A Russian deal, an Indian election, Libya & more

While the Europeans are busy squabbling about how to diversify their natural gas supplies and reduce reliance on Russia, the country's President Vladimir Putin hedged his bets earlier this week and reacted smartly by inking a 30-year supply deal with China.

No financial details were revealed and the two sides have been haggling over price for better parts of the last decade. However, yet again the Russian president has proved more astute than the duds in Brussels! Nevertheless, the Oilholic feels Russia would have had to make substantial compromises on price levels. By default, the Ukraine standoff has undoubtedly benefitted China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC), and Gazprom has a new gas hungry export destination.

Still there is some good news for the Europeans. Moody's believes that unlike in 2008-09, when gas prices spiked in the middle of the winter due to the cessation of Russian gas supplies to Europe via Ukraine, any temporary disruption via Ukraine would have only have a muted impact.

"This opinion factors in a combination of (1) lower reliance on Ukraine as a transit route, owing to alternative supply channels such as the Nord Stream pipeline which became operational in 2011; (2) low seasonal demand in Europe as winter has come to an end; and (3) gas inventories at high levels covering a full month of consumption," the ratings agency noted in a recent investment note.

Meanwhile, a political tsunami in India swept the country's Congress party led government out of power putting an end to years of fractious and economic stunting coalition politics in favour of a right-wing nationalist BJP government. The party's leader Narendra Modi delivered a thumping majority, which would give him the mandate to revive the country's economic fortunes without bothering to accommodate silly whims of coalition partners.

Modi was the chief minister of Gujarat, one of the country's most prosperous provinces and home to the largest in the refinery in the world in the shape of Jamnagar. In many analysts' eyes, regardless of his politics, the Prime Minister elect is a business friendly face.

Moody's analyst Vikas Halan expects that the new BJP-led government will increase natural gas prices, which would benefit upstream oil & gas companies and provide greater long term incentives for investment. Gas prices were originally scheduled to almost double in April, but the previous government put that increase on hold because of the elections.

This delay has meant that India's upstream companies have been losing large amounts of revenue, and a timely increase in gas prices would therefore cushion revenues and help revive interest in offshore exploration.

"A strong majority government would also increase the likelihood of structural reform in India's ailing power sector. Closer co-ordination between the central and state governments on clearances for mega projects and land use, two proposals outlined in the BJP's manifesto, would address investment delays," Halan added.

The Oilholic agrees with Moody's interpretation of the impact of BJP's victory, and with majority of the Indian masses who gave the Congress party a right royal kick. However, one is sad to see an end to the political career of Dr Manmohan Singh, a good man surrounded by rotten eggheads.

Over a distinguished career, Singh served as the governor of the Reserve Bank of India, and latterly as the country's finance minister credited with liberalising and opening up of the economy. From winning the Adam Smith Prize as a Cambridge University man, to finding his place in Time magazine's 100 most influential people in the world, Singh – whose signature appears on an older series of Indian banknotes (see right) – has always been, and will always be held in high regard.

Still seeing this sad end to a glittering career, almost makes yours truly wish Dr Singh had never entered the murky world of mainstream Indian politics in the first place. Also proves another point, that almost all political careers end in tears.

Away from Indian politics, Libyan oilfields of El Sharara, El Feel and Wafa, having a potential output level 500,000 barrels per day, are pumping out the crude stuff once again. However, this blogger is nonplussed because (a) not sure how long this will last before the next flare up and (b) unless Ras Lanuf and Sidra ports see a complete normalisation of crude exports, the market would remain sceptical. We're a long way away from the latter.

A day after the Libyan news emerged on May 14, the Brent forward month futures contract for June due for expiry the next day actually extended gains for a second day to settle 95 cents higher at US$110.19 a barrel, its highest settlement since April 24.

The July Brent contract, which became the forward-month contract on May 16, rose 77 cents to settle at US$109.31 a barrel. That's market scepticism for you right there? Let's face it; we have to contend with the Libyan risk remaining priced in for some time yet.

Just before taking your leave, a couple of very interesting articles to flag-up for you all. First off, here is Alan R. Elliott's brilliant piece in the Investor’s Business Daily comparing and contrasting fortunes of the WTI versus the LLS (Louisiana Light Sweet), and the whole waterborne crude pricing contrast Stateside.

Secondly, Claudia Cattaneo, a business columnist at The National Post, writes about UK political figures' recent visit to Canada and notes that if the Americans aren't increasing their take-up of Canada's energy resources, the British 'maybe' coming. Indeed, watch this space. That's all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com 

© Gaurav Sharma 2014. Photo: Pipeline, India © Cairn Energy

Saudi’s ‘crude’ range, Fitch on Abu Dhabi & more

Petroleum economists are wondering if we have crossed a gateway to crude chaos? The magnificent one pictured (left) here in Abu Dhabi's Capital Garden is certainly no metaphor for the situation. Egypt is burning, Libya is protesting and US/UK/NATO are threatening [almost direct] action against Syria.

Add the US Federal Reserve's current stance on QE to the geopolitical mix and you get a bullish Brent price. Yes, yes, that's all very predictable. But when bulls run amok, all attention usually turns to Aramco's response. It is a well known fact that the Saudis like the crude oil price to remain within what economists prefer to describe as the "middle" ground. (You want your principal export to be priced high enough to keep you ticking, but not so high as to drive importers towards either consuming less or seeking alternatives).

Investment house Jadwa's research often puts such a Saudi comfort zone in US$80-90 per barrel price range. The Oilholic has been banging on about the same range too, though towards the conservative lower end (in the region of $78-80). The Emiratis would also be pretty happy with that too; it's a price range most here say they’ve based their budget on as well.

A scheduled (or "ordinary") OPEC meeting is not due until December and in any case the Saudis care precious little about the cartel's quota. Hints about Saudi sentiment only emerge when one gets to nab oil minister Ali Al-Naimi and that too if he actually wants to say a thing or two. As both Saudi Arabia and UAE have spare capacity, suspicions about a joint move on working towards a "price band" have lurked around since the turn of 1990s and Gulf War I.

Aramco's response to spikes and dives in the past, for instance the highs and lows of 2007-08 and a spike during the Libyan crisis, bears testimony to the so called middle approach. Recent empirical evidence suggests that if the Brent price spikes above $120 per barrel, Aramco usually raises its output to cool the market.

Conversely, if it falls rapidly (or is perceived to be heading below three digits), Aramco stunts output to prop-up the price. The current one is a high-ish price band. Smart money would be on ADNOC and Aramco raising their output, however much the Iranians and Venezuelans squeal. For the record, this blogger feels it is prudent to mention that Aramco denies it has any such price band.

