Mr. Gergely Moln?r:

I thank members for the questions. With regard to the "Yes" or "No" question, it is a much more complex issue than could be responded to with one word. I will be happy to follow up on that with Deputy Whitmore if there is an interest in the matter.

With regard to energy storage, there are issues regarding the maturation of LNG. The operating expenses regarding to LNG storage are also substantially higher than storing natural gas underground in gaseous form. This being said, in some markets, for instance, in north-east Asia, there are limited options for underground gas storage. Energy storage is playing quite an important role in seasonal balancing and meeting the short-term variability of the power system.

LNG storage is playing an important role. Calling this strategic and historic might be a bit of a far stretch, but it is worth highlighting that it can play quite an important role from a supply separation perspective.

Regarding floating storage and disposal, it is really a question in commercial terms of being able to negotiate. We have seen charter agreements ranging from just a couple of years to periods of more than a decade. It really depends on the demand outlook and the commercial terms that can be negotiated. FSRUs have the benefit of being flexible. They do not necessarily create lock-in effects. However, they typically have higher operating expenses than do onshore LNG terminals.