A meeting, an appointment & Vienna’s icy chill!

The Oilholic finds himself back in Vienna for the 162nd meeting of OPEC ministers and his first snowfall of the festive season; the latter has eluded him back home in London. Here is a view of Vienna's snow-laced Auer Welsbach Park and it’s not the only place where things are a bit chilly. The OPEC HQ here could be one place for instance!

For this time around, accompanying the usual tussles between the Saudis and Iranians, the doves and the hawks, is the additional stress of appointing a successor to OPEC Secretary General Abdalla Salem el-Badri, a genial Libyan, who is nearing the end of his second term.

Finding a compromise candidate is usually the order of the day but not if 'compromise' is not a by-word for many of its members. Trouble has been brewing since OPEC members last met in June. As a long term observer of the goings-on at OPEC, the Oilholic can say for certain that all the anecdotal evidence he has gathered seems to suggest a clash is imminent. That’s hardly a surprise and it could not have come at a worse time.

OPEC has forecast a 5% drop in demand for its crude oil in wake of shale supply and other unconventional oil from non-OPEC jurisdictions hitting the market in a troubling global macroeconomic climate. It also acknowledged for the first time that shale oil was of concern and then got into a debate with the IEA whether (or not) US production could overtake Saudi Arabia’s by 2020. In light of all this, OPEC could seriously do with some strong leadership at this juncture.

Sources suggest three 'potential' candidates are in the running to succeed el-Badri. Two of these are Thamir Ghadhban of Iraq and Gholam-Hossein Nozari of Iran. Both have served as their country’s respective oil ministers. The third man is Majid Munif; an industry veteran and a former Saudi OPEC adviser. Now, the Oilholic uses the world ‘potential’ above for the three men only guardedly.

Historical and recent acrimony between the Iranians and Saudis needs no documentation. It has only been a year and half since an OPEC meeting broke-up in acrimony and er...highly colourful language! This puts the chances of either one of them settling for the other’s candidate as highly unlikely. Iran is also miffed about the lack of support it has received in wake of international sanctions on its oil industry by several importing jurisdictions.

Some here suggest that Ghadhban of Iraq would be the compromise candidate for the post. However, sources within four MENA OPEC member delegations have told the Oilholic that they are backing the Saudi candidate Munif. Yours truly cannot predict whether they’ll have a change of heart but as things stand, a compromise banking on the appointment of an Iraqi is just not working out.

Never say ‘never’ but the possibility of el-Badri continuing is remote as well. He is not allowed more than two terms under OPEC rules. In order to assuage both the Iranian and the Saudis, perhaps an Ecuadorian or an Angolan candidate might come forward. While such a candidate may well calm tempers in the room, he (or she, there is after all one lady at the table) is highly unlikely to wield the leverage, clout or respect that el-Badri has commanded over his tenure.

As Kuwait prepares to hold the rotating presidency of the cartel, a stalemate over the Secretary General’s appointment, according to most here, is detrimental to “market stability”. How about it being detrimental to OPEC itself at a time when a medium term, possibly long term, rewriting of the global oil trade is perhaps underway?

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

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo:  Snowfall at Auer-Welsbach Park, Vienna, Austria © Gaurav Sharma, December 2012.

‘Oh Frack’ for OPEC, ‘Yeah Frack’ for IEA?

In a space of a fortnight this month, both the IEA and OPEC raised “fracks” and figures. Not only that, a newly elected President Barack Obama declared his intentions to rid the USA of “foreign oil” and the media was awash with stories about American energy security permutations in wake of the shale bonanza. Alas, the whole lot forgot to raise one important point; more on that later.

 

Starting with OPEC, its year-end calendar publication – The World Oil Outlook – saw the oil exporters’ bloc acknowledge for the first time on November 8 that fracking and shale oil & gas prospection on a global scale would significantly alter the energy landscape as we know it. OPEC also cut its medium and long term global oil demand estimates and assumed an average crude oil price of US$100 per barrel over the medium term.

 

“Given recent significant increases in North American shale oil and shale gas production, it is now clear that these resources might play an increasingly important role in non-OPEC medium and long term supply prospects,” its report said.

