Puts n’ calls, Russia ‘peaking’ & Peking’s shale

Oil market volatility continues unabated indicative of the barmy nature of the world we live in. On January 25, the Brent forward month futures contract spiked above US$113. If the day's intraday price of US$113.46 is used as a cut-off point, then it has risen by 4.3% since Christmas Eve. If you ask what has changed in a month? Well not much! The Algerian terror strike, despite the tragic nature of events, does not fundamentally alter the geopolitical risk premium for 2013.

In fact, many commentators think the risk premium remains broadly neutral and hinged on the question whether or not Iran flares-up. So is a US$113-plus Brent price merited? Not one jot! If you took such a price-level at face value, then yours would be a hugely optimistic view of the global economy, one that it does not merit on the basis of economic survey data.

 

In an interesting note, Ole Hansen, Head of Commodity Strategy at Saxo Bank, gently nudges observers in the direction of examining the put/call ratio. For those who don’t know, in layman terms the ratio measures mass psychology amongst market participants. It is the trading volume of put options divided by the trading volume of call options. (See graph above courtesy of Saxo Bank. Click image to enlarge)

 

When the ratio is relatively high, this means the trading community or shall we say the majority in the trading community expect bearish trends. When the ratio is relatively low, they’re heading-up a bullish path.

 

Hansen observes: “The most popular traded strikes over the five trading days (to January 23) are evenly split between puts and calls. The most traded has been the June 13 Call strike 115 (last US$ 3.13 per barrel), April 13 Call 120 (US$0.61), April 13 Put 100 (US$0.56) and June 13 Put 95 (US$1.32). The hedging of a potential geopolitical spike has been seen through the buying of June 13 Call 130, last traded at US$0.54/barrel.”

 

The Oilholic feels it is prudent to point out that tracking the weekly volume of market puts and calls is a method of gauging the sentiments of majority of traders. Overall, the market can, in the right circumstances, prove a majority of traders wrong. So let’s see how things unfold. Meanwhile, the CME Group said on January 24 that the NYMEX March Brent Crude had made it to the next target of US$112.90/113.29 and topped it, but the failure to break this month’s high "signals weakness in the days to come."

 

The  group also announced a record in daily trading volume for its NYMEX Brent futures contract as trading volumes, using January 18 as a cut-off point, jumped to 30,250 contracts; a 38% increase over the previous record of 21,997 set on August 8, 2012.

 

From the crude oil market to the stock market, where ExxonMobil finally got back its position of being the most valuable publicly traded company on January 25! Apple grabbed the top spot in 2011 from ExxonMobil which the latter had held since 2005. Yours truly does not have shares in either company, but on the basis of sheer consistency in corporate performance, overall value as a creator of jobs and a general contribution to the global economy, one would vote for the oil giant any day over an electronic gadgets manufacturer (Sorry, Apple fans if you feel the Oilholic is oversimplifying the argument).

 

Switching tack to the macro picture, Fitch Ratings says Russian oil production will probably peak in the next few years as gains from new oilfields are offset by falling output from brownfield sites. In a statement on January 22, the ratings agency said production gains that Russia achieved over the last decade were mainly driven by intensive application of new technology, in particular horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing applied to Western Siberian brownfields on a massive scale.

 

"This allowed oil companies to tap previously unreachable reservoirs and dramatically reverse declining production rates at these fields, some of which have been producing oil for several decades. In addition, Russia saw successful launches of several new production areas, including Rosneft's large Eastern Siberian Vankor field in 2009," Fitch notes.

 

However, Fitch says the biggest potential gains from new technology have now been mostly achieved. The latest production figures from the Russian Ministry of Energy show that total crude oil production in the country increased by 1.3% in 2012 to 518 million tons. Russian refinery volumes increased by 4.5% to 266 million tons while exports dropped by 1% to 239 million tons. Russian oil production has increased rapidly from a low of 303 million tons in 1996.

 

"Greenfields are located in inhospitable and remote places and projects therefore require large amounts of capital. We believe oil prices would need to remain above US$100 per barrel and the Russian government would need to provide tax incentives for oil companies to invest in additional Eastern Siberian production," Fitch says.

 

A notable exception is the Caspian Sea shelf where Lukoil, Russia’s second largest oil company, is progressing with its exploration and production programme. The ratings agency does see potential for more joint ventures between Russian and international oil companies in exploring the Russian continental shelf. No doubt, the needs must paradigm, which is very visible elsewhere in the ‘crude’ world, is applicable to the Russians as well.

 

On the very same day as Fitch raised the possibility of Russian production peaking, Peking announced a massive capital spending drive towards shale exploration. Reuters reported that China intends to start its own shale gale as the country’s Ministry of Land and Resources issued exploration rights for 19 shale prospection blocks to 16 firms. Local media suggests most of the exploration rights pertain to shale gas exploration with the 16 firms pledging US$2 billion towards the move.

On the subject of shale and before the news arrived from China, IHS Vice Chairman Daniel Yergin told the World Economic Forum  in Davos that major unconventional opportunities are being identified around the world. "Our research indicates that the shale resource base in China may be larger than in the USA, and we note prospects elsewhere," he added.

 

However, both the Oilholic and the industry veteran and founder of IHS CERA agree that the circumstances which led to and promoted the development of unconventional sources in the USA differ in important aspects from other parts of the world.

“It is still very early days and we believe that it will take several years before significant amounts of unconventional oil and gas begin to appear in other regions,” Yergin said. In fact, the US is benefitting in more ways than one if IHS’ new report Energy and the New Global Industrial Landscape: A Tectonic Shift is to be believed.

In it, IHS forecasts that the "direct, indirect and induced effects" of the surge in nonconventional oil and gas extraction have already added 1.7 million jobs to the US jobs market with 3 million expected by 2020. Furthermore, the surge has also added US$62 billion to federal and state government coffers in 2012 with US$111 billion expected by 2020. (See bar chart above courtesy of IHS. Click image to enlarge)

 

IHS also predicts that non-OPEC supply growth in 2013 will be 1.1 million barrels per day – larger than the growth in global demand – which has happened only four times since 1986. Leading this non-OPEC growth is indeed the surge in unconventional oil in the USA. The report does warn, however, that increases in non-OPEC supply elsewhere in the world could be subject to what has proved to be a recurrent “history of disappointment.”

 

That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

 

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Graph: Brent Crude – Put/Call ratio © Saxo Bank, Photo: Russian jerry pump jacks © Lukoil, Bar Chart: US jobs growth projection in the unconventional oil & gas sector © IHS 2013.

Algeria’s ‘dark cloud’, PDVSA’s ratings & more

The terrorist strike on Algeria’s In Amenas gas field last week and the bloodbath that followed as the country’s forces attempted to retake the facility has dominated the news headlines. The siege ended on Saturday with at least 40 hostages and 32 terrorists dead, according to newswires. The number is likely to alter as further details emerge. The hostage takers also mined the whole facility and a clear-up is presently underway. The field is operated as a joint venture between Algeria's Sonatrach, Statoil and BP. While an estimated 50,000 barrels per day (bpd) of condensate was lost as production stopped, the damage to Algeria’s oil & gas industry could be a lot worse as foreign oil workers were deliberately targeted.

 

In its assessment of the impact of the terror strike, the IEA said the kidnapping and murder of foreign oil workers at the gas field had cast a ‘dark cloud’ over the outlook for the country's energy sector. The agency said that 'political risk writ large' dominates much of the energy market, 'and not just in Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya or Venezuela' with Algeria returning to their ranks. Some say it never left in the first place.