Away from pricing matters, Fitch Ratings has affirmed Abu Dhabi's long-term foreign and local currency Issuer Default Ratings (IDR) at 'AA' with a Stable Outlook. Additionally, the UAE's country ceiling is affirmed at 'AA+' (This ceiling, the agency says, also applies to Ras al-Khaimah).

In a statement, the agency said, oil rich Abu Dhabi has a strong sovereign balance sheet, both in absolute terms and compared to most 'AA' category peers. To put things into perspective, its sovereign external debt at end of Q4 2012 was just 1% of GDP, compared to Fitch's estimate of sovereign foreign assets of 153% of GDP. Only Kuwait has a stronger sovereign net foreign asset position within the GCC.

With estimated current account surpluses of around double digits forecast each year, sovereign net foreign assets of Abu Dhabi are forecast to rise further by end-2015. Fitch also estimates that the fiscal surplus, including ADNOC dividends and ADIA investment income, returned to double digits in 2012 and will remain of this order of magnitude for each year to 2015.

Furthermore, non-oil growth in the Emirate accelerated to 7.7%. This parameter also compares favourably to other regional oil-rich peers. Help provided by Abu Dhabi to other Emirates is likely to be discretionary. Overall, Fitch notes that Abu Dhabi has the highest GDP per capita of any Fitch-rated sovereign.

However, the Abu Dhabi economy is still highly dependent on oil, which accounted for around 90% of fiscal and external revenues and around half of GDP in 2012. As proven reserves are large, this blogger is not alone in thinking that there should be no immediate concerns for Abu Dhabi. Furthermore, Fitch's conjecture is based on the supposition of a Brent price in the region of $105 per barrel this year and $100 in 2014. No concerns there either!

Just a couple of footnotes before bidding farewell to Abu Dhabi – first off, and following on from what the Oilholic blogged about earlier, The National columnist Ebrahim Hashem eloquently explains here why UAE's reserves are so attractive for IOCs. The same newspaper also noted on Friday that regional/GCC inflation is here to stay and that the MENA region is going to face a North-South divide akin to the EU. The troubled "NA" bit is likely to rely on the resource rich "ME" bit.

Inflation certainly hasn’t dampened the UAE auto market for sure – one of the first to see the latest models arrive in town. To this effect, the Oilholic gives you two quirky glimpses of some choice autos on the streets of Abu Dhabi. The first (pictured above left) is the latest glammed-up Mini Cooper model outside National Bank of Abu Dhabi's offices, the second is proof that an Emirati sandstorm can make the prettiest automobile look rather off colour.

Finally, a Bloomberg report noting that Oil-rich Norway had gone from a European leader to laggard in terms of consumer spending made yours truly chuckle. Maybe they should reduce the monstrous price of their beer, water and food, which the Oilholic found to his cost in Oslo recently. That's all from Abu Dhabi, its time to bid the Emirate good-bye for destination Oman! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: Entrance to Capital Garden, Abu Dhabi, UAE Photo 2: Cars parked around Abu Dhabi, UAE © Gaurav Sharma, August, 2013.

On Abu Dhabi’s ‘spot’ chaps, ADNOC & INR

It's good to spot a traditional dhow on millionaire's yacht row at the marina here in Abu Dhabi. Though a millionaire or some tour company probably owns the thing! Switching tack from spot photography to spot crude oil trading – the community here in the UAE is in bullish mood, as is the national oil company – ADNOC.

With the spot Brent price in three figures, and above the US$110-level last time this blogger checked, few here (including the administration), have anything to worry about. The Oilholic has always maintained that a $80 per barrel plus price keeps most in OPEC, excluding Venezuela and Iran and including the Saudis and UAE happy. Short-term trend is bullish and Egyptian troubles, Libyan protests plus the US Federal Reserve's chatter will probably keep Brent there with the regional (DME Oman) benchmark following in its wake, a mere few dollars behind.

Furthermore, of the three traders the Oilholic has spoken to since arriving in the UAE, American shale oil is not much of a worry in this part of the world. "Has it dented the (futures) price?? An American bonanza remains…well an American bonanza. The output will be diverted eastwards to importing jurisdictions; they have in any case been major importers of ADNOC’s crude. What we are seeing at the moment are seasonal lows with refiners in India and China typically buying less as summer demand for distillate falls," says one.

In fact, on Wednesday, Oil Movements – a tanker traffic monitor and research firm – said just that. It estimates that OPEC members, with the exception of Angola and Ecuador, will curtail exports by 320k barrels per day or 1.3% of daily output, in the four weeks from August 10 to September 7.

Meanwhile, ADNOC is investing [and partnering] heavily as usual. Recently, it invited several IOCs to bid for the renewal of a shared licence to operate some of the Emirate's largest onshore oilfields. The concession (on Bu Hasa, Bab, Asab, Sahil and Shah oilfields), in which ADNOC holds a 60% stake, is operated by Abu Dhabi Company for Onshore Oil Operations (or ADCO) subsidiary.

Existing partners for the remaining stake include BP, Shell, ExxonMobil, Total and Partex O&G. All partners, except Partex have been invited to apply again, according to a source. Additionally, ADNOC has also issued an invitation to seek new partners. Anecdotal evidence here suggests Chevron is definitely among the interested parties.

The existing 75-year old concessions expire in January 2014, so ADNOC will have to move quickly to decide on the new line-up of IOCs. For once, its hand was forced as the UAE's Supreme Petroleum Council rejected an application for a one-year extension of the existing arrangement. Doubtless, Chinese, Korean and Indian NOCs are also lurking around. A chat with an Indian contact confirmed the same.

Whichever way you look at it – its probably one of the few new opportunities, not just in the UAE but the wider Middle East as well. Abu Dhabi is among the few places in the region where international companies would still be allowed to hold an equity interest; mostly a no-no elsewhere in the region. But in the UAE's defence, ever since the first concession was signed by this oil exporting jurisdiction in 1939 – it has always been open to foreign direct investment, albeit with caveats attached. ADNOC is also midway through a five-year $40 billion investment plan aimed at boosting oil and gas production and expanding/upgrading its petrochemical and refining facilities.

Meanwhile, the slump of Indian Rupee (INR) is headline news in the UAE, given its ties to the subcontinent and a huge Indian expat community here in Abu Dhabi. The slump could stoke inflation, according to the Reserve Bank of India, which is already struggling to curtail it. The central bank has tried everything from capital controls to trying to stabilise the INR for a good few months by hiking short-term interest rates. Not much seems to have gone its way (so far).

Furthermore, the INR's troubles have exposed indebtedness of the country's leading natural resources firms (and others) – most notably – Reliance, Vedanta and Essar. Last week, research conducted by Credit Suisse Securities noted that debt levels of top ten Indian business houses in the current fiscal year have gone up by 15% on an annualised basis.

