The utilization of FLNG in the Leviathan field can be seen as a negotiating tool rather than a dedicated solution. The feasibility of implementing FLNG in Israel's waters is indeed an issue that warrants critical examination. While the project financing market might harbor reservations about the viability of FLNG in such a politically charged region, it's noteworthy that FLNG offers a temporary show of progression, even if it's just "pretend-FLNG development" until there's a clearer path forward.

The method and route of export that BP-ADNOC would prefer are crucial factors. They have limited options: Cyprus requires significant investment and time, Turkey presents geopolitical concerns, and handing over negotiation power to Egypt isn't ideal. Hence, the narrative revolves around working on LNG solutions. Both the Israeli government and the involved corporations aren't in positions to outrightly dismiss FLNG due to the current lack of alternatives. Admitting the impracticalities of FLNG doesn't suit either party at the moment.

It's essential to consider how off-takers perceive buying from Israel and the market's response. Chevron's institutional stance as an FLNG player is worth noting. There's a noticeable absence of off-taker alliances, which lends credence to the idea that the promise of FLNG might be a temporary solution. Should a consortium provide an attractive offer, Leviathan's stakeholders would be compelled to heed market demands regarding purchase and delivery.

Where does Israel stand in granting export permissions for expanding towards FLNG, ELNG, or even Cyprus? This decision holds implications not just for the energy sector but also for Israel's diplomatic relations with its neighbors.

Aphrodite vs. Leviathan/Tamar

It's pivotal to highlight that Aphrodite's stagnation might have resulted from Noble, and subsequently Chevron, operating Israeli assets simultaneously. This dual operation possibly led to a prioritization of Israel's assets, inadvertently sidelining Aphrodite. While from an industrial perspective, this approach made sense – maximizing profits from one location before moving to another – Cyprus found itself in a conundrum. It was improbable that operators like Noble or Chevron would prioritize Aphrodite over Leviathan/Tamar.

As Israel navigates its offshore gas reserves' future, the FLNG option presents a convoluted tapestry of geopolitical, economic, and industrial considerations. Whether it remains a negotiating stick or evolves into a tangible solution will be contingent on multiple stakeholders' decisions, market dynamics, and, crucially, the ever-shifting sands of regional politics.

As Cyprus stands on the brink of significant energy development, its options will undoubtedly influence the direction of the Newmed deal. If Cyprus manages to create a diverse set of options and collaborations, it might challenge and potentially overhaul the FDP and the Aphrodite way of working, which has historically been the framework for energy extraction in the region.

At present, Cyprus seems to be playing a strategic game. The nation is evidently cooperating with existing agreements and stakeholders but is concurrently exploring alternatives. Such an approach is not only prudent but essential in a volatile energy and geopolitical climate.

It's worth noting that Cyprus is not resting on its laurels. The nation is actively engaging in discussions with various parties to broaden its energy prospects. This proactive approach signals Cyprus's intentions to not only secure its energy future but also to potentially reshape the region's energy dynamics.

The Newmed deal is a reflection of the complexities and opportunities in the Eastern Mediterranean's energy sector. Cyprus, with its evolving strategies and the potential to pivot the region's energy direction, remains a crucial player to watch.