 

Reflecting this sentiment, BP said hundred of overseas workers from IOCs had left Algeria and many more were likely to join them. Three of the company’s own workers at the In Amenas facility are unaccounted for.

 

Continuing with the MENA region, news emerged that Saudi Arabia’s output fell 290,000 bpd in December to 9.36 million bpd. Subsequently, OPEC’s output in December also fell to its lowest level in a year at 30.65 million bpd. This coupled, with projections of rising Chinese demand, prompted the IEA to raise its global oil demand forecast for 2013 describing it as a 'sobering, 'morning after' view.'

 

The forecast is now 240,000 bpd more than the IEA estimate published in December, up to 90.8 million bpd; up 1% over 2012. "All of a sudden, the market looks tighter than we thought…OECD inventories are getting tighter - a clean break from the protracted and often counter-seasonal builds that had been a hallmark of 2012," IEA said.

 

However, the agency stressed there was no need for rushed interpretations. "The dip in Saudi supply, for one, seems less driven by price considerations than by the weather. A dip in air conditioning demand - as well as reduced demand from refineries undergoing seasonal maintenance - likely goes a long way towards explaining reduced output. Nothing for the global market to worry about," the IEA said.

 

"The bull market of 2003‐2008 was all about demand growth and perceived supply constraints. The bear market that followed was all about financial meltdown. Today's market, as the latest data underscore, has a lot to do with political risk writ large. Furthermore, changes in tax and trade policies, in China and in Russia, can, at the stroke of a pen, shakeup crude and products markets and redraw the oil trade map," the agency concluded.

 

Simply put, it’s too early for speculators to get excited about a possible bull rally in the first quarter of 2013, something which yours truly doubts as well. However, across the pond, the WTI forward month futures contract cut its Brent discount to less than US$15 at one point last week, the lowest since July. As the glut at Cushing, Oklahoma subsides following the capacity expansion of the Seaway pipeline, the WTI-Brent discount would be an interesting sideshow this year. 

 

The IEA added that non-OPEC production was projected to rise by 980,000 bpd to 54.3 million bpd, the highest growth rate since 2010. Concurrently, BP said that US shale oil production is expected to grow around 5 million bpd by 2030. This, according to the oil major, is likely to be offset by reductions in supply from OPEC, which has been pumping at historical highs led by the Saudis in recent years.

 

BP's chief economist Christof Ruehl said, "This will generate spare capacity of around 6 million bpd, and there's a fault line if there is higher shale production then the consequences would be even stronger." But the shale revolution will remain largely a "North American phenomenon," he added.

 

"No other country outside the US and Canada has yet succeeded in combining these factors to support production growth. While we expect other regions will adapt over time to develop their resources, by 2030 we expect North America still to dominate production of these resources," Ruehl said.

 

Along the same theme, CNN reported that California is sitting on a massive amount of shale oil and could become the next oil boom state. That’s only if the industry can get the stuff out of the ground without upsetting the state's powerful environmental lobby. Yeah, good luck with that!

Returning to Saudi Arabia, Fitch Ratings said earlier this month that an expansionary 2013 budget based on a conservative oil price will support another year of healthy economic growth for the country and a further strengthening of the sovereign's net creditor position. However, overall growth will slow “due to a decline in oil production that was already evident in recent months.”

 

In the full year to December-end 2013, the Saudi budget, unveiled on December 29, projected record spending of US$219 billion (34% of GDP), up by almost 20% on the 2012 budget. Budgeted capital spending is 28% higher than in 2012, though the government has struggled to achieve its capital spending targets in recent years.

 

While an 18% rise in Saudi revenues is projected in the budget, they are based on unstated oil price and production assumptions, with the former well below prevailing market prices. Fitch anticipates Saudi production and prices will be lower in 2013 than 2012.

"With no new revenue-raising measures announced and little scope for higher oil revenues, the revenue projection appears less cautious than usual. However, actual revenues generally substantially exceed budget revenues (by an average of 82% over the past five years) and should do so again in 2013," the agency said.

 

Meanwhile, political uncertainty continues in Venezuela with no clarity about the health of President Hugo Chavez. It has done Petróleos de Venezuela's (PDVSA), the country’s national oil company, no favours. On January 16, ratings agency Moody’s changed PDVSA's rating outlook to negative.

It followed the change in outlook for the Venezuelan government's local and foreign currency bond ratings to negative. "The sovereign rating action reflects increasing uncertainty over President Chavez's political succession, and the impact of a possibly tumultuous transition on civil order, the economy, and an already deteriorating government fiscal position," Moody’s said.

 

On PDVSA, the agency added that as a government-related issuer, the company's ratings reflect a high level of imputed government support and default correlation between the two entities. Hence, a downgrade of the government's local and foreign currency ratings would be likely to result in a downgrade of PDVSA's ratings as well.

 

Away from a Venezuela, two developments in the North Sea – a positive and a negative apiece – are worth taking about. Starting with the positive news first, global advisory firm Deloitte found that 65 exploration and appraisal wells were drilled on the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS), compared with 49 in 2011.

 

The activity, according to Deloitte, was boosted by a broader range of tax allowances and a sustained high oil price. The news came as Dana Petroleum said production had commenced at the Cormorant East field which would produce about 5,500 bpd initially. Production will be processed at the Taqa-operated North Cormorant platform, before being sent to BP's Sullom Voe terminal (pictured above) for sale.

 

Taqa, an Abu Dhabi government-owned energy company, has a majority 60% stake in the field. Alongside Dana Petroleum (20%), its other partners include Antrim Resources (8.4%), First Oil Expro (7.6%) and Granby Enterprises (4%).

 

While Taqa was still absorbing the positives, its Cormorant Alpha platform, about 160 km from the Shetland Islands, reported a leak leading to a production shut-down at 20 other interconnected North Sea oilfields.

 

Cormorant Alpha platform handles an output of about 90,000 bpd of crude which is transported through the Brent pipeline to Sullom Voe for dispatch. Of this only 10,000 bpd is its own output. Thankfully there was no loss of life and Taqa said the minor leak had been contained. It is currently in the process of restoring 80,000 bpd worth of crude back to the Brent pipeline system along with sorting its own output.

 

Finally, as the Oilholic blogged back in October on a visit to Hawaii, Tesoro is to close its Kapolei, O'ahu refinery in the island state in April as a buyer has failed to turn-up (so far). In the interim, it will be converting the facility to a distribution and storage terminal in the hope that a buyer turn up. The Oilholic hopes so too, but in this climate it will prove tricky. Tesoro will continue to fulfil existing supply commitments.

 

That’s all for the moment folks except to inform you that after resisting it for years, yours truly has finally succumbed and opened a Twitter account! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

 

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo: Sullom Voe Terminal, BP © BP Plc.

The oil market in 2013: thoughts & riddles aplenty

Over a fortnight into 2013 and a mere day away from the Brent forward month futures contract for February expiring, the price is above a Nelson at US$111.88 per barrel. That’s after having gone to and fro between US$110 and US$112 intra-day.

As far as the early January market sentiment goes, ICE Future Europe said hedge funds and other money managers raised bullish positions on Brent crude by 10,925 contracts for the week ended January 8; the highest in nine months. Net long positions in futures and options combined, outnumbered short positions by 150,036 lots in the week ended January 8, the highest level since March 27 and the fourth consecutive weekly advance.

On the other hand, bearish positions by producers, merchants, processors and users of Brent outnumbered bullish positions by 175,478, down from 151,548 last week. It’s the biggest net-short position among this category of market participants since August 14. So where are we now and where will we be on December 31, 2013?