With the currency in near freefall, the report specifically said Reliance ADA Group's gross debt was the highest, with Vedanta in second place among top 10 Indian groups. Draw your own conclusions. On a personal level, Mukesh Ambani (Chairman of Reliance Industries Ltd, the man who holds right to the world largest refinery complex and India's richest tycoon), has lost close to $5.6 billion of his wealth as the INR's plunge has continued, according to various published sources.

Few corporate jets less for him then but a much bigger headache for India Inc, one supposes. If the worried lot fancy a pipe or two, then the "Smokers Centre" (pictured right) on the City's Hamdan Street is a quirky old place to pick up a few. More generally, should one fancy a puff of any description shape, size or type then Abu Dhabi is the city for you. What's more, the stuff is half the price compared to EU markets! For the sake of balance, this humble blogger is officially a non-smoker and has not been asked to flag this up by the tobacco lobby!

Just one more footnote to the INR business, Moody's says the credit quality of state-owned oil marketing and upstream oil companies in India will likely weaken for the rest of the fiscal year (April 2013 to March 2014), if the Indian government continues to ask them, as it did in April-June, to share a higher burden of the country's fuel subsidies.

To put this into context - the INR has depreciated by about 10% and the crude oil prices have increased by about 6% since the beginning of June, as of August 20. Moody's projections for the subsidy total assumes that there will be no material changes in either the INR exchange rate or the crude oil price for the rest of the fiscal year (both are already out of the window). That's all from Abu Dhabi for the moment folks. Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com
 

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: A dhow on the Abu Dhabi marina, UAE. Photo 2: Smokers Centre, Hamdan Street, Abu Dhabi, UAE © Gaurav Sharma, August, 2013.

Crude bits of the ‘Lough Erne Declaration'

As predicted, Russia and the West's differing positions for and against supporting the Assad regime in Syria threatened to overshadow everything else at the G8 Summit here in Lough Erne Resort, Enniskillen, Northern Ireland but mercifully didn’t.

The leaders of the group of eight leading industrialised nations, meant to promote trade and dialogue at this forum, did make some progress and provided lots of hot air…er sorry…soundbites. The outcome of talks was grandiosely dubbed the 'The Lough Erne Declaration'. But before that, the European Union and the US finally agreed to 'start talks' on a new trade pact while not losing sight (or to the detriment) of ongoing negotiations with Canada.

The trade talks had been under threat from a potential French veto, but EU ministers agreed to their demand "or exclusion of the film and television industry from the talks". On to crude notes, the leaders thankfully did not indulge in silly talk of doing something to 'bring down the price of oil' (and leave it to market forces) just because the Brent contract is at US$100-plus levels.

 

There were also no wide-ranging discussions about price levels of crude benchmarks, apart from individual non-Russian grumbling that they should be lower. More importantly, the G8 thinks the state of their respective economies would hopefully act as a correcting mechanism on prices in any case. The leaders agreed that global economic prospects "remain weak".

 

Ironically, just as US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke was issuing soundings stateside about easing-up on quantitative easing, they noted that downside risks have reduced thanks in part to "significant policy actions taken in the US, euro area and Japan, and to the resilience of major developing and emerging market economies".

 

The leaders said most financial markets had seen marked gains as a result. "However, this optimism is yet to be translated fully into broader improvements in economic activity and employment in most advanced economies. In fact, prospects for growth in some regions have weakened since the Camp David summit." You bet they have!

 

The Lough Erne declaration had one very significant facet with implications for the oil and gas industry along with mining. The G8 leaders said developing countries should have corporate identification data and the capacity to collect the taxes owed to them and other countries had "a duty to help them".

 

The move specifically targets extractive industries. It follows revelations that many mining companies use complex ownership structures in the Netherlands and Switzerland to avoid paying taxes on the natural resources they extract in developing countries. Hence, the G8 agreed that mining companies should disclose all the payments they make, and that "minerals should not be plundered from conflict zones".

 

Speaking after the declaration was signed, UK Prime Minister David Cameron said, "We agreed that oil, gas and mining companies should report what they pay to governments, and that governments should publish what they receive, so that natural resources are a blessing and not a curse." Good luck with that Sir!

 

And that dear reader is that! Here are the links to this blogger's reports for CFO World on tax, trade, economy and US President Barack Obama’s soundbites (to students in Belfast), should they interest you. Also on a lighter note, here is a report from The Sun about Obama's idiotic gaffe of calling UK Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne – "Jeffery" Osborne on more than one occasion and his bizarre explanation for it.

 

So the leaders' motorcades have left, the ministerial delegations are out and the police – who did a great job – are packing it in. Out of the eight leaders and EU officials in Lough Erne, the Oilholic felt Canadian PM Stephen Harper looked the most relaxed while German Chancellor Angela Merkel looked least cranky among her European peers. Guess they would be, as both economies are the only ones in the G8 still rated as AAA by all three ratings agencies.

 

That's all from Enniskillen folks! Should you wish to read the so called Lough Erne Declaration in full, it can be downloaded here. Despite the pressures of reporting, the buzz of a G8 Summit and the hectic schedule, yours truly could not have left without visiting Enniskillen Castle (above right) in this lovely town full of welcoming, helpful people with big smiles.

The location's serenity is a marked contrast from the Russians versus West goings-on at Lough Erne. It's a contrasting memory worth holding on to. And on Syria, both sides agreed to disagree, but expressed the urgency to hold a 'peace summit.' Sigh! Not another summit? Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

 

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com
 

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: Lough Erne Resort, Enniskillen, Northern Ireland © Invest NI. Photo 2: Enniskillen Castle, Northern Ireland © Gaurav Sharma, June 18, 2013.

UK Oil & Gas Inc. - The Thatcher Years!

The Oilholic has patiently waited for the fans and despisers of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to quieten down, in wake of her death on April 8, 2013, before giving his humble take on what her premiership did (or in many cases didn’t) for the UK oil and gas Inc. and what she got in return.

 

Her influence on the North Sea exploration and production certainly got a mention in passing in all the tributes and brickbats thrown at the Iron Lady, the longest serving (1979-1990) and only female British Prime Minister. The world’s press ranging from The Economist to the local paper in her former parliamentary constituency – The Hendon & Finchley Times (see covers below) – discussed the legacy of the Iron Lady; that legacy is ‘cruder’ than you think.

 

In the run-up to Thatcher's all-but-in-name state funeral on April 17, the British public was bombarded with flashbacks of her time in the corridors of power. In one of the video runs, yours truly glanced at archived footage of Thatcher at a BP production facility and that said it all. Her impact on the industry and the industry’s impact itself on her premiership were profound to say the least.

