Recommended Free Tools
The 2017 MEIDP materials concerned a proposed Middle East to India Deepwater Pipeline, not an operating gas line. A September 2017 MEED report, summarizing an Assocham India study and project plans, described projected savings from pipeline gas versus shipped LNG. Those figures were forecasts, not evidence of savings achieved. Engineering listings also show that the route faced substantial deepwater geohazard questions.
What did “MEIDP Study 2017” refer to?
MEIDP is ambiguous: it can refer to subjects other than an energy pipeline. In the 2017 sources relevant here, it refers to the proposed Middle East to India Deepwater Pipeline, intended to bring natural gas to India while avoiding transit through Pakistan.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
MRY-SFW SS144520 1/144 Military Model Kit US T26E5 M26 Pershing Heavy Tank | Buy on Amazon |
The phrase does not identify one definitive report. The main economic account was a MEED report dated 7 September 2017, which summarized an Assocham India study. A June 2017 SAGE project presentation and technical listings from 2017 and 2019 covered project viability claims and engineering issues. The Assocham study itself is not available in the source record summarized here, so its underlying assumptions cannot be independently checked from these materials.
What economics did the 2017 coverage project?
MEED attributed the following estimates to the Assocham India study or to the proposed project. They describe 2017 projections, not current prices, audited spending or operating results.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
#1 Best Overall
- Model Building Kit：1/144 3D Printed Resin.
- Quality Assurance：After receiving the goods,If there is any damage, Please contact us in time.
- Note：Not include tool,glue,paint,Need to be purchased separately. Plastic model kit for ammunition without lead or gunpowder.
- Material：Resin
- Age limit：17+
| Measure | 2017 reported figure | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| Pipeline gas cost | $5.00–$5.50 per million British thermal units (mmBtu) | Projected cost for gas delivered through the proposed pipeline, as reported by MEED from the Assocham India study. |
| Ship-imported LNG comparison | $7.50/mmBtu | Comparison price cited in the same MEED account; the underlying calculation and assumptions are not established in the available material. |
| Estimated cost difference | $2.00–$2.50/mmBtu | Projected difference between the reported pipeline and LNG figures, attributed to the study. |
| Annual savings | About $1 billion | Study estimate reported by MEED; the available evidence does not show that this saving was realized. |
| Estimated EPC cost | $4.5 billion | Engineering, procurement and construction contract estimate reported by MEED in 2017, not a record of actual project expenditure. |
These figures make the economic case easy to state but difficult to verify from the available information. The reported cost advantage depends on assumptions about delivered gas costs and project financing, among other factors; the account does not provide a consistent, current comparison with LNG or other supply routes. A projected lower unit cost is therefore not, by itself, proof that the pipeline would have delivered cheaper gas in practice.
What did “viable” mean in the project claims?
The June 2017 SAGE presentation said commercial and financial viability was supported by a study performed by SBI Capital Markets Ltd. That is a claim in a project presentation; it should not be treated as independent confirmation that the project secured financing, passed final investment approval or was ready to build.
MEED described the proposal as still at the study stage in September 2017. It reported an expectation that procurement for front-end engineering design would be tendered before the end of that year. That was a forecast at the time, not evidence that the tender was issued or that later project milestones occurred.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Why was the route technically challenging?
The engineering work described a very deepwater route, with significant sections exceeding 3,000 metres in water depth. A 2017 engineering-paper listing said its authors drew on findings from a 2013 geophysical reconnaissance survey and considered a crossing of the Owen Fracture Zone and the Indus River Abyssal Fan. A 2019 technical listing also emphasized extreme depth, continental slopes and sediments in the Indus Fan.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →The issues examined included fault crossing, a deep channel system, possible debris and turbidity flows, slope stability and route-intervention design. These are material construction and engineering questions for a subsea pipeline. The listings show that such hazards were studied; they do not establish that every risk was resolved, that a final route was approved or that construction was ready to proceed.
Was the MEIDP built, and what is its status now?
The available evidence does not establish the pipeline’s current implementation status or show that it was built. The strongest dated status description here is MEED’s September 2017 account that the proposal remained at the study stage. A Press Information Bureau search result is titled as a clarification about media reports on the proposal, but its clarification text is not available in the material summarized here; no conclusion about what the government clarified can be drawn from its title alone.
For a reader assessing the proposal as an infrastructure investment, the key distinction is between an attractive forecast and a financeable, completed project. The 2017 reports provide proposed route and capacity figures, projected unit costs and savings, and a construction-cost estimate. They do not provide evidence of realized savings, actual expenditure, resolved engineering risks or present-day operating status.
What were the proposed route and capacity?
MEED reported a planned route of about 1,300 kilometres and proposed capacity of up to 1.1 billion standard cubic feet per day. These are project plans reported in 2017, not built capacity or verified current specifications. A later conference listing described a proposed offshore route linking gas fields in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Oman to India, but project descriptions do not independently establish a final route.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