Despite many market suggestions to the contrary, Barclays continues to maintain a 2013 Brent forecast of US$125. The readers of this blog asked the Oilholic why and well the Oilholic asked Barclays why. To quote the chap yours truly spoke to, the reason for this is that Barclays’ analysts still see the Middle East as “most likely” geopolitical catalyst.

“While there are other likely areas of interest for the oil market in 2013, in our view the main nexus for the transmission into oil prices is likely to be the Middle East, with the spiralling situations in Syria and Iraq layered in on top of the core issue of Iran’s external relations,” a Barclays report adds.

Macroeconomic discontinuities will continue to persist, but Barclays’ analysts reckon that the catalyst they refer to will arrive at some point in 2013. Nailing their colours to mast, well above a Nelson, their analysts conclude: “We are therefore maintaining our 2013 Brent forecast of US$125 per barrel, just as we have for the past 21 months since that forecast was initiated in March 2011.”

Agreed, the Middle East will always give food for thought to the observers of geopolitical risk (or instability) premium. Though it is not as exact a science as analysts make it out to be. However, what if the Chinese economy tanks? To what extent will it act as a bearish counterweight? And what are the chances of such an event?

For starters, the Oilholic thinks the chances are 'slim-ish', but if you’d like to put a percentage figure to the element of chance then Michael Haigh, head of commodities research at Société Générale, thinks there is a 20% probability of a Chinese hard-landing in 2013. This then begs the question – are the crude bulls buggered if China tanks, risk premium or no risk premium?

Well China currently consumes around 40% of base metals, 23% major agricultural crops and 20% of ‘non-renewable’ energy resources. So in the event of a Chinese hard-landing, not only will the crude bulls be buggered, they’ll also lose their mojo as investor confidence will be battered.

Haigh thinks in the event of Chinese slowdown, the Brent price could plummet to US$75. “A 30% drop in oil prices (which equates to approximately US$30 given the current value of Brent) would ultimately boost GDP growth and thus pull oil prices higher. OPEC countries would cut production if prices fall as a result of a China shock. So we expect Brent’s decline to be limited to US$75 as a result,” he adds.

Remember India, another major consumer, is not exactly in a happy place either. However, it is prudent to point out the current market projections suggest that barring an economic upheaval, both Indian and Chinese consumption is expected to rise in 2013. Concurrently, the American separation from international crude markets will continue, with US crude oil production tipped to rise by the largest amount on record this year, according to the EIA.

The independent statistical arm of the US Department of Energy, estimates that the country’s crude oil production would grow by 900,000 barrels per day (bpd) in 2013 to 7.3 million bpd. While the rate of increase is seen slowing slightly in 2014 to 600,000 bpd, the total jump in US oil production to 7.9 million bpd would be up 23% from the 6.4 million bpd pumped domestically in 2012.

The latest forecast from the EIA is the first to include 2014 hailing shale! If the agency’s projections prove to be accurate, US crude oil production would have jumped at a mind-boggling rate of 40% between 2011 and 2014.

The EIA notes that rising output in North Dakota's Bakken formation and Texas's Eagle Ford fields has made US producers sharper and more productive. "The learning curve in the Bakken and Eagle Ford fields, which is where the biggest part of this increase is coming from, has been pretty steep," a spokesperson said.

So it sees the WTI averaging US$89 in 2013 and US$91 a barrel in 2014. Curiously enough, in line with other market forecasts, bar that of Barclays, the EIA, which recently adopted Brent as its new international benchmark, sees it fall marginally to around US$105 in 2013 and falling further to US$99 a barrel in 2014.

On a related note, Fitch Ratings sees supply and demand pressures supportive of Brent prices above US$100 in 2013. “While European demand will be weak, this will be more than offset by emerging market growth. On the supply side, the balance of risk is towards negative, rather than positive shocks, with the possibility of military intervention in Iran still the most obvious potential disruptor,” it said in a recent report.

However, the ratings agency thinks there is enough spare capacity in the world to deal with the loss of Iran's roughly 2.8 million bpd of output. Although this would leave little spare capacity in the system were there to be another supply disruption. Let’s see how it all pans out; the Oilholic sees a US$105 to US$115 circa for Brent over 2013.

Meanwhile, the spread between Brent and WTI has narrowed to a 4-month low after the restart of the Seaway pipeline last week, which has been shut since January 2 in order to complete a major expansion. The expanded pipeline will not only reduce the bottleneck at Cushing, Oklahoma but reduce imports of waterborne crude as well. According to Bloomberg, the crude flow to the Gulf of Mexico, from Cushing, the delivery point for the NYMEX oil futures contract, rose to 400,000 bpd last Friday from 150,000 bpd at the time of the temporary closure.

On a closing note, and going back to Fitch Ratings, the agency believes that cheap US shale gas is not a material threat to the Europe, Middle East and Africa’s (EMEA) oil and gas sector in 2013. It noted that a lack of US export infrastructure, a political desire for the US to be self-sufficient in gas, and the prevalence of long term oil-based gas supply contracts in Europe all suggest at worst modest downward pressure on European gas prices in the short to medium term.

Fitch’s overall expectation for oil and gas revenues in EMEA in 2013 is one of very modest growth, supported by continued, if weakened, global GDP expansion and potential supply shocks. The ratings agency anticipates that top line EMEA oil and gas revenue growth in 2013 will be in the low single digits. There remains a material – roughly 30% to 40% – chance that revenue will fall for the major EMEA oil producers, but if so this fall is unlikely to be precipitous according to a Fitch spokesperson.

That’s all for the moment folks! One doubts if oil traders are as superstitious about a Nelson or the number 111 as English cricketers and Hindu priests are, so here’s to Crude Year 2013. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo: Holly Rig, Santa Barbara, California, USA © James Forte / National Geographic.

Crude talking points of the last two weeks

In a fortnight during which the Bank of England hired a man whose signature appears on Canadian banknotes as its new governor, the oil & gas world reiterated its own cross-border nature, when an American firm sold a Kazakh asset to an Indian company. That firm being ConocoPhillips, the asset being its 8.4% stake in Kazakh oil field Kashagan and the Indian buyer being national oil company (NOC) ONGC Videsh – all signed, sealed and delivered in a deal worth around US$5.5 billion.

 

Even with an after-tax impairment of US$400 million, the deal represents a tidy packet for ConocoPhillips as it attempts to cut its debt. Having divested its stake in Russia’s Lukoil, the American oil major has already beaten its asset sale programme target of US$20 billion. So when the final announcement came, it was not much of a surprise as Kazakhstan government officials had revealed much earlier that a move was on the cards.

 

Still it is sobering to see ConocoPhillips divest from Kashagan – the world's biggest oilfield discovery by volume since 1968. It may hold an estimated 30 billion barrels of oil. Phase I of the development, set to begin next year, could yield around 8 billion barrels, a share of which ONGC is keenly eyeing.

India imports over 75% of the crude oil it craves and is in fact the world's fourth-biggest oil importer by volume. Given this dynamic, capital expenditure on asset with a slower turnaround may not be an immediate concern for an Indian NOC, but certainly is for investors in the likes of ConocoPhillips and its European peers.

On the back of a series of meetings between investors and its EMEA natural resources & commodities team in London, Fitch Ratings recently revealed that elongated upstream investment lead times and a (still) weak refining environment in Western Europe remain a cash flow concern for investors.