 

Academic Peter R. Odell, noted at the time in his book  Oil and World Power (c1986) that, “Countries as diverse as Finland, France, Italy, Austria, Spain, Norway and Britain had all decided to place oil partly, at least, in the public sector.” A later footnote observes, “Britain’s Conservative government, under Mrs. Thatcher, subsequently decided [in 1983] to ‘privatize’ the British National Oil Corporation (BNOC) created by an earlier Labour administration.”

 

The virtue of private free enterprise got instilled into the UK oil and gas industry in general and the North Sea innovators in particular thanks to Thatcher. But to say that the industry somehow owed the Iron Lady a debt of gratitude would be a travesty. Rather, the industry repaid that debt not only in full, but with interest.

 

Just as Thatcher was coming to power, more and more of the crude stuff was being sucked out of the North Sea with UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) being much richer in those days than it certainly is these days. The UK Treasury, under her hawk-eyed watch, was quite simply raking it in. According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) data, government revenue from the oil and gas industry rose from £565 million in fiscal year 1978-79 to £12.04 billion in 1984-85. That is worth over three times as much in 2012 real-terms value, according to a guesstimate provided by a contact at Barclays Capital.

 

Throughout the 1980s, the Iron Lady made sure that the revenue from the [often up to] 90% tax on North Sea oil and gas exploration and production was used as a funding source to balance the economy and pay the costs of economic reform. Over three decades on from the crude boom of the 1980s, Brits do wish she had examined, some say even adopted, the Norwegian model.

 

That she privatised the BNOC does not irk the Oilholic one bit, but that not even a drop of black gold and its proceeds – let alone a full blown Norwegian styled sovereign fund – was put aside for a rainy day is nothing short of short-termism or short-sightedness; quite possibly both. One agrees that both macroeconomic and demographical differences between Norway and the UK complicate the discussion. This humble blogger doubts if the thought of creating a sovereign fund didn’t cross the Iron Lady’s mind.

 

But unquestionably, as oil and gas revenue was helping in feeding the rising state benefits bill at the time – all Thatcher saw in Brent, Piper and Cormorant fields were Petropounds to balance the books. And, if you thought the ‘crude’ influence ended in the sale of BNOC, privatisation drives or channelling revenue for short-term economic rebalancing, then think again. Crude oil, or rather a distillate called diesel, came to Thatcher’s aid in her biggest battle in domestic politics – the Miners’ Strike of 1984.

 

Pitting her wits against Arthur Scargill, the National Union of Mineworkers’ (NUM) hardline, stubborn, ultra-left leader at the time, she prevailed. In March 1984, the National Coal Board (NCB) proposed to close 20 of the 174 state-owned mines resulting in the loss of 20,000 jobs. Led by Scargill, two-thirds of the country's miners went on strike and so began the face-off.

 

But Thatcher, unlike her predecessors, was ready for a prolonged battle having learnt her lesson in an earlier brief confrontation with the miners and knew their union’s clout full well based on past histories. This time around, the government had stockpiled coal to ensure that power plants faced no shortages as was the case with previous confrontations.

 

Tongue-tied in his vanity, Scargill had not only missed the pulse of the stockpiling drive but also failed to realise that many UK power plants had switched to diesel as a back-up. Adding to the overall idiocy of the man, he decided to launch the strike in the summer of 1984, when power consumption is lower, than in the winter.

 

Furthermore, he refused to hold a ballot on the strike, after losing three previous ballots on a national strike (in January 1982, October 1982 and March 1983). The strike was declared illegal and Thatcher eventually won as the NUM conceded a year later in March 1985 without any sizable concessions but with its member having borne considerable hardships. The world was moving away from coal, to a different kind of fossil fuel and Thatcher grasped it better than most. That the country was a net producer of crude stuff at the time was a bonanza; the Treasury’s to begin with as she saw it.

 

The Iron Lady left office with an ‘ism’ in the shape of 'Thatcherism' and bred 'Thatcherites' espousing free market ideas and by default making capitalism the dominant, though recently beleaguered, economic system of our time. Big Bang, the day [October 27, 1986] the London Stock Exchange's rules changed, following deregulation of the financial markets, became the cornerstone of her economic policy.

 

In this world there are no moral absolutes. So the Oilholic does not accept the rambunctious arguments offered by left wingers that she made ‘greed’ acceptable or that the Big Bang caused the global financial crisis of 2007-08. Weren’t militant British unions who, for their own selfish odds and ends, held the whole country to ransom throughout the 1970s (until Thatcher decimated them), greedy too? If the Big Bang was to blame for a global financial crisis, so was banking deregulation in the UK in 1997 (and elsewhere around that time) when she was not around.

 

Equally silly, are the fawning accolades handed out by the right wingers; many of whom – and not the British public – were actually instrumental in booting her out of office and some of whom were her colleagues at the time. Let the wider debate about her legacy be where it is, but were it not for the UK oil and gas Inc., there would have been no legacy. Luck played its part, as it so often does in the lives of great leaders. As The Economist noted:

 

“She was also often outrageously lucky: lucky that the striking miners were led by Arthur Scargill, a hardline Marxist; lucky that the British left fractured and insisted on choosing unelectable leaders; lucky that [Argentine] General Galtieri decided to invade the Falkland Islands when he did; lucky that she was a tough woman in a system dominated by patrician men (the wets never knew how to cope with her); lucky in the flow of North Sea oil; and above all lucky in her timing. The post-war consensus was ripe for destruction, and a host of new forces, from personal computers to private equity, aided her more rumbustious form of capitalism.”

 

They say that the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez stage-managed 'Chavismo' and bred 'Chavistas' from the proceeds of black gold. The Oilholic says 'Thatcherism' and 'Thatcherites' have a ‘crude’ dimension too. Choose whatever evidence you like – statistical, empirical or anecdotal – crude oil bankrolled Thatcherism in its infancy. That is the unassailable truth and that’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

 

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com
 

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: Baroness Margaret Thatcher’s funeral cortege with military honours, April 17, 2013 © Gaurav Sharma. Photo 2: Front page of the Hendon & Finchley Times, April 11, 2013. Photo 3: Front cover of the The Economist, April 13, 2013.

Crude thoughts, an event, few articles & a lecture!

Brent’s decline continues with the forward month futures contract now well and truly below the US$110 per barrel level. In fact, when the Oilholic last checked, a price of US$108.41 was flashing on the ticker. Given that over the past seven days – OPEC, EIA and IEA – have all come out with bearish reports, the current price level should hardly be a surprise.

 

Additionally, both OPEC and IEA appear to be in broad agreement that overall concerns about economic growth in the US and the Eurozone will continue to persist over the short term at the very least. As if that wasn’t enough, the US dollar has reached a seven-month high against a basket of currencies, not least the pound sterling!

