Enron Mentions - 02/06/01 ,
 Enron Proposes $700 Mln Venezuela LNG Invest Over 3 Yrs
Dow Jones, 02/06/01

Market Talk/IN: India Bonds Up; Pft-Taking May Emerge
Dow Jones, 02/06/01
Rating Agencies Tools of MNCs: Maharashtra
The Economic Times, 02/06/01
Enron Walks Out of Proposed JV with Ispat
Business Standard, 02/06/01

Generalitat Stops for a Breather Over Enron Plant
Expansion, 02/06/01

Profits Escape Owner of Orange County, Calif., Electricity Generators
Knight-Ridder Tribune, 02/06/01

California Power Crisis Creates Losses for Some Out-of-State Energy Firms
Knight-Ridder Tribune, 02/06/01

El Paso Energy Plans LNG Terminals --- Company Will Spend $1.5 Billion on 
Facilities to Supply U.S and Mexico --- Projects Would Cost $250 Million to 
$350 Million Each
The Asian Wall Street Journal, 02/06/01


Enron Proposes $700 Mln Venezuela LNG Invest Over 3 Yrs
02/06/2001
Dow Jones Energy Service 
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) 
CARACAS -(Dow Jones)- U.S. energy company Enron Corp. (ENE) has proposed a 
three year, $700 million investment in Venezuela's liquid natural gas sector, 
Domingo Marsicobetre, a vice president at state oil company Petroleos de 
Venezuela S.A, (E.PVZ), or PdVSA, said Tuesday. 
The proposal, for a facility at the Jose Industrial Complex in eastern 
Venezuela with PdVSA holding 25% of the venture, still has to be approved by 
President Hugo Chavez, Marsicobetre said. He didn't give a timeframe for the 
approval.
The plant should produce 2.1 million tons per year in its first phase, 
according to local media reports. 
-Dow Jones Newswires, 582 564 1339; venezuela@dowjones.com

MARKET TALK/IN: India Bonds Up; Pft-Taking May Emerge
02/06/2001
Dow Jones International News 
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) 

1624 Dow Jones] Enron India's decision to invoke central government financial 
guarantee to recover millions of rupees for unpaid power bills, accrued by 
Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB), unlikely to harm overall foreign 
direct investor sentiment, says analyst; "it's unlikely to harm 
FDI...investors see it as an issue between two parties (Enron's Dabhol Power 
Co and MSEB) and are taking a more long-term perspective;" also unlikely to 
affect foreign portfolio investment. However, analysts say may damp sentiment 
in power sector.(SEP) 

Ratings agencies tools of MNCs: Maharashtra
Girish Kuber

02/06/2001
The Economic Times 
Copyright (C) 2001 The Economic Times; Source: World Reporter (TM) 

MUMBAI
THE MAHARASHTRA government on Monday denounced credit rating agencies Crisil 
and ICRA for downgrading the state's ratings. "We reject their judgement," 
the government said.
"These agencies have considered just Enron's case in which we have refused to 
honour our contractual obligations by choice. It is our strategic decision 
not to pay Enron as we want to scrap the power purchase agreement the state 
has with the company," Jayant Patil, state's finance minister told ET on 
Monday. 
"Our decision not to pay Enron has nothing to do with the state's finances," 
he clarified. Significantly, this is for the first time since Enron 
controversy surfaced again the state government has put it on record that the 
non-payment has nothing to do with its financial situation. 
In an exclusive interview to ET immediately after the credit rating agencies 
downgraded the state's rating visibly agitated finance minister said: "We 
reject their views". 
According to Patil, these companies were looking at just Enron-issue. "They 
lack a balanced approach and their interpretation is wrong," he said and 
added: "No state corporation has defaulted on payments. We all are in sound 
position." 
"This is the most unfortunate decision based on faulty reasoning," said 
Patil. "The state government has already announced the decision to appoint an 
experts committee to review the Enron project. If the committee recommends to 
keep the existing PPA alive, we will pay Enron," he said. 
"If these agencies keep ignoring positive aspects of the state, then I must 
say that they are tools in the hands of the multinationals," Patil said. "We 
don't accept their judgments," he said.

Enron walks out of proposed JV with Ispat
Arijit De & S Ravindran Mumbai

02/06/2001
Business Standard 
1
Copyright (c) Business Standard 

Global energy major Enron has decided to walk out of its proposed joint 
venture with the Ispat group to set up a 354 mw power project. The project, 
under Ispat Energy, was to be a captive plant for Ispat Industries and would 
have significantly brought down the production cost for the steel major. 
Ispat Energy was earlier to be part of Ispat Industries, but was later hived 
off following ballooning of project costs. Enron was to pick up 49 per cent 
equity in the venture at a cost of Rs 100 crore, while Ispat was to hold the
balance stake. 
Confirming the development, an Enron spokesman said: "We can confirm that 
Enron will not be investing in Ispat Energy. We have also advised Ispat on 
this issue." 
Enron's decision is likely to be a body-blow for Ispat as its power costs 
from the state grid would almost be double that from its proposed captive 
power plant.