 

They seemed most concerned about the lead time between higher upstream capex and eventual cash flow generation and were worried about downward rating pressure if financial metrics become strained for an extended period. It is prudent to mention that Fitch Ratings views EMEA oil & gas companies' capex programmes as measured and rational despite a sector wide revised focus on upstream investment.

 

For example, the two big beasts – BP and Royal Dutch Shell – are rated 'A'/Positive and 'AA'/Stable respectively; both have increased capex by more than one-third for the first 9 months of 2012 compared to the same period last year. Elsewhere in their chats, unsurprisingly Fitch found that refining overcapacity and weak utilisation rates remain a concern for investors in the European refining sector. Geopolitical risk is also on investors' minds as they look to 2013.

 

While geopolitical events may drive oil prices up, which positively impact cash flow, interruptions to shipping volumes may more than offset gains from these price increases – negatively impacting both operating cash flow and companies' competitive market positions. Away from capex concerns, Fitch also said that shale gas production in Poland could improve the country's security of gas supplies but is unlikely to lead to large declines in gas prices before 2020.

In a report published on November 26, Arkadiusz Wicik, Fitch’s Warsaw-based director and one of the most pragmatic commentators the Oilholic has encountered, noted that shale gas production in Poland, which has one of the highest shale development potentials in Europe, would lower the country's dependence on gas imports. Most of Poland's imports currently come from Russia.

 

However, Wicik candidly noted that even substantial shale gas production by 2020, is unlikely to result in large declines in domestic gas prices.

 

"In the most likely scenario, shale gas production, which may start around 2015, will not lead to a gas oversupply in the first few years of production, especially as domestic gas demand may increase by 2020 as several gas-fired power plants are planned to be built. If there is a surplus of gas because shale gas production reaches a significant level by 2020, this surplus is likely to be exported," he added.

 

In actual fact, if the planned liberalisation of the Polish gas market takes place in the next few years, European spot gas prices may have a larger impact on gas prices in Poland than the potential shale gas output.

 

From a credit perspective, Fitch views shale gas exploration as high risk and capital intensive. Meanwhile, the UK government was forced on the defensive when a report in The Independent newspaper claimed that it was opening up 60% of the country’s cherished countryside for fracking.

 

Responding to the report, a government spokesperson said, "There is a big difference between the amount of shale gas that might exist and what can be technically and commercially extracted. It is too early to assess the potential for shale gas but the suggestion more than 60% of the UK countryside could be exploited is nonsense."

 

"We have commissioned the British Geological Survey to do an assessment of the UK's shale gas resources, which will report its findings next year," he added.

 

Barely had The Independent revealed this ‘hot’ news, around 300 people held an 'anti-fracking' protest in London. Wow, that many ‘eh!? In defence of the anti-frackers, it is rather cold these days in London to be hollering outside Parliament.

 

Moving on to the price of the crude stuff, Moody’s reckons a constrained US market will result in a US$15 per barrel difference in 2013 between the two benchmarks – Brent and WTI – with an expected premium in favour of the former. Its recently revised price assumptions state 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. While the price assumption for Brent beyond 2014 is unchanged, the agency has revised both the 2013 and 2014 assumptions.

 

For WTI, Moody’s has left its previous assumptions unchanged at US$85 in 2013, 2014 and thereafter. Such a sentiment ties-in to the Oilholic’s anecdotal evidence from the US and what many in City concur with. So Moody’s is not alone in saying that Brent’s premium to WTI is not going anywhere, anytime soon. Even if the Chinese economy tanks, it’ll still persist in some form as both benchmarks will plummet relative to market conditions but won’t narrow up their difference below double figures.

 

Finally, on the noteworthy corporate news front, aside from ConocoPhillips’ move, BP was in the headlines again for a number of reasons. Reuters’ resident Oilholic Tom Bergin reported in an exclusive that BP is planning a reorganisation of its exploration and production (E&P) operations. Citing sources close to the move, Bergin wrote that Lamar McKay, currently head of BP's US operations, will become head of a new E&P unit; a reinstatement of a role that was abolished in 2010 in the wake of the oil spill.

 

Current boss Bob Dudley split BP's old E&P division into three units on his elevation to CEO to replace Tony Hayward, whose gaffes in during the Gulf of Mexico oil spill led to his stepping down. BP declined to comment on Bergin’s story but few days later provided an unrelated newsworthy snippet.

 

The oil giant said it had held preliminary talks with the Russian government and stakeholders in the Nordstream pipeline about extending the line to deliver gas to the UK. BP said any potential extension to the pipeline was unlikely to be agreed before mid-2013.

 

The pipeline’s Phase I, which is onstream, runs under the Baltic Sea bringing Russian gas into Germany. A source described the move as “serious” and aimed at diversifying the UK’s pool of gas supplying nations which currently include Norway and Qatar as North Sea production continues to wane. As if that was not enough news from BP for one fortnight, the US government decided to "temporarily" ban the company from bagging any new US government contracts.

 

The country's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said on November 28 that the move was standard practice when a company reaches an agreement to plead guilty to criminal charges as BP did earlier in the month. New US E&P licences are made available regularly, so BP may miss out on some opportunities while the ban is in place but any impact is likely to be relatively ephemeral at worst. No panic needed!

 

On a closing note, in a move widely cheered by supply side industry observers, Shell lifted its force majeure on Nigeria's benchmark Bonny Light crude oil exports on November 21 easing supply problems for Africa’s leading oil producer. The force majeure, implying a failure to meet contractual obligations due to events outside of corporate control, on Bonny Light exports came into place on October 19 following a fire on a ship being used to steal oil. It forced the company to shut down its Bomu-Bonny pipeline and defer 150,000 barrels per day of production.

 

However, Shell said that force majeure on Nigerian Forcados crude exports remains in place. Forcados production was also stopped owing to damage caused by suspected thieves tapping into the Trans Forcados Pipeline and the Brass Creek trunkline. As they say in Nigeria - it’s all ok until the next attempted theft goes awry. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

 

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: Oil Rig, USA © Shell

BP’s settlement expensive but sound

As BP received the biggest criminal fine in US history to the tune of US$4.5 billion related to the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the Oilholic quizzed City analysts over what they made of it. Overriding sentiment of market commentators was that while a move to settle criminal charges in this way was expensive for BP, it was also a sound one for the oil giant.

 

Beginning with what we know, according to the US Department of Justice (DoJ), BP has agreed to plead guilty to eleven felony counts of misconduct or neglect of ships officers relating to the loss of 11 lives, one misdemeanour count under the Clean Water Act, one misdemeanour count under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and one felony count of obstruction of Congress.

 

Two BP workers - Robert Kaluza and Donald Vidrine - have been indicted on manslaughter charges and an ex-manager David Rainey charged with misleading Congress according to the Associated Press. The resolution is subject to US federal court approval. The DoJ will oversee BP handover US$4 billion, including a US$1.26 billion fine as well as payments to wildlife and science organisations.

 

BP will also pay US$525 million to the US SEC spread over three years. The figure caps the previous highest criminal fine imposed on pharmaceutical firm Pfizer of US$1.2 billion. City analysts believe BP needed this settlement so that it can now focus on defending itself against pending civil cases.

 

“It was an expensive, but necessary closure that BP needed on one legal fronts of several,” said one analyst. The 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster killed 11 workers and released millions of barrels of crude into the Gulf of Mexico which took 87 days to plug.

 

The company is expected to make a final payment of US$860 million into the US$20 billion Gulf of Mexico compensation fund by the end of the year. BP’s internal investigation about the incident had noted that, “multiple companies, work teams and circumstances were involved over time.”