 

At such points in recent trading history, geopolitics always lends support to the oil price. Yet further evidence is emerging about the oil & gas community largely regarding the risk premium to be neutral, a theme which this blogger has consistently stressed on since September last year. Many delegates at the recently concluded International Petroleum Week (IP Week) in London, a signature European event, expressed pretty much the same sentiments.

 

Rather than relying on the Oilholic’s anecdotal evidence, here’s an observation from Société Générale analyst Michael Wittner who wrote in an investment note that, “On the geopolitical front, there seemed to be a sort of fatigue (at the IP Week), if not boredom, with the various issues and countries. In addition to Syria and Iran, there was talk about risks in Iraq and Nigeria, and even Chinese-Japanese tensions. Given recent events in Algeria, Egypt, and Mali, we were surprised at how little concern there was about North Africa.”

 

“All agreed that the geopolitical elephant in the room was still Iran, but even here, the fatigue was evident. People were well aware of Israel’s late spring/early summer “deadline”, but they were not excited about it. Some pointed to higher Saudi spare capacity (after recent cuts) and much higher pipeline capacity that could be used to avoid the Straits of Hormuz. Others simply thought that, posturing aside, there was little real appetite for a war against Iran, and that an Iranian bomb was inevitable,” he wrote further. Need we say more?

 

So in summation – tepid crude demand plus fatigued risk premium equals to no short term hope for the bulls! But at least there’s hope for the Brent-WTI spread to narrow, with the former falling and the latter rising on the back of the supply glut at Cushing, Oklahoma showing signs of abating.

 

Away from pricing matters, given that yours truly has been travelling a lot within good old England these past few weeks, there has also been plenty of time to do some reading up on trains! Four interesting articles came up while the Oilholic was experiencing the joys (or otherwise) of British railways.

 

First off, the Wall Street Journal’s Jerry A. Dicolo screams: “Brent barrels to prominence: European oil benchmark poised to overtake WTI as a global gauge.” The Oilholic has some news for the WSJ – Er…Brent is not ‘poised’ to overtake WTI as a global gauge, it has already overtaken it in terms of market sentiment! This blog first mulled the subject as far back as May 2010! Since then, even the EIA has decided to adopt Brent as a benchmark that’s more reflective of global conditions.

 

The second interesting piece of reading material yours truly encountered was a republished Bloomberg wire copy that carried feedback from an Indian refiner. In it, he suggested that the country’s refiners may be forced to halt purchases of Iranian crude as local insurers refuse to cover the risks for any Indian refinery using the Islamic Republic’s oil.

 

Bloomberg cites a certain P.P. Upadhya, Managing Director of the Mangalore Refinery in Southern India as having said, “There’s a problem with getting insurance for refineries processing Iranian oil. If there’s no clarity very soon, we all have to stop buying from Iran or risk operating the refineries without insurance.” Looks like the squeeze on Iran is going into overdrive!

 

Moving on to the third article, here is The Economist's sound take on the late Hugo Chavez’s rotten economic legacy. And finally, a Reuters’ exclusive would have you believe we Brits are planning to bid for US gas to be imported to our shores.

 

An abundance of gas, courtesy of the country’s shale bonanza has certainly lent credence to the US’ gas exporting potential. One would think if the US were to export gas, it would one fine day make its way to the UK. However, a “source” spoken to by Reuters seems to suggest that day is not that far away.

 

Speaking of shale, the Oilholic had the pleasure of listening to a brilliant lecture on the subject from Prof. Paul Stevens, the veteran energy economist and Chatham House fellow. Delivering the Institution of Engineering and Technology’s Clerk Maxwell Lecture for 2013, Prof. Stevens set about exploding the myth of a shale gas revolution taking place in Europe anytime soon.

 

He joked that North Dakota might become the next member of OPEC, but one thing is for certain Poland and other European shale enthusiasts are not getting there any time soon. Apart from the usual concerns, often mulled over by the Oilholic, such as jurisdictional prospection moratoriums and population density, pipeline access, environmental regulations etc. being very different between the US and Europe, the good professor pointed out a very crucial point.

 

“Shale rock formation in Europe is very different from what it is in North America. When ExxonMobil was disappointed in Poland, it was not for want of trying. Rather US technology was found lacking when it came to Polish geology. There is no one size fits all! The American shale revolution got where it is today through massive investment and commitment towards research and development (and over two decades of perseverance). I don’t see that level of commitment in Europe,” he said.

 

Speaking to the Oilholic, following his lecture, Prof. Stevens said the export of US gas to the UK was plausible, but that Asia was a much more natural export market for the Americans. “Plus, let’s not forget that the moment US exports start to rise meaningfully, there is always a chance the likes of Congressman Ed Markey might take a nationalistic tone and try to stunt them,” he added.

 

Quite true, after all we got a glimpse of Markey’s intellect via his ‘Bolshoi’ Petroleum remark! That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
 

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com
 

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Sullom Voe Terminal, UK © BP Plc

Brent’s liquidity, Nexen, 'crude' Vancouver & more

Last Friday, the Brent forward month futures price plummeted to US$110.65 per barrel thereby losing all of the gains it made in 2013. The WTI price declined in near furious tandem to US$91.92; the  benchmark's lowest intraday price since January 4. An Italian political stalemate and US spending cuts enforced by Congressional gridlock have unleashed the bearish trends. Quite frankly, the troublesome headwinds aren’t going anywhere, anytime soon.

Prior to the onset of recent bearish trends, Bank of America said the upper limit for Brent crude will rise from US$140 per barrel this year to US$175 in 2017 because of constraints on supply. It added that WTI may slip to “US$50 within the next two years” amid booming North American supply. Meanwhile, ratings agency Moody’s expects strong global crude prices in the near term and beyond, with a continued US$15 per barrel premium in favour of Brent versus WTI over 2013.

Moody's still assumes that Brent crude will sell for an average US$100 per barrel in 2013, US$95 in 2014, and US$90 in the medium term, beyond 2014. For WTI, the agency leaves its previous assumptions unchanged at US$85 in 2013, 2014 and thereafter. Away from the fickle pricing melee, there was a noteworthy development last month in terms of Brent’s liquidity profile as a benchmark, which is set to be boosted.

On February 19, Platts proposed the introduction of a quality premium for Ekofisk and Oseberg crudes; two of the four grades constituting the Dated Brent marker. A spokesperson said the move would increase transparency and trading volumes in Dated Brent. The proposal came a mere fortnight after Shell’s adjustments to its trading contract for three North Sea blends including Brent.

