more overhang,'' he told AAP.

    Until now shareholders would have been concerned about possibly share-diluting actions such as capital raisings to keep up with the costs."


    Woodside announced early today it had abandoned its concept for a large, multiple-user gas processing hub onshore at James Price Point north of Broome in the Kimberley region as it was "not commercially viable''.

    The oil and gas giant said it was reviewing "alternative concepts'' for commercialising Browse Basin gas, including a floating processing vessel, a smaller onshore plant at James Price Point and piping the gas hundred of kilometres south to its existing facilities at Karratha.

    Woodside said its decision was not based on environmental, red tape or public policy issues.


    Australian Conservation Foundation chief executive Don Henry said the project would have done untold damage to the region's coastline.

    Wilderness Society director Lyndon Schneiders said Woodside's decision should serve as a warning to both governments and businesses which wanted to force unwanted and unsustainable developments on communities


  4. BARNETT is wasting his time


    $45b Browse gas hub dead

    Woodside Chief executive officer Peter Coleman says it is confident the Browse gas project will go ahead, despite scrapping plans James Price Point.

    Mr Coleman said the decision to dump the plan for James Price Point was tough, saying the project was subject to cost pressures.

    "We do believe that Browse will get developed,” he said.

    He would not be drawn on the cost estimate of the James Price Point development but said Woodside had tried everything to significantly reduce the budget, including reducing the size of the proposed LNG trains, in an effort to enhance the economics.

    In the end the costs had not come down sufficiently for the Browse project to be viable.


    Mr Coleman said it was too early to discuss specifics around other development options for the Browse gas, and he declined to give his preference.

    He said the hype sparked by environmental protesters had not been a factor in Woodside's decison, which was based solely on economic reasons.

    In an announcement to the ASX this morning, Woodside said it would review alternative ideas with its joint venture partners.

    Woodside said James Price Point "does not meet the company's commercial requirements for a positive investment decision".


    Woodside said a major review of the proposed LNG processing plant, near Broome, had found it would not deliver the returns the company needed.


    Shell's Australian boss Ann Pickard reiterated that it believed its floating technology would be the fastest, most economic and best technical solution for processing gas from the Browse project.

    "Floating LNG can bring significant long-term, sustainable jobs to Western Australia, Australia, and the Kimberley, as well as providing employment and business opportunities for Kimberley indigenous people,” Ms Pickard said in a statement.


    WA Opposition Leader Mark McGowan said the Premier's constant interfering and meddling caused the James Price Point project to be lost.

    Mr McGowan said WA Labor has always said that the gas should be processed onshore first and foremost.

    “We do not support offshore processing of Western Australian gas,” Mr McGowan said.

    “Mr Barnett should have insisted the gas be processed onshore but should never have interfered in the commercial arrangements or the exact siting of the project onshore.

    “The Premier has no one to blame but himself. His handling of the James Price Point issue has been abysmal right from the beginning."


    “There were always less environmental and socially destructive options yet governments of both persuasions – spearheaded by Liberal Premier Colin Barnett and Labor’s former federal resources minister Martin Ferguson ‑ tried to force this unwanted and unnecessary development on the Broome and Kimberley communities," Wilderness Society National Director Lyndon Schneiders said this morning.

    “This development was opposed by people all around Australia and the world, but nowhere stronger than by the brave Broome community who stood up to hundreds of police alongside the Traditional Custodians who wanted to treasure their cultural heritage,” he said.

    “It’s time for the Western Australian Government to look seriously at sustainable economic development for the Kimberley.”

  5. BARNETT is wasting his time


    Federal Resources Minister Gary Gray, a former Woodside executive, said Browse gas could still be developed to the benefit of WA, Australia and the Kimberley.

    "What we have seen in the past past 24 hours is Woodside and the joint venturers making clear their preferred options because James Price Point is too expensive," Mr Gray.


    Asked by Opposition Leader Mark McGowan yesterday if he had received advice in the past week from the joint venture partners that the project would not proceed, Mr Barnett said: "I have not received advice to that effect from the joint venture partners at all. At all."

    Senior sources yesterday told The West Australian that the WA Government and Canberra had been informed by Woodside of its impending announcement.


    In April 2013, Woodside completed its technical and commercial evaluation of the proposed Browse LNG Development near James Price Point and determined that the development concept did not meet the company’s commercial requirements for a positive final investment decision. The evaluation was completed in line with the conditions of the Browse Retention Leases.