 

These companies included Transocean, Halliburton, Anadarko, Moex and Weatherford. BP has settled all claims with Anadarko and Moex, its co-owners of the oil well and contractor Weatherford. It received US$5.1 billion in cash settlements from the three firms which was put into the Gulf compensation fund.

 

BP has also reached a US$7.8 billion settlement with the Plaintiffs' Steering Committee, a group of lawyers representing victims of the spill. However, the company is yet to reach a settlement with Transocean, the owner of the Deepwater Horizon rig and engineering firm Halliburton. A civil trial that will determine negligence is due to begin in New Orleans in February 2013.

 

Jeffrey Woodruff, Senior Director at Fitch Ratings, felt that the settlement was a positive move but key areas of uncertainty remained. “Although the settlement removes another aspect of legal uncertainty, it does not address Clean Water Act claims, whose size cannot yet be determined. It is therefore too early for us to consider taking a rating action,” he added.

 

Fitch said in July, when revising the company's Outlook to Positive, that BP should be able to cover its remaining legal costs without impairing its financial profile, and that a comprehensive settlement of remaining liabilities for US$15 billion or less would support an upgrade.

 

Recent asset sales have also strengthened BP's credit profile. Last month, BP posted a third quarter underlying replacement cost profit, adjusted for non-operating items and fair value accounting effects, of US$5.2 billion. The figure is down from US$5.27 billion recorded in the corresponding quarter last year but up on this year's second quarter profit of US$3.7 billion.

 

“The company has realised US$35 billion of its US$38 billion targeted asset disposal programme at end the end of the third quarter of 2012. Proceeds from the sale of its 50% stake in TNK-BP in Russia will further improve its liquidity, supporting our view that the company can meet legal costs without impairing its profile,” Woodruff concluded.

 

Meanwhile, Moody’s noted that the credit rating and outlook for Transocean (currently Baa3 negative), which is yet to settle with BP, was unaffected by the recent development.

 

Stuart Miller, Moody's Senior Credit Officer, said, "The big elephant in the room for Transocean is its potential exposure to Clean Water Act fines and penalties as owner of the Deepwater Horizon rig. The recent agreement between BP and DoJ did not address the claims under the Act."

 

However, he felt that Transocean will ultimately settle with the DoJ, and there was a good chance that the amount may be manageable given the company’s current provision level and cash balances.

 

“But if gross negligence is proven, a very high legal standard, the settlement amount could result in payments by Transocean in excess of its current provision amount,” Miller concluded.

Plenty more to unfold in this saga but that’s all for the moment folks. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

 

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Gulf of Mexico spill containment area © BP Plc.

Oil rich Abu Dhabi’s 'benign' shadow over Dubai

The Oilholic thinks there is certain poignancy about a street sign in the Dubai Marina area. The sign (pictured left) points to different directions for Abu Dhabi and Dubai city centre – while the macroeconomic direction for both Emirates is anything but following on from the 2008-09 domestic real estate crisis. As if with perfect metaphorical symmetry, the sign’s current backdrop is coloured by construction conglomerate EMAAR’s flags, the odd logo of another construction conglomerate Nakheel and ongoing building work; some of which is a little ‘behind schedule’ for good reason.

 

In March this year, the UAE’s oil production came in at 2.7 million barrels per day (bpd) with attempts on track to increase it to 3 million bpd. Of this, Dubai’s production on a standalone basis has never accounted for more than 70,000 bpd at any given point excluding barrels of oil equivalent in offshore gas findings. It is Abu Dhabi that holds 95% of proven oil reserves in the UAE.

 

With Dubai’s oil reserves set to be exhausted within a few decades bar the emergence of a significant find, a decision was taken in the late 1990s, by the powers that be, to diversify towards finance, tourism and manufacturing. The decision made sense but the approach was not sensible. By 2008, construction, real estate, trade and finance and not oil & gas had become the biggest contributors to Dubai’s economy.

 

Dubai was to be the go to capital market of the Middle East, so ran the spiel. Along came the construction of some of the tallest skyscrapers in the world such as – the Burj Dubai (renamed Burj Khalifa later for a reason), Palm Islands, Emirates Towers and the Burj Al Arab hotel. However, the global financial crisis that was to follow laid bare the fact that some of tall buildings downtown were built (or about to be built) on a mountain of debt covered by a cone of opacity. A global credit squeeze hit debt laden Dubai where it hurt – its brash, inflated property market.

 

The Oilholic distinctly remembers a wire flash from December 2008 when Mohammed al-Abbar, CEO of Emaar, told the world’s scribes that his company held US$350 billion in real estate assets and US$70 billion in credits. Concurrently, industry peer Nakheel declared US$16 billion in debts.

 

As speculators ditched the Dubai real estate market, property values tumbled, construction stalled and unemployment spiked. Inevitably, both Nakheel and Emaar were left with a pile of defunct assets, angry investors, homeowners defaulting and many dodging service charges. One contact recollects an instance where a fresh development lost 63% of its marked pre-crisis value. While Emaar was holding firm, Nakheel owned by Dubai World was imploding.

 

Absence of organic growth and the end of a debt fuelled boom had Dubai staring into the abyss. With the credit rating of the entire UAE being threatened, a miffed white knight came along on December 14, 2009 in the shape of Abu Dhabi. The oil rich emirate had decided to bailout its beleaguered neighbour on the day to the tune of US$10 billion.

 

Not only that, Abu Dhabi then went on to provide Dubai with US$25 billion in the shape of buying Dubai bonds. Local independent commentators say the actual figure may never be known but a 2010 calculated guess puts Dubai’s debt to Abu Dhabi in the range of US$80 to US$95 billion. When asking for an official confirmation, yours truly was told to “enjoy the sunshine!”

 

However, a most polite spokesperson on the Abu Dhabi side says it took remedial action needed at the time in good faith and to this day the UAE central bank is firmly committed to domestic banking institutions exposed to the real estate crisis of 2009, bringing about institutional reforms and learning from it.

 

Yet, transparency never comes easy for Dubai even after facing a financial storm it never envisaged. In March this year, Richard Fox, head of Middle East and Africa sovereigns’ ratings at Fitch, summed it up best while speaking in London. “Ratings agencies have no plans to give Dubai a credit rating because its government has not asked to be rated, and the lack of transparency would make a credit assessment difficult,” he said.

 

Three years later both Nakheel and Emaar are thought to be in a much happier place according to local media outlets. This is particularly true of Emaar which builds its domestic projects on land that is provided free in the main and uses migrant labour on little more than US$8 to US$10 a day based on anecdotal evidence and the Oilholic’s own findings! Despite recent attempts by the government to rectify the manner in which Dubai’s property market is hitherto disconnected from conventional market ground rules, not much has changed.

 

One thing is certain, Dubai will never be disconnected from its ‘benevolent’ oil rich neighbour Abu Dhabi. Some complain that Abu Dhabi’s crude help must have come with strings attached; something which was strenuously denied by both sides in 2009.

The Oilholic thinks strings weren’t attached; Abu Dhabi quite simply now holds most of the strings! So it was fitting that on January 4, 2010, when Emaar inaugurated the world tallest building (pictured right) – its name was promptly changed from Burj Dubai to Burj Khalifa in honour of Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, the Emir of Abu Dhabi.

 

For oil producing nations, the challenge has always been to establish a viable non-oil sector which counters the impact of a resource driven windfall on other facets of the economy. Dubai had every chance, not to mention a more pressing need than its neighbour to do this and messed it up spectacularly. Au contraire, Abu Dhabi has managed the challenge rather well as it seems.