The oil major said it would change its contract (SUKO 90) for buying and selling to introduce a premium for the delivery of higher quality Brent, Ekofisk and Oseberg grades. Previously, it only used the Forties grade which was typically the cheapest Brent blend and thus used to price the benchmark by default. BP has also agreed to Shell’s amended pricing proposals in principle.

The Oilholic thinks it is prudent to note that even though Platts is the primary provider of price information for North Sea crude(s), actual contracts such as Shell’s SUKO 90 are the industry’s own model. So in more ways than one, a broad alignment of the thinking of both parties (and BP) is a positive development. Platts is requesting industry feedback on the move by March 10 with changes being incorporated with effect from shipments in May.

However, there are some subtle differences. While Shell has proposed an inclusion of Brent, Platts is only suggesting premiums for Oseberg and Ekofisk grades. According to published information, the oil major, with BP’s approval, has proposed a 25% premium for Brent and Oseberg based on their difference to the Forties differential, and a 50% premium for Ekofisk.

But Platts, is seeking feedback on recommending a flat 50% premium for both Oseberg and Ekofisk. Nonetheless, at a time of a dip in North Sea production, a change of pricing status quo aimed at boosting liquidity ought to be welcomed. Furthermore, there is evidence of activity picking up in the UK sector of the North Sea, with Oil and Gas UK (OGUK), a body representing over 320 operators in the area, suggesting last month that investment was at a 30-year high.

OGUK said companies invested £11.4 billion in 2012 towards North Sea prospection and the figure is expected to rise to £13 billion this year. It credited UK Chancellor George Osborne’s new tax relief measures announced last year, which allowed gas fields in shallow waters to be exempt from a 32% tax on the first £500 million of income, as a key factor.

However, OGUK warned that reserves currently coming onstream have not been fully replaced with new discoveries. That is hardly surprising! In fact, UK production fell to the equivalent of 1.55 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2012, down by 14% from 2011 and 30% from 2010. While there may still be 24 billion barrels of oil to be found in the North Sea, the glory days are not coming back. Barrel burnt per barrel extracted or if you prefer Petropounds spent for prospection are only going to rise.

From the North Sea’s future, to the future of a North Sea operator – Canada’s Nexen – the acquisition of which by China’s state-owned CNOOC was finally approved on February 26. It took seven long months for the US$15.1 billion takeover to reach fruition pending regulatory approval in several jurisdictions, not least in Canada.

It was announced that shareholders of the Calgary, Alberta-based Nexen would get US$27.50 in cash for each share, but the conditions imposed by Canadian (and US) regulators for the deal to win approval were not disclosed. More importantly, the Harper administration said that CNOOC-Nexen was the last deal of its kind that the Canadian government would approve.

So it is doubtful that a state-controlled oil company would be taking another majority stake in the oil sands any time soon. The Nexen acquisition makes CNOOC a key operator in the North Sea, along with holdings in the Gulf of Mexico and West Africa, Middle East and of course Canada's Long Lake oil sands project (and others) in Alberta.

Meanwhile, Moody’s said the Aa3 ratings and stable outlooks of CNOOC Ltd and CNOOC Group will remain unchanged after the acquisition of Nexen. The agency would also continue to review for upgrade the Baa3 senior unsecured rating and Ba1 subordinated debt rating of Nexen.

Moving away from Nexen but sticking with the region, the country’s Canadian Business magazine asks, “Is Vancouver the new Calgary?”  (Er…we’re not talking about changing weather patterns here). The answer, in 'crude' terms, is a firm “Yes.” The Oilholic has been pondering over this for a good few years. This humble blogger’s research between 2010 and present day, both in Calgary and Vancouver, has always indicated a growing oil & gas sector presence in BC.

However, what is really astonishing is the pace of it all. Between the time that the Oilholic mulled about the issue last year and February 2013, Canadian Business journalist Blair McBride writes that five new oil & gas firms are already in Vancouver. Reliable anecdotal evidence from across the US border in general, and the great state of Texas in particular, suggests more are on their way! Chevron is a dead certain, ExxonMobil is likely to follow.

One thing is for certain, they’re going to need a lot more direct flights soon between Vancouver International and Houston’s George Bush Intercontinental airport other than the solitary Continental Airlines route. Hello, anyone from Air Canada reading this post?

Continuing with corporate news, Shell has announced the suspension of its offshore drilling programme in the Arctic for the rest of 2013 in order to give it time to “ensure the readiness of equipment and people.” It was widely expected that prospection in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas off Alaska would be paused while the US Department of Justice is looking into safety failures.

Shell first obtained licences in 2005 to explore the Arctic Ocean off the Alaskan coastline. Since then, £3 billion has been spent with two exploratory wells completed during the short summer drilling season last year. However, it does not mask the fact that the initiative has been beset with problems including a recent fire on a rig.

Meanwhile, Repsol has announced the sale of its LNG assets for a total of US$6.7 billion to Shell. The deal includes Repsol’s minority stakes in Atlantic LNG (Trinidad & Tobago), Peru LNG and Bahia de Bizkaia Electricidad (BBE), as well as the LNG sale contracts and time charters with their associated loans and debt. It’s a positive for Repsol’s credit rating and Shell’s gas reserves.

As BP’s trial over the Gulf of Mexico oil spill began last month, Moody’s said the considerable financial uncertainty will continue to weigh on the company’s credit profile until the size of the ultimate potential financial liabilities arising from the April 2010 spill is known.

Away from the trial, the agency expects BP's cash flows to strengthen from 2014 onwards as the company begins to reap benefits of the large roster of upstream projects that it is working on, many of which are based in high-margin regions. “This would help strengthen the group's credit metrics relative to their weaker positioning expected in 2013,” Moody’s notes.

One final bit of corporate news, Vitol – the world's largest oil trading company –  has posted a 2% rise in its 2012 revenue to US$303 billion even though volumes traded fell and profit margins remained under pressure for much of the year. While not placing too much importance on the number, it must be noted that a US$300 billion-plus revenue is more than what Chevron managed and a first for the trading company.

However, it is more than safe to assume Chevron’s profits would be considerably higher than Vitol’s. Regrettably, other than relying on borderline gossip, the Oilholic cannot conduct a comparison via published sources. That’s because unlike listed oil majors like Chevron, private trading houses like Vitol don’t release their profit figures.

That’s all for the moment folks. But on a closing note, this blogger would like to flag-up research by the UK’s Nottingham Trent University which suggests that Libya could generate approximately five times the amount of energy from solar power than it currently produces in crude oil!