    In August 2013, Woodside resolved to recommend the Browse Joint Venture participants use floating LNG (FLNG) technology as the development concept to commercialise the three Browse gas fields.

    Woodside’s recommendation followed the evaluation of alternative development concepts for Browse after the announcement in April this year not to proceed with the onshore development at James Price Point. Other development concepts considered included a pipeline to existing facilities in the Pilbara and a modified option in the Kimberley. ​​

    On 2 September 2013​​​​, the Browse Joint Venture participants selected the use of FLNG technology as the development concept to commercialise the Browse resources.


    James Price Point demand sent us offshore: Chevron

    CHEVRON has blamed the federal and state governments' instruction that the Woodside Petroleum-led Browse joint venture build a gas plant at James Price Point for the partnership's decision to walk away from an onshore development in Western Australia and instead use controversial floating LNG technology.

    In his first public comments on the issue, Chevron Australia managing director Roy Krzywosinski said yesterday that Chevron -- which sold out of the Browse project last year before James Price Point was formally abandoned -- had wanted the gas to be processed at the North West Shelf project in the Pilbara rather than at the Kimberley site.

    He said he knew the cost of building any greenfields LNG project in Australia was soaring because of his experience in overseeing construction of Chevron's Gorgon and Wheatstone projects, which have a combined capital cost of almost $80 billion.

    Mr Krzywosinski's comments suggest Chevron believed piping the Browse gas to existing infrastructure in the Pilbara would have significantly lowered the costs of the project and possibly averted the need for the partners to ultimately choose FLNG, which offers a higher rate of return. He agreed that the government instruction to build at James Price Point had excluded other options from being considered.

    "Our preference was to bring the Browse gas down to the Burrup (Peninsula) to backfill the North West Shelf," he told a West Australian parliamentary committee yesterday.

    "But because of the retention lease issues, we could only look at James Price Point. "Our message to government is let the industry take a look at the wide range of alternatives to figure out the best options."

  6. BARNETT is wasting his time


    The de-risking of Woodside’s exposure to the Browse project through the $US2 billion sell-down of its interests to Mitsui and Mitsubishi was a case in point, as was the decision to resist the pressure from the WA government and walk away from the controversial $US45 billion-plus proposed onshore LNG facility for Browse at James Price Point. That decision was further validated by this week’s West Australian Supreme Court finding that the environmental approvals for the proposed gas processing hub were unlawful.


    "But the boom has not been all plain
    sailing. Most of the projects have
    suffered budget blow-outs, estimated by
    analysts at anywhere between 15% and
    50%. The increasing costs have led some
    projects to be delayed or even shelved.
    Woodside’s 12 million mt/year Browse
    LNG project at a remote site on James
    Price Point in Western Australia was one
    such casualty.
    Soaring labor and equipment costs were
    behind Woodside’s decision in April this
    year to shelve the project. The original
    budget had ballooned, with some
    observers speculating the cost of the
    development would have been as high as
    $100 billion."



    The $45 billion project (originally $26 billion) was planned to process $200 billion worth of gas which would be piped from beneath the sea from the Browse Basin, 425 kilometres off the Kimberley coast. The gas would be shipped to Asia.
    The chief executive of Perth-based Woodside and his team spent more than $1 billion on the design work for the James Price Point LNG project near Broome. (Nov 2012)


    "It's not an either or situation," Mr Coleman said yesterday. "It's not a situation of choosing James Price Point versus floating.

    "We spent almost $2 billion to get James Price Point to work. I don't know how people can expect companies to spend any more money than that trying to make a development commercially viable.

    "James Price Point simply didn't work. Period. So talking about local content in the context of a project that won't get built is kind of a hollow discussion."

    Mr Coleman was talking after handing down Woodside's $US873 million ($966.1 million) interim net profit, up 7.5 per cent on the six months to June 30, 2012. Woodside declared an US83¢ interim dividend. Woodside shares fell 60¢ to $38.10.


    "The basis is three floating vessels for Browse. That will be firmed up as we finalise the basis of our design." With $190 billion worth of LNG projects underway, Australia is set to become the world's largest LNG exporter by the end of the decade, but more than half of the seven LNG plants currently under construction have suffered large cost blowouts. According to analyst estimates, choosing to use floating LNG technology would mean a cost savings of 20 percent.