 

For an Emirate which holds 9% of global proven oil reserves and 95% of that of the UAE, Sheikh Khalifa’s Abu Dhabi sees around 44% of its revenues come in from non-oil sources. Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, the Emirate’s sovereign wealth fund rumoured to have nearly U$900 billion in managed assets, leads the way.

 

Ratings agencies may grumble about Dubai’s opacity but all three major ones do rate Abu Dhabi. Fitch and Standard & Poor's rate Abu Dhabi 'AA' while Moody's rates it 'Aa2'. Sheikh Khalifa is actively looking to increase the share of non-oil revenue in Abu Dhabi to 60% within this decade if not sooner.

So maybe the several streets signs in Dubai pointing to the route to Abu Dhabi and the imposing Burj Khalifa (a structure that’s hard to miss from practically most parts of Dubai) have a metaphorical message. And probably there is envy and gratitude in equal measure. Cosmopolitan Dubai is now increasing reliant on black gold dust from Abu Dhabi. That’s all for the moment folks; more from Dubai later! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

 

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo 1: A street sign on the Dubai Marina, UAE. Photo 2: Burj Khalifa, Dubai, UAE © Gaurav Sharma 2012.

BP fishes, ETP swoops & Chesapeake stumbles

Three corporate stories have caught the Oilholic’s eye over the past fortnight and all are worth talking about for very different reasons. With things improving Stateside and memories of a Russian misadventure fading, oil major BP announced on Tuesday that it had inked two production sharing agreements and aims to begin new deepwater exploration in Atlantic waters off the coast of Trinidad and Tobago. The company is already the Caribbean island nation’s largest oil & gas producer with average production for 2011 coming in the region of 408,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day.

Having been awarded blocks 23(a) and TTDAA14 in the 2010-2011 competitive bid rounds last summer, BP finds itself fishing for crude and gassy stuff in the two blocks which are 2,600 sq km and 1,000 sq km in area respectively. Local sources see the company as a ‘good corporate citizen’ and that ought to be comforting for BP in its march to rebuild trust under Bob Dudley.

While BP’s fishing, Energy Transfer Partners LP (ETP) is smiling having won plaudits around the crude world for its US$5.3 billion acquisition of Sunoco on April 30. A fortnight hence, market commentators are still raving on about the move especially as ETP’s swoop for Sunoco follows on from a clever buyout of Southern Union for US$5.7 billion. These acquisitions make ETP the USA’s second-biggest owner of pipeline assets behind Kinder Morgan whose merger with El Paso is imminent.

Most importantly, the Oilholic believes a swoop for Sunoco diversifies ETP’s pipeline portfolio adding around 9,700 km of oil and refined products pipelines to its existing network of 28,160 km of natural gas and natural gas liquids pipelines. With the move, oil revenues will account for over a quarter of its income. A Moody’s report prior to announcement of the deal suggested that together with Enterprise Production Partners, ONEOK Partners and Williams Partners, ETP was currently in a good place and among those best positioned for organic growth.

Growing production of oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids and higher margins are driving increased earnings and cash flow for midstream companies, especially those with existing gathering and processing or pipeline infrastructure near booming shale plays says the agency. While ETP’s smiling, the situation at Chesapeake Energy is anything but smiles. Under Aubrey McClendon, who co-founded the firm in 1989 in Oklahoma, it grew from strength to strength becoming the USA’s second largest natural gas producer and a company synonymous with the country’s shale gas bonanza. However, in a troubling economic climate with the price of natural gas plummeting to historic lows, Chesapeake has endured terrible headlines many of which were self-triggered.

Two weeks ago activist shareholders forced McClendon’s hand by making him relinquish the post of Chairman which he held along with that of Chief Executive over an arrangement which allows him to buy a 2.5% stake in all new wells drilled by Chesapeake. The arrangement itself will also be negotiated by 2014. The Oilholic finds the way McClendon has been treated to be daft for a number of reasons.

The arrangement has been in place since 1993 when the firm went public so neither the company’s Board nor its shareholders can claim they did not know. Two decades ago Chesapeake drilled around 20 wells per annum on average but by 2011 the average had risen to well above 1500 wells. That McClendon kept putting his money where his mouth is for so long is itself astonishing which is what the attention should focus on rather than on the man himself.

In later years this was largely achieved by borrowing at a personal level to the tune of US$850 million; Reuters reckons the figure is more in the region of US$1.1 billion. However, sections of the US media are currently busy sensationalising the Oklahoma man’s tussles within the company and as if this arrangement has emerged out of the blue.

Furthermore, the macroclimate and falling gas prices are now forcing the energy company’s hand with analysts at Fitch Ratings noting that it faces a funding shortfall of US$10 billion this year. In response, Chesapeake says it plans to sell US$9.0 billion to US$11.5 billion in assets this year. Word from Houston is that the sales of its Permian Basin property in West Texas and Mississippi Lime joint venture are a given by September. Some analysts believe asset sales may cap the figure of US$14 billion; though the view is not unanimous.

While this would help with liquidity issues, a sell-off of those assets currently producing oil & gas would most certainly reduce Chesapeake’s cash flow needed to meet requirements of its existing US$4 billion corporate credit facility secured earlier this week from Goldman Sachs and Jeffries Group. It matures in December 2017, with an interest rate of around 8.5% and can be repaid at any time over 2012 without penalty at par value.

As expected, Chesapeake has suffered a ratings downgrade; Standard & Poor's lowered its credit rating to "BB-" from "BB" citing corporate governance matters and a widening gap between capex and operating cash flow as the primary reasons. There is clear evidence of hedge funds short-selling Chesapeake’s shares.

Industry veteran and founder of BP Capital Partners – T. Boone Pickens – launched a strange albeit very vocal defence of McClendon on CNBC’s US Squawk Box on Wednesday which made yours truly smile. Pickens admitted that he had sold his position on Chesapeake – not because of what is going on but rather that he was very concerned about natural gas prices full stop.

“We got out of natural gas stocks and Chesapeake was one of them. We’re not long on Chesapeake now. Aubrey (McClendon) is a great Oklahoman and Chesapeake is a great company for Oklahoma City generating jobs and investment. Aubrey is a visionary…don’t bet against him…They’ll pull it off. You bet against Aubrey and you’ll scratch your loser’s ass,” said the industry veteran.

You have got to hand it to Pickens! If he's got something to say, there is no minding of the "Ps" and "Qs" – so what if its live television! As a former CNBC employee, the Oilholic wholeheartedly enjoyed Pickens’ soundbite and agrees that Chesapeake should make it out of this mess! However, bad headlines won’t go away anytime soon and its partly their own fault. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo 1: Pipeline warning sign, Fairfax, Virginia, USA © O. Louis Mazzatenta/National Geographic. Photo 2: Chesapeake well drilling site © Chesapeake Energy.

Oh drat! Brits ask what the ‘Frack’!

The Oilholic arrived back home from Texas last week to the sound of fellow Brits discussing ‘fracks’ and figures in favour of shale gas prospection here. All UK activity ground to a halt last year, when a couple of minor quakes majorly spooked dwellers of Lancashire where a company – Cuadrilla – was test fracking.

Fast forward to April 2012, and a UK government appointed panel of experts including one from the British Geological Survey now says, "There was a very low probability of other earthquakes during future treatments of other wells. We believe that (last year's) events are attributable to the existence of an adjacent geological fault that had not been identified. There might be other comparable faults, (and) we believe it's not possible to categorically reject the possibility of further quakes."