Generalitat stops for a breather over Enron plant (La Generalitat se toma un 
respiro ante la central de Enron)
02/06/2001
Expansion 
Copyright(C) 2001 Abstracted from Expansion in Spanish, Source: World 
Reporter (TM) 

Local protests have forced a temporary stoppage in the construction of a 
power plant in Tarragona in the Spanish region of Catalonia. Residents in the 
area are complaining that "energy waste is always being dumped in the south 
of the region". The area, which will be affected by the national hydrological 
plan, already has two nuclear power plants, numerous initiatives connected to 
wind energy and two combined cycle plant projects, one by US multinational 
Enron Corp and another by Spanish natural gas company Gas Natural. The Enron 
plan to build Spain's biggest combined cycle power plant was the last straw. 
Residents' reaction has forced the regional government (Generalitat) to halt 
the project, which should be given the go-ahead in the next couple of days, 
for two to three months. The US company does not believe the plant, which 
would cost 600m euros (Pta100bn) and would have a total power of 1,600 
megawatts, is in danger.


Profits Escape Owner of Orange County, Calif., Electricity Generators
James B. Kelleher

02/06/2001
KRTBN Knight-Ridder Tribune Business News: The Orange County Register - 
California 
Copyright (C) 2001 KRTBN Knight Ridder Tribune Business News; Source: World 
Reporter (TM) 

California's energy crisis continues to generate windfall profits for many of 
the out-of-state companies that sell power here but not all are benefiting. 
Williams Cos., the Tulsa-based energy trader and gas pipeline operator, said 
Monday that its fourth-quarter earnings from continuing operations jumped 
almost 300 percent thanks, in part, to the sky-high prices the company has 
been able to charge for electricity in California and other Western states.
But the robust results at Williams, which doesn't own any power plants in 
California, came at the expense of AES Corp. Arlington, Va.-based AES owns 
three generating plants in Southern California, including those in Huntington 
Beach and Long Beach. 
Back before skyrocketing electricity prices heralded the current energy 
crisis, AES inked a contract that essentially lets Williams buy all of the 
electricity produced at the three AES California plants for a predetermined 
fee. Under the deal, Williams delivers natural gas to the plants, AES turns 
the gas into electricity and Williams then sells the electricity on the 
state's grid or wherever it can fetch the highest price. 
"We're basically paid to do the conversion," says Ed Blackford, the manager 
of the Huntington Beach AES plant. 
So as California's electricity prices skyrocketed, the AES California plants 
have generated big bucks for Williams and nothing but headaches for AES. 
In fact, AES actually lost $11 million in the state in the fourth quarter 
because the profit generated by the Williams contract was wiped out by a $17 
million fine AES had to pay for pumping illegal emissions into Southern 
California's air. 
Williams, on the other hand, said Monday that its earnings from continuing 
operations rose to $259.3 million during the fourth quarter, up from just 
$66.1 million during the same quarter last year. 
The company said the big increase in earnings, which beat Wall Street's 
expectations by a mile, reflected "substantially higher profits from the 
energy marketing and trading business." Because all of existing AES 
California capacity has been sold to Williams, AES is now scrambling to get 
regulators to OK a plan to refurbish two idled generating units at Huntington 
Beach and bring them back online. The units, which were shut down in 1995, 
could add 450 megawatts of fresh capacity each day and substantially turn 
around the California operating profits of AES. 
"Once we get the permit from the (California Energy Commission), we would 
need three months to bring the units online," says Blackford. 
In recent weeks, a number of other out-of-state companies active in 
California's energy market have reported earnings: Houston-based Dynegy Inc. 
said its fourth-quarter profit more than doubled to $106 million. 
Minneapolis-based NRG Energy Inc. said its fourth-quarter earnings jumped 50 
percent to $42 million. 
Houston-based Reliant Energy Inc. said its fourth-quarter earnings from 
continuing operations were unchanged at $73 million. 
Houston-based Enron Corp. said fourth-quarter profit rose 34 percent to $347 
million.

California Power Crisis Creates Losses for Some Out-of-State Energy Firms
James B. Kelleher

02/06/2001
KRTBN Knight-Ridder Tribune Business News: The Orange County Register - 
California 
Copyright (C) 2001 KRTBN Knight Ridder Tribune Business News; Source: World 
Reporter (TM) 