The university’s School of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment found that if the North African country – which is estimated to be 88% desert terrain – used 0.1% of its landmass to harness solar power, it could produce almost 7 million crude oil barrels worth of energy every day. Currently, Libya produces around 1.41 million bpd. Food for thought indeed! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: Oil tanker, English Bay, BC, Canada. Photo 2: Downtown Vancouver, BC, Canada © Gaurav Sharma

Banality of forecasts predicated on short-termism

Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! So the Brent crude price sank to a weekly loss last week; the first such instance in roughly a month. Is the Oilholic surprised? Not one jot. What yours truly is surprised about is that people are surprised! One sparrow does not make spring nor should we say one set of relatively positive Chinese data, released earlier this month, implies bullish trends are on a firm footing.

The Chinese news was used as a pretext by some to go long on the Brent forward month futures contract for March as it neared its closure (within touching distance of US$120 per barrel). And here we are a few days later with the Brent April contract dipping to a February 15 intraday price of US$116.83 on the back of poor industrial data from the US.

 

The briefest of spikes of the week before was accompanied by widespread commentary on business news channels that the price would breach and stay above the US$120 mark, possibly even rise above US$125. Now with the dip of the past week with us, the TV networks are awash with commentary about a realistic possibility that Brent may plummet to US$80 per barrel. You cannot but help laughing when spike n’ dips, as seen over the past few weeks, trigger a topsy-turvy muddle of commentators’ quotes.

 

Sometimes the Oilholic thinks many in the analyst community only cater to the spread betters! Look at the here, the now and have a flutter! Don’t put faith in the wider real economy, don’t examine the macroeconomic environment, just give a running commentary on price based on the news of the day! Nothing wrong with that, absolutely nothing – except don’t try to pass it off as some sort of a science! This blogger has consistently harped on – even at times sounding like a broken record to those who read his thoughts often – that the risk premium provided by the Iranian nuclear standoff is broadly neutral.

 

So much so, that the reason the Brent price has not fallen below US$100 is because the floor is actually being provided by the Iranian situation on a near constant basis. But that’s where it ends unless the country is attacked by Israel; the likelihood of which has receded of late. Syria’s trouble has implications in terms of its civil war starting a broader regional melee, but its production is near negligible in terms of crude supply-side arguments.

 

Taking all factors into account, as the Oilholic did last month, it is realistic to expect a Brent price in the range of US$105 to US$115. To cite a balanced quote, Han Pin Hsi, the global head of commodities research at Standard Chartered bank, said that oil should be trading at US$100 per barrel at the present moment in time were supply-demand fundamentals the only considering factors.

 

In recent research, Hsi has also noted that relatively lower economic growth as well as the current level of tension in the Middle East has already been “priced in” to the Brent price by the wider market. Unless either alters significantly, he sees an average price of US$111 per barrel for 2013.

 

Additionally, analysts at Société Générale note that along with the usual suspects – sorry bullish factors – now priced in, Brent could see some retracement on profit-taking, though “momentum and sentiment are still bullish”. The French bank’s analyst, Mike Wittner, notes that just as the Saudis have (currently) cut production, concerns over prices being “too high” will cause them to increase production. “In short, our view is that Brent has already priced in all the positive news, and it looks and feels toppy to us,” he wrote in an investment note. “Toppy” – like the expression (slang for markets reaching unstable highs whereupon a decline can be expected if not imminent)!

 

On a related note, in its short-term energy outlook released on February 12, the EIA estimates the spread between WTI and Brent spot price could be reduced by around 50% by 2014. The US agency estimates that the WTI will average US$93 and US$92 in 2013 and 2014 respectively, down from US$94 in 2012. It expects Brent to trade at US$109 in 2013 and edge lower to US$101 in 2014, down from the 2012 average of US$112.

 

Elsewhere in the report, the EIA estimates that the total US crude oil production averaged 6.4 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2012, an increase of 0.8 million bpd over 2011. The agency’s projection for domestic crude oil production was revised to 7.3 million bpd in 2013 and 7.8 million bpd in 2014.

 

Meanwhile, money managers have raised bullish positions on Brent crude to their highest level in two years for a third successive week. The charge, as usual, is lead by hedge funds, according to data published by ICE Futures Europe for the week ended February 5.

 

Net-long positions, in futures and options combined, outnumbered net-short positions by 192,195 lots versus a figure of 179,235 the week before; a rise of 6.9% according to ICE’s latest Commitment of Traders report. It brings net-long positions to the highest level since January 2011, the month the current data series began.

 

On the other hand, net-short positions by producers, merchants, processors and users of the crude stuff outnumbered bullish positions by 249,350, compared with 235,348 a week earlier. It is the eighth successive weekly increase in their net-short position, ICE Futures Europe said.

 

Moving away from pricing matters, a few corporate snippets worth flagging up - starting with Gazprom. In a call to investors and analysts earlier this month, the Russian state energy giant finally appeared to be facing-up to greater competition in the European gas market as spot prices and more flexible pricing strategies from Norway’s Statoil and the Qataris put Gazprom’s defence of its conventional oil-indexation pricing policy to the test.

 

Gazprom ceded market share in defence of prices last year, although it did offer rebates to selected customers. However, it appears to be taking a slightly different line this year and aims to cede more ground on prices in a push to bag a higher market share and prop up its overall gas exports by volume.

 

Gazprom revealed that it had paid out US$2.7 billion in 2012 in refunds to customers in Europe, with the company planning another US$4.7 billion in potential price cuts this year in order to make its pipeline gas prices competitive with spot prices and incentivise European customers to make more voluminous gas purchases.

 

Commenting on the move, analysts at IHS CERA noted, “Increasing gas sales volumes by retaining the oil-indexation pricing strategy and then retroactively offering price discounts may be a difficult proposition, however, particularly if Ukraine, Gazprom’s largest gas export customer, continues to reduce its Russian gas purchases in response to Gazprom’s refusal to cut prices.”

 

“Rather than continuing to react to changing market conditions by offering lower prices to customers, Gazprom may need to take a more proactive approach to reducing its gas export prices in order to incentivise customers to buy more gas from the Russian gas firm this year,” they concluded.

 

Finally, TAQA, the Abu Dhabi National Energy Company, said in a statement over the weekend that a new oilfield has been discovered in the North Sea. It reported that two columns of oil have been found since drilling began in November at the Darwin field, about 80 miles north-east of the Shetlands.

 

The field is a joint venture between the Abu Dhabi state-owned company and Fairfield Energy. TAQA acquired some of BP’s North Sea assets for US$1.1 billion in November 2012. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

 

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo: Andrew Rig, North Sea © BP.  Graph: World crude oil benchmarks © Société Générale Cross Asset Research February 14, 2013.