However, it added that while the tremors may be felt in areas where fracking is conducted, they won’t be above magnitude 3 on the Richter scale and were unlikely to cause any significant damage. The panel’s report has now been sent for a six-week consultation period.

The British Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) is expected to issue a set of regulations soon and ahead of that a verbal melee has ensued with everyone for or against wanting a say and environmental groups crying foul. However, there was near unanimous approval for a control mechanism which would halt fracking activity as soon as seismic levels rise above 0.5 on the Richter scale. The engineers wanted in too.

Dr. Tim Fox, Head of Energy and Environment at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, says, “The recommendations that any shale gas operations should be more closely monitored are welcome. UK and European environmental regulations are already some of the most stringent in the world; and these proposed precautions are a good example of how to help mitigate the risk of any damage caused by seismic activity as a result of shale gas activity.”

City energy analysts also gave the panel’s conclusions a cautious thumbs-up as there is a long way to go before a meaningful extraction of the gassy stuff occurs in any case. Jim Pearce, Energy and Process Industries practice partner at global management consultancy A.T. Kearney, says, “Shale developments offer the UK an opportunity to exploit a relatively clean resource and fill the energy gap that is opening up once again as nuclear projects come under threat. If the UK is going to use gas we should look for the best available source, which is arguably shale gas. Moreover, shale developments may also provide the UK’s chemical industry with a much needed boost if ethane and other NGL’s (natural gas liquids) are also found.”

He opines that UK and the rest of Europe are falling rapidly behind on gas supply security and cost. “Our key industries will be coming under increasing threat if we do not react to the new order that shale has created. We have a great opportunity here to take the lessons learned from the US and benefit from them,” Pearce adds.

Oh what the ‘frack’, that’s surely reason enough to tolerate a few quakes providing the security of the water table is preserved and concerns over water pollution are addressed. Yikes, that’s another quaky one! Away from shale, the 30th anniversary of the Falkland Islands war between the UK and Argentina came and went earlier this month marked by remembrance services for the fallen, but accompanied by the usual nonsensical rhetoric from British and Argentine officials, more so from the latter irked by oil prospection off the Islands’ shores which it claims as its own.

Five independent British oil companies are exploring four areas for oil in Falkland Islands’ waters, but only one of these – Rockhopper – claims to have struck meaningful reserves of the crude stuff. It says it could get 350 million barrels in the Sea Lion field to the north of the islands, which it plans to bring onstream by 2016. However, analysts at Edison Investment Research noted in March that a total of 8.3 billion barrels could lie offshore. So expect each anniversary and the run up to it from here on to be accompanied by ‘crude’ rhetoric and much frothing from Buenos Aires.

When it comes to being ‘crude’, the Argentines are in a class of their own. Just ask Repsol! On Wednesday, the country’s Senate approved the controversial decision, announced last week by President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, to nationalise Repsol YPF thereby stripping Spanish giant Repsol’s controlling stake in YPF.

Following the bizarre but locally popular announcement last week, while its stock plummeted, rating agencies scrambled to downgrade Repsol YPF’s ratings with Fitch Ratings and Moody’s doing so in tandem. Warnings to Argentina from the Spanish government, EU Trade Commission and last but not the least Repsol itself have since followed.

Repsol wants around US$10 billion for its 57.4% stake in YPF, but Argentina has said it does not recognise that valuation. There also one more thing they don’t possibly recognise - it’s called ‘sound economics’ which often gets trumped by ‘good politics’ in that jurisdiction. A number of analysts’ notes have been doing the rounds since April 17th when Kirchner went down the route towards nationalisation. Most had the same dire forecast for Repsol, but for the Oilholic, one issued by the inimitable Stuart Joyner, head of oil and gas at Investec, stood out.

In it he notes, “The apparent decision to nationalise YPF means we move to a worst case for the value of Repsol's 57.4% stake. The Argentine Tango is the consummate dance of love, but there was little affection for the country's largest foreign investor in Buenos Aires yesterday.”

Well said sir! Meanwhile with near perfect symmetry while the Argentines were being crudely castigated, Time magazine decided to name Brazilian behemoth Petrobras' CEO Maria das Graças Silva Foster one of the most influential people in the world. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: Gas pipeline © National Geographic photo stock.

Crude market’s health & farewell to the Bay Area

It’s nearly time to say goodbye to the Bay Area head north of the border to British Columbia, Canada but not before some crude market conjecture and savouring the view of Alcatraz Island Prison from Fisherman’s Wharf. A local politician told yours truly it would be an ideal home for speculators, at which point the owner of the cafe ‘with a portfolio’ where we were sitting quipped that politicians could join them too! That’s what one loves about the Bay Area – everyone has a jolly frank opinion.

Unfortunately for debaters on the subject of market speculation, Alcatraz (pictured left) often called “The Rock” and once home to the likes of Al Capone and Machin Gun Kelly was decommissioned in 1963 can no longer be home to either speculators or politicians, though it seems quite a few seagulls kind of like it!

Not blaming speculators or politcians and with market trends remaining largely bullish, selected local commentators here, those back home in the City of London and indeed those the Oilholic is about to meet in Vancouver BC are near unanimous in their belief about holding exposure to oil price sensitivity over the next two quarters via a mixed bag of energy stocks, Russian equities, natural resources linked Forex (especially the Australian and Canadian dollar) and last but not the least an “intelligent play” on the futures market.

Nonetheless the second quarter opened on Monday in negative territory as WTI crude oil slid lower to retest the US$102 per barrel area, while Brent has been under pressure trading just above US$122 per barrel level on the ICE. “The European equity markets are also trading lower as risk appetite has been limited,” notes Myrto Sokou, Sucden Financial Research.

Protecting one’s portfolio from short-dated volatility would be a challenge worth embracing and Société Générale recommends “buying (cheap) short-dated volatility to protect portfolios from escalating political risk in Iran.” (Click on benchmarks graph to enlarge)

Mike Wittner, a veteran oil market commentator at Société Générale, remains bullish along with many of his peers and with some justification. OPEC and Saudi spare capacity is already tight, and will soon become even tighter, due to sanctions on Iran, says Wittner, and the already very bullish scenario would continue to be driven by fundamental.

Analysts point to one or more of the following: 

• Compared to three months ago, fears of a very bearish tail risk have subsided to an extent (e.g. Eurozone, US data) and macro environment is gradually turning supportive.
• Concurrently, risks of a very bullish tail risk remain (e.g. war against Iran or the Straits of Hormuz situation).
• OECD crude oil inventory levels are at five year lows.
• OPEC spare capacity is quite low at 1.9 million barrels per day (bpd), of which 1.6 million bpd is in Saudi Arabia alone.
• Ongoing significant non-OPEC supply disruptions in South Sudan, Syria, and Yemen thought to be in the circa of 0.6 million bpd.
• Broad based appetite for risk assets has been strong.
• Low interest rate and high liquidity environment is bullish.

On the economy front, in its latest quarterly Global Economic Outlook (GEO), Fitch Ratings forecasts the economic growth of major advanced economies to remain weak at 1.1% in 2012, followed by modest acceleration to 1.8% in 2013. While the baseline remains a modest recovery, short-term risks to the global economy have eased over the past few months.

Compared with the previous Fitch GEO in December 2011, the agency has only marginally revised its global GDP forecasts. The agency forecasts global growth, based on market exchange rates, at 2.3% for 2012 and 2.9% in 2013, compared with 2.4% and 3.0% previously.

"Fitch expects the eurozone to have the weakest performance among major advanced economies. Real GDP is projected to contract 0.2% in 2012, and grow by only 1.1% in 2013. Sizeable fiscal austerity measures and the more persistent effect of tighter credit conditions on the broader economy remain key obstacles to growth," says Gergely Kiss, Director in Fitch's Sovereign team.