California's energy crisis continues to generate windfall profits for many of 
the out-of-state companies that sell power here but not all are benefiting. 
Williams Cos., the Tulsa-based energy trader and gas pipeline operator, said 
Monday that its fourth-quarter earnings from continuing operations jumped 
almost 300 percent thanks, in part, to the sky-high prices the company has 
been able to charge for electricity in California and other Western states.
But the robust results at Williams, which doesn't own any power plants in 
California, came at the expense of AES Corp. Arlington, Va.-based AES owns 
three generating plants in Southern California, including those in Huntington 
Beach and Long Beach. 
Back before skyrocketing electricity prices heralded the current energy 
crisis, AES inked a contract that essentially lets Williams buy all of the 
electricity produced at the three AES California plants for a predetermined 
fee. Under the deal, Williams delivers natural gas to the plants, AES turns 
the gas into electricity and Williams then sells the electricity on the 
state's grid or wherever it can fetch the highest price. 
"We're basically paid to do the conversion," says Ed Blackford, the manager 
of the Huntington Beach AES plant. 
So as California's electricity prices skyrocketed, the AES California plants 
have generated big bucks for Williams and nothing but headaches for AES. 
In fact, AES actually lost $11 million in the state in the fourth quarter 
because the profit generated by the Williams contract was wiped out by a $17 
million fine AES had to pay for pumping illegal emissions into Southern 
California's air. 
Williams, on the other hand, said Monday that its earnings from continuing 
operations rose to $259.3 million during the fourth quarter, up from just 
$66.1 million during the same quarter last year. 
The company said the big increase in earnings, which beat Wall Street's 
expectations by a mile, reflected "substantially higher profits from the 
energy marketing and trading business." Because all of existing AES 
California capacity has been sold to Williams, AES is now scrambling to get 
regulators to OK a plan to refurbish two idled generating units at Huntington 
Beach and bring them back online. The units, which were shut down in 1995, 
could add 450 megawatts of fresh capacity each day and substantially turn 
around the California operating profits of AES. 
"Once we get the permit from the (California Energy Commission), we would 
need three months to bring the units online," says Blackford. 
In recent weeks, a number of other out-of-state companies active in 
California's energy market have reported earnings: Houston-based Dynegy Inc. 
said its fourth-quarter profit more than doubled to $106 million. 
Minneapolis-based NRG Energy Inc. said its fourth-quarter earnings jumped 50 
percent to $42 million. 
Houston-based Reliant Energy Inc. said its fourth-quarter earnings from 
continuing operations were unchanged at $73 million. 
Houston-based Enron Corp. said fourth-quarter profit rose 34 percent to $347 
million.

El Paso Energy Plans LNG Terminals --- Company Will Spend $1.5 Billion on 
Facilities to Supply U.S and Mexico --- Projects Would Cost $250 Million to 
$350 Million Each
By Alexei Barrionuevo
Staff Reporter
02/06/2001
The Asian Wall Street Journal 
M9
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) 

In another sign that the U.S. market for liquefied natural gas is heating up, 
El Paso Energy Corp. said it plans to spend at least $1.5 billion over five 
years to build a handful of terminals for handling LNG for the U.S. and 
Mexico markets. 
El Paso Energy, based in Houston, said it is considering six projects in all: 
three in the U.S., two in Mexico and one in the Bahamas.
Five of the projects, which would cost from $250 million to $350 million 
apiece, would serve the U.S. market, where natural-gas prices are nearly 
three times higher than last year. 
Last week, Enron Corp., another Houston energy concern, said it plans to 
spend as much as $400 million to feed gas from the Bahamas to the growing 
Florida market. El Paso said it hopes to have its project running six months 
before Enron's. 
The rival projects underscore surging U.S. demand for LNG, a process that 
allows natural gas to be shipped but that generally adds significantly to the 
cost. While LNG has been a vital part of the gas supply in Asia, particularly 
in Japan, it has never enjoyed sustained success in the U.S., mostly because 
it has been too costly to compete with low U.S. natural gas prices. 
But over the past two decades, the cost of the process, which cools natural 
gas into liquid form, has come down 30% and the price to construct LNG 
tankers has dropped by a third, said Kathleen Eisbrenner, El Paso's managing 
director for global LNG. Still, high U.S. natural-gas prices are the key. 
Tight gas supplies in the U.S. drove average prices for natural gas to $3.89 
per thousand cubic feet last year, up 71% from $2.27 a thousand cubic feet in 
1999. 
To make El Paso's LNG bet worth the effort, natural-gas prices have to stay 
above $3 per thousand cubic feet over the next decade, said Ralph Eads, El 
Paso's president for merchant energy. 
Assuming prices hold at that level, "we think the LNG business will grow at 
10% to 15% a year for the next decade. There is no other energy business 
growing at that pace," Mr. Eads said. 
In response, both El Paso and Williams Cos., a Tulsa, Oklahoma, natural-gas 
company, expect to revive mothballed terminals in the U.S. states of Georgia 
and Maryland in the next two years. El Paso's plans include a plant in a 
remote part of Mexico's Baja California that would feed gas markets in San 
Diego and Mexico, where gas demand also is growing rapidly. The company owns 
a site in Florida, has options on land in the Bahamas, is finalizing options 
on a site in the southern U.S. and is evaluating sites in Baja, San Diego and 
San Francisco. In addition, El Paso said it is building a terminal in 
Altamira, Mexico, to feed the Mexican market.
mark.palmer@enron.com, meredith.philipp@enron.com, steven.kean@enron.com, 