Brent’s ‘nine-month high’, Aubrey, BP & more

Oh boy, what one round of positive data, especially from China, does to the oil market! The Brent forward month futures contract for March is within touching distance of a US$120 per barrel price and the bulls are out in force. Last Friday’s intraday price of US$119.17 was a nine-month high; a Brent price level last seen in May 2012. The cause – and you have heard this combination before – was healthy economic data from China, coupled with Syrian turmoil and an Iranian nuclear stalemate.

 

The Oilholic has said so before, and will say it again – the last two factors touted by market commentators have been broadly neutral in terms of their impact for the last six months. It is the relatively good macroeconomic news from China which is principally behind the rally that nearly saw the Brent price breach the US$120 level.

 

The bull-chatter is already in full force. In a note to clients, Goldman Sachs advised them last week to maintain a net long position in the S&P GSCI Brent Crude Total Return Index. The investment bank believes this rally is "less driven by supply shocks and instead by improving demand."

 

"Global oil demand has surprised to the upside in recent months, consistent with the pick-up in economic activity," the bank adds in an investment note. Really? This soon – on one set of data? One thing is for sure, with many Asian markets shut for the Chinese New Year, at least trading volumes will be lighter this week.

 

Nonetheless, the ‘nine-month high’ also crept into the headline inflation debate in the UK where the CPI rate has been flat at 2.7% since October, but commentators reckon the oil spike may nudge it higher. Additionally, the Brent-WTI spread is seen widening yet again towards the US$25 per barrel mark. On a related note, Enterprise Product Partners said that capacity on its Seaway pipeline to the US Gulf of Mexico coast from Cushing, Oklahoma will remain limited until much later this year.

 

Moving away from pricing, news arrived end-January that the inimitable Aubrey McClendon will soon vacate the office of the CEO of Chesapeake Energy. It followed intense scrutiny over the last nine months about revelations, which surfaced in May, regarding his borrowings to finance personal stakes in company wells.

 

As McClendon announced his departure on January 29, the company’s board reiterated that it had found no evidence to date of improper conduct by the CEO. McClendon will continue in his post until a successor is found which should be before April 1st – the day he is set to retire. The announcement marks a sad and unspectacular exit for the great pioneer who co-founded and led Chesapeake Energy from its 1989 inception in Oklahoma City and has been a colourful character in the oil and gas business ever since.

 

Whatever the circumstances of his exit may be, let us not forget that before the so called ‘shale gale’ was blowing, it was McClendon and his ilk who first put their faith in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. The rest, and US’ near self-sufficiency in gas supplies, is history.

Meanwhile, BP has been in the crude news for a number of reasons. First off, an additional US$34 billion in claims filed against BP by four US states earlier this month have provided yet another hurdle for the oil giant to overcome as it continues to address the aftermath of the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

 

However, Fitch Ratings not believe that the new round of claims is a game changer. In fact the agency does not think that any final settlement is likely to be enough to interfere with BP's positive medium term credit trajectory. The latest claims come on top of the US$58 billion maximum liability calculated by Fitch. If realised, the cost of the spill could rise up to as much as US$92 billion.

 

The agency said the new claims should be put in the context of an asset sale programme that has raised US$38 billion. “This excludes an additional US$12 billion in cash to come from the sale of TNK-BP this year – upside in our analysis because we gave BP no benefit for the TNK-BP stake. BP had US$19 billion of cash on its balance sheet at 31 December 2012. That is after it has already paid US$38 billion in settlements or into escrow,” it added.

 

Away from the spill, the company announced that it had started production from new facilities at its Valhall field in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea on January 26 with an aim of producing up to 65,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day in the second half of 2013. Valhall's previous output averaged about 42,000 barrels per day (bpd), feeding crude into the Ekofisk oil stream.

 

Earlier this month, BP also said that both consortiums vying to link Azerbaijan's Shah Deniz gas field in the Caspian Sea, into Western European markets have an equal chance of success. BP operates the field which was developed in a consortium partnership with Statoil, Total, Azerbaijan’s Socar, LukAgip (an Eni, LUKoil joint venture) and others.

 

A decision, whether to pipe gas from the field into Austria via the proposed Nabucco (West) pipeline or into Italy through the rival Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) project, is expected to be made by mid-2013. Speaking in Vienna, Al Cook, head of BP's Azeri operations, said, “I genuinely believe both pipelines at the moment have an equal chance. There's certainly no clear-cut answer at the moment.”

 

BP is aiming for the first gas from Shah Deniz II to be delivered to existing customer Turkey in 2018. Early 2019 is the more likely date for the first Azeri gas to reach Western Europe via this major development often touted as one which would reduce European dependence on Russia for its energy supplies.

 

The Shah Deniz consortium owns equity options in both the pipeline projects and Cook did not rule out that both Nabucco (West) and TAP could be built in the long term. Specifically, BP's own equity options, which are part of the Shah Deniz stakes, are pegged at 20% in TAP and 14% in Nabucco. Cook said BP was not “actively seeking” to increase its stake in either project – a wise choice indeed.

 

On February 4, BP said its Q4 2012 net profit, adjusted for non-operating items, currency and accounting effects, fell to US$3.98 billion from US$4.98 billion recorded over the corresponding quarter last year. Moving away from BP, Royal Dutch Shell posted a 6% dip in 2012 profits to US$27 billion on the back of weak oil and gas prices and lower exploration and production (E&P) margins.

 

The Anglo-Dutch oil major reported Q4 earnings of US$7.3 billion, a rise of 13%. However, on an adjusted current cost of supply basis and one-off asset sales, the profit came in at US$5.58 billion. In particular, Shell’s E&P business saw profits dip 14% to US$4.4 billion, notwithstanding an actual 3% increase in oil and gas production levels. However, the company did record stronger refining margins.

 

Ironically, while acknowledging stronger refining margins, Shell confirmed its decision to close most of its Harburg refinery units in Hamburg, Germany. The permanent shutdown of much of its 100,000 bpd refinery is expected next month in line with completing a deal made with Swedish refiner Nynas in 2011.

 

Finally, in a typical Italian muddle, several oil executives in the country are under investigation following a probe into alleged bribery offences related to the awarding of oil services contracts to Saipem in Algeria. Eni has a 43% stake in Saipem which is Europe’s biggest oil services provider. While the company itself denied wrongdoing, the probe was widened last Friday to include Eni CEO Paolo Scaroni.

 

The CEO’s home and office were searched as part of the probe. However, Eni is standing by their man and said it will cooperate fully with the prosecutor’s office in Milan. So far, Pietro Franco Tali (the CEO of Saipem) and Eni’s Chief Financial Officer Alessandro Bernini (who was Saipem’s CFO until 2008) have been the most high profile executives to step down in wake of the probe. Watch this crude space! That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

 

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: Asian oil rig © Cairn Energy. Photo 2: Gas extraction site © Chesapeake Energy.