    "The original
    budget had ballooned, with some
    observers speculating the cost of the
    development would have been as high as
    $100 billion."


    ""We spent almost $2 billion to get James Price Point to work. I don't know how people can expect companies to spend any more money than that trying to make a development commercially viable.

    "James Price Point simply didn't work. Period"




    1. FROM BCNGC Facebook :

      "While Browse is Woodside's problem more than Shell's, Voser is unapologetic about the floating option for that project, saying it was a choice between a floating LNG project or no project mainly because of the cost issue, although he notes environmental matters were also a factor. "In the end you want a project which is profitable, which is doable," he says. "And an onshore project in WA was just not possible." The political issues, he says, will be straightened out eventually."

      - See more at:

  7. Shire Local Planning Strategy 'consultation' with OAP Indigenous Community "insufficient, disrespectful and disempowering."

    Extract from Broome Shire Schedule of Submissions.

    Submission 156.
    Submission from CEO of Ardyaloon Inc. (One Arm Point Aboriginal Community).

    Firstly, thank you visiting Ardyaloon and presenting your draft strategy and plan. And thank you for sending the general discussion point/items raised summary from your community information sessions. We received those on Wednesday 4th September. Just 2 weeks before the deadline for submissions about the Plan/Strategy.
    I understood from what you said at our meeting that if we don’t make a submission now, on issues we should raise now, then it will be much harder to get things considered or amended later. I appreciate your advice on this because it helps to prioritise the issue. Even so, Ardyaloon Inc are not in a position to respond thoughtfully and with due consideration because of the limited time you have made available.
    As you will know, because of the structure and culture of Aboriginal communities, it is sometimes necessary to provide sufficient time for decisions to be made. In order to give full consideration to the ramifications of the Strategy/Scheme, which we want to do and which is our right to do, we require further information sessions with both Shire planners, and Department of Planning. As well, we require time to enable appropriate and if necessary, extensive discussions and negotiations with Traditional Owners, and owners and occupiers of outstations and other properties. A single, 2 hour Shire information session which presents the Scheme/Strategy is insufficient, disrespectful and disempowering to the community, its leaders and the Aboriginal Corporation responsible for the management of the community and the land.

  8. Government brags it will build 500 houses in the Kimberley.

    Meanwhile what's this?

    Indigenous hit hard by housing policy

    More than 500 indigenous households have been evicted by the Department of Housing since the State Government's hardline disruptive behaviour policy was introduced in May 2011.

    Statistics released to The Weekend West reveal that of the 945 evictions in that period, 519 self-identified as Aboriginal - more than double the number in the two years before the policy.

    The official number of children involved was not available but advocates estimate that 2000 Aboriginal children may have been evicted in the past 2½ years.

    Some evictions have gone ahead despite warnings from other government departments and schools that the children's wellbeing could be at risk.

    Although long-suffering neighbours have been relieved of dysfunctional behaviour in their streets, experts warn social problems only get worse with transience and an inability for support services to keep track of clients.

    Advocates say some of WA's most vulnerable children are being evicted into circumstances where they are likely to be abused.

    They talk of mothers with large broods farming out their children to different relatives all over the State and living in chaotic, overcrowded houses.

    Some evicted children are dropping off the radar of schools and social workers who can no longer keep track of their welfare.

    Parents hide from Department for Child Protection workers, frightened that their homelessness will lead to their children being taken away.

    In the two financial years before the policy, a total of 411 tenants were evicted, 225 of them Aboriginal.
    Housing Minister Bill Marmion said that while there were "sad cases", the department was committed to improving the behaviour of its tenants and tried to work with them to keep their tenancies where possible.

  9. Politicians spend more to commute by RAAF jets

    Federal politicians taking Air Force-operated VIP flights are costing taxpayers $50,000 for every hour spent in the air.

    Documents obtained by Fairfax Media call into question the Abbott government's insistence that the use of luxury RAAF jets to shuttle ministers and MPs to Canberra from as far away as Perth is often more economical than individual commercial fares.

    Leader of the House Christopher Pyne defended the use of a Defence-leased Boeing 737 to transport three government ministers and six MPs, including Don Randall, one of the Liberals at the centre of the expenses scandal, from Perth to Canberra for the opening of Parliament this week.