In contrast to problems in Europe, the recovery in the US has gained momentum over past quarters. Growth is supported by the stronger-than-expected improvement in labour market conditions and indicators pointing to strengthening business and household confidence.

In line with the underlying improvement in fundamentals Fitch has upgraded its 2012 US growth forecast to 2.2% from 1.8%, whilst keeping the 2013 forecast unchanged at 2.6%. For Japan and the UK, Fitch forecasts GDP to increase 1.9% and 0.5% respectively for 2012.

Economic growth of the BRIC countries is expected to remain robust over the forecast horizon, at 6.3% in 2012 and 6.6% in 2013, well above MAE or global growth rates. Nevertheless, Brazil in particular, but also China and India slowed during 2011 and China is expected to slow further this year.

While on the subject of economics, Wittner of Société Générale, regards a shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz as a low-probability but high-impact scenario with Brent potentially spiking to US$150-$200. “In such a scenario, the equity markets would correct sharply. As a rule of thumb, a permanent US$10/barrel increase in the oil price would shave around 0.2% from global GDP growth in the first year after the shock,” he concludes.

That’s all for the moment folks! The Oilholic leaves you with a view of driving on Golden Gate Bridge on a sunny day and downtown San Francisco as he dashes off to catch a flight to Vancouver. Yours truly will be examining Canada’s role as a geopolitically stable non-OPEC supplier of crude while there. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Graph: World crude oil benchmarks © Société Générale. Photo 1: Alcatraz Island. Photo 2: Downtown San Francisco. Photo 3: Driving on the Golden Gate Bridge, California, USA. © Gaurav Sharma.

The fortnight’s ‘crude’ conjecture & UK’s budget

It’s been an interesting few weeks with varying takes on the ‘crude’ state of affairs, but first the UK’s union budget and its impact on the North Sea. Delivering his 2012 budget in the British House of Commons on Wednesday, Chancellor of the exchequer George Osborne announced plans for a major package on tax changes to boost oil and gas extraction in the North Sea, along with a £3 billion new field allowance West of Shetland.

The Chancellor also said a new gas strategy designed to secure investment in the sector will be announced in the autumn. Of the two, the tax incentives announcement allowing British companies operating in the North Sea to enter into contracts with the UK Government aimed at offering long term certainty on future decommissioning cost tax relief was perhaps a more significant announcement from the Chancellor in the Oilholic’s humble opinion given the acrimony caused by last year's tax rises. Most in the City are united in their belief that this will go some way towards restoring trust which had been shaken by last year’s oil tax increase.

Osborne said the government "will end the uncertainty over decommissioning tax relief that has hung over the industry for years by entering into a contractual approach”, adding that he wanted to ensure the UK "extracts the greatest possible amount of oil and gas from our reserves in the North Sea".

Roman Webber, UK head of oil & gas tax at Deloitte, believes the announcement will remove a major fiscal risk for UK North Sea investors and release significant funds for investment if companies can move to post-tax decommissioning guarantees.

“In the longer term this measure should also increase the tax take for the Government. Whilst much work remains to be done to work out the detail and legislation is not expected until 2013, this is a very positive development. Deloitte Petroleum Services Group estimates that the UK North Sea decommissioning costs for the remainder of the life of the UK North Sea will be around £27 to 30 billion (US$44 to $48 billion),” he concludes.

Away from the UK budget and on to market conjecture, Mark Brown of Fitch Ratings hypothesises that Abu Dhabi will become the oil producing member of the Gulf Cooperation Council that is best insulated from a closure of the Strait of Hormuz, once the Habshan-Fujairah pipeline is fully operational later this year.

In January, the UAE's energy minister said that the pipeline, designed to transport 1.5 million barrels per day (bpd), should hopefully be operational within six months. “As we have previously said, a prolonged closure of the Strait is a low probability. As well as the practical challenge of physically blocking it, we think Iran would only choose to close an international shipping lane that is the world's most important oil chokepoint as a last resort, given the potential for international retaliation. Iran also exports oil via the Strait,” Brown says.

However, if the Strait was blocked in the second half of this year, when the Habshan-Fujairah pipeline could be operational, it would potentially give Abu Dhabi the best safety net. “It would enable Abu Dhabi, which has the world's second largest per capita reserves of hydrocarbons, to continue to export up to around two-thirds of its oil output, or around three-quarters of its current net oil exports, by bypassing the Strait and delivering oil to the Gulf of Oman,” he concludes.

Fitch also believes Saudi Arabia currently has the advantage that it already enjoys pipeline access to the Red Sea via the East-West pipeline. The country could export more than half its output through this pipeline, which has a maximum capacity of 5 million bpd and currently transports around 1.8 million bpd.

However, even at maximum capacity, with 2011 output running at 9.3 million bpd and no decline so far this year due to the tensions over Iran, a higher proportion of Saudi oil output and exports would be stuck inside the country if they could not be shipped out of the Persian Gulf than would be the case for Abu Dhabi once the Habshan-Fujairah pipeline is operational.

Switching tack to an unrelated comment from Moody’s, the ratings agency believes that as a result of financial flexibility built up over the past two years, rated Russian integrated oil & gas companies will be able to accommodate volatility in oil prices and other emerging challenges in 2012 within their current rating categories.

In a note to clients, Victoria Maisuradze, an Associate Managing Director in Moody's Corporate Finance Group, writes: "In 2011, rated Russian players continued to demonstrate strong operating and financial results, underpinned by elevated oil prices. Indeed, operating profits are likely to remain stable in 2012 as an increased tax and tariff burden will offset the benefits of high crude oil prices."

Speaking of prices, WTI-Brent price differential did narrow down to under US$18 over the course of the last fortnight. Brent is resisting a price level of US$123, while WTI is resisting a price level of US$106 and market trends remain moderately bullish with Greece having been “sorted”, US data being encouraging and geopolitical factors nudging the forward month futures price upwards.

Following minor bearish trends, crude oil prices were again correcting higher on Wednesday, tracking a broader rally in risk assets as the dollar eases back from yesterday’s gains. Specifically, front-month WTI is trading around the US$106.50 mark ahead of US data, notes Jack Pollard of Sucden Financial research.

“Bears will happily refer to repeated Saudi claims of increased production, though the threat in the Straits of Hormuz as well as the reduction in Saudi spare capacity (amid broad based geopolitical volatility) will remain the bulls’ best bet,” concludes Pollard.

This brings the Oilholic to a superb editorial in The Economist. The inimitable publication, of which yours truly has been a loyal reader for the past 14 years, debates in a recent edition whether another oil shock maybe on the cards. It comes-up with its own unique equation, in an American context: "Politician + pump prices + poll = panic"

From a global standpoint, The Economist notes that Iranian threats are only one of many scares facing oil markets drawing an analogy with a horror flick:

“When things get too quiet in horror films it is a sure sign that something nasty is just around the corner. Stability in oil prices (earlier in the year) may have been the forerunner of something unpleasant too…But as in any scary movie, the obvious suspect is not always to blame…Many analysts reckon that Iran would not close the strait because of the damage it would do to its own oil exports and vital imports. And anyway such a move would almost certainly lead to military retaliation.” (Oil Markets: High Drama, The Economist, February 25, 2012)

Well said sir! In fact many in the City agree and do believe Sudan, Nigeria and maintenance issues in the North Sea are as much to blame for the price rise. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: North Sea Oil Rig © Cairn Energy