    Mr Pyne said on Tuesday: ''It's probably cheaper than bringing them all individually on Qantas or Virgin.''


    But the first breakdown of the true cost of VIP flights, obtained under freedom of information laws, suggests that cannot be the case. According to the figures, which include the cost of leasing aircraft, maintenance and airport costs, a single four-hour flight from Perth to Canberra costs the public just over $200,000.

    Based on that, the cost of flying the nine Liberal politicians from Perth is $22,000 a head - or $12,500 if the seven family members accompanying them are factored into the bill. Those figures do not include the cost of flying the jet empty from Canberra to Perth.

    By comparison, a business-class flight from Perth to Canberra on Qantas costs $1850 this week.


    ANZ chief executive Mike Smith's salary rises to $10.4 million

    ANZ chief executive Mike Smith remains the highest-paid bank boss in Australia, after higher bonus payments pushed his remuneration to $10.4 million.

    Despite being the country's third-largest bank, ANZ spent more on its top executive than bigger rivals Westpac and the Commonwealth Bank in 2013, its annual report showed on Friday.

    Mr Smith's pay rose 3.2 per cent, up from $10.1 million last year, due to higher short-term bonus payments.

    Of the total payment, $5.3 million was paid in cash and $5.1 million was paid in deferred shares.


    In addition, shareholders will also be asked to approve a bonus of up to $3.15 million to Mr Smith at the company's annual general meeting next month.

    The payment to Mr Smith confirms he was the best-paid boss of a big four bank in 2013 for the second year running.

    It exceeds the $7.8 million payment to the Commonwealth Bank's Ian Narev and the $9.2 million to Westpac's Gail Kelly, who took a pay cut of $500,000.

    National Australia Bank has not yet disclosed how much it paid chief executive Cameron Clyne

  10. Chinese builder planning $7.5bn of developments

    ONE of China's largest developers, the state-owned Greenland Holdings Group, plans to take advantage of the Chinese appetite for Australian property and become a huge force locally, unleashing a $1.5 billion investment war chest next year. Greenland, a household name in China but little known here, has revealed its three to five-year growth plan to The Weekend Australian. This could see it undertake projects worth $7.5bn by 2018 in local developments.

    Greenland this year bought sites with an end value of $1bn. The developer is set to build Sydney's tallest residential tower and plans to build a 1500 luxury apartment complex next to Melbourne's Flemington racecourse.Greenland Australia managing director Sherwood Luo said he expected other Chinese developers to follow Greenland into the Australian market.

    "We are aiming for a 50 per cent (per annum) increase in business investment in the first stage (of being in Australia) and we will keep that growth until Greenland has a decent portfolio," Mr Luo said.

    "We found that there is a lot of Asian people in Sydney and Melbourne, and Greenland has a great branding name that the Chinese respect, which will add value to any business we do here. "But we also believe that, in terms of the future developments and business activities that Greenland is going to carry out in Australia, there will be more and more reception from the rest of society.

    "The company -- which had global sales of $34bn last year and ranked 359 on the Global Fortune 500 list -- believes its reputation as a proven developer in China will give it an edge when marketing local property to the booming offshore investor and local Chinese-born markets.

    Chinese offshore investment into Australian real estate grew by almost 60 per cent in the past two years, with Foreign Investment Review Board figures showing that Chinese property investment during the 2011-12 financial year was worth $4.2bn.China is Australia's second largest source of migrants. The Australian Bureau of Statistics says there were 18,030 long-term arrivals in the year to June.

    In Sydney's Chatswood, where 13 per cent of the population was born in China, Mirvac's ERA apartment development sold about 90 per cent of its 295 apartments to local and offshore Chinese. Former Macquarie Group banker Bill Moss believes Chinese investment in residential property could increase tenfold.

    Greenland is about to sell apartments for its first Australian development, which will be the tallest residential tower in Sydney, at 235m.The $600m luxury project, boasting "Sydney's highest sky homes", will transform the former Sydney Water Board office building on Bathurst Street into a 66-storey, 500 luxury apartment tower, with a boutique hotel and commercial and retail space.

    The company is awaiting approval for its development in Melbourne's Flemington.Mr Luo said Greenland Australia would consider all opportunities to expand, including residential, commercial, hotels and casinos.

    Greenland has been active in China for 21 years.The company expanded to the US, Thailand and Europe two years ago to take advantage of depressed Western markets.