 

The report added that shale oil will contribute 2 million barrels per day (bpd) towards global oil supply by 2020 and 3 million bpd by 2035. If this materialises, then the projected rate of incremental supply is over the daily output of some OPEC members and compares to the ‘official’ daily output (i.e. minus the illegal siphoning / theft) of Nigeria.

 

OPEC’s first acknowledgement of the impact of shale came attached with a caveat that over the medium term, shale oil would continue to come from North America only with other regions making “modest” contributions over the longer term at best. For the record, the Oilholic agrees with the sentiment and has held this belief for a while now based on detailed investigations in a journalistic capacity (about financing shale projects).

 

OPEC admitted that the global economy, especially the US economy, is expected to be less reliant on its members, who at present pump over a third of the world's oil and have around 80% of planet’s conventional crude reserves. Pay particular attention to the ‘conventional’ bit, yours truly will come back to it.

 

According to the exporters’ bloc, global demand would reach 92.9 million bpd by 2016, down over 1 million from its 2011 report. By 2035, it expects consumption to rise to 107.3 million bpd, over 2 million less than previous estimates. To put things into perspective, global demand in 2011 was 87.8 million bpd.

 

Partly, but not only, down to shale oil, non-OPEC output is expected to rise to 56.6 million bpd by 2016, up 4.2 million bpd from 2011, the report added. So OPEC expects demand for its crude to average 29.70 million bpd in 2016; much less than its current output (ex-Iraq).

 

"This downward revision, together with updated estimates of OPEC production capacity over the medium term, implies that OPEC crude oil spare capacity is expected to rise beyond 5 million bpd as early as 2013-14," OPEC said.

 

"Long term oil demand prospects have not only been affected by the medium term downward revisions, but by higher oil prices too…oil demand growth has a notable downside risk, especially in the first half of 2013. Much of this risk is attributed to not only the OECD, but also China and India," it added.

 

So on top of a medium term crude oil price assumption of US$100 per barrel (by its internal measure and OPEC basket of crudes, which usually follows Brent not WTI), the bloc forecasts the price to rise with inflation to US$120 by 2025 and US$155 by 2035.

 

Barely a week later, IEA Chief Economist Fatih Birol – who at this point in 2009 was discussing 'peak oil' – created ripples when he told a news conference in London that in his opinion the USA would overtake Russia as the biggest gas producer by a significant margin by 2015. Not only that, he told scribes here that by 2017, the USA would become the world's largest oil producer ahead of the Saudis and Russians. 

 

Realising the stirrings in the room, Birol added that he realised how “optimistic” the IEA forecasts were sounding given that the shale oil boom was a new phenomenon in relative terms.

 

"Light, tight oil resources are poorly known....If no new resources are discovered after 2020 and plus, if the prices are not as high as today, then we may see Saudi Arabia coming back and being the first producer again," he cautioned.

 

Earlier in the day, the IEA forecasted that US oil production would rise to 10 million bpd by 2015 and 11.1 million bpd in 2020 before slipping to 9.2 million bpd by 2035. It forecasted Saudi Arabia’s oil output to be 10.9 million bpd by 2015, 10.6 million bpd in 2020 but would rise to 12.3 million bpd by 2035.

 

That would see the world relying increasingly on OPEC after 2020 as, in addition to increases from Saudi Arabia, Iraq will account for 45% the growth in global oil production to 2035 and become the second-largest exporter, overtaking Russia.

 

The report also assumes a huge expansion in the Chinese economy, which the IEA said would overtake the USA in purchasing power parity soon after 2015 (and by 2020 using market exchange rates). It added that the share of coal in primary energy demand will fall only slightly by 2035. Fossil fuels in general will remain dominant in the global energy mix, supported by subsidies that, in 2011, rose by 30% to US$523 billion, due mainly to increases in the Middle East and North Africa.

 

Fresh from his re-election, President Obama promised to “rid America of foreign oil” in his victory speech prior to both the IEA and OPEC reports. An acknowledgement of the US shale bonanza by OPEC and a subsequent endorsement by IEA sent ‘crude’ cheers in US circles.

 

The US media, as expected, went into overdrive. One story – by ABC news – stood out in particular claiming to have stumbled on a shale oil find with more potential than all of OPEC. Not to mention, the environmentalists also took to the airwaves letting the great American public know about the dangers of fracking and how they shouldn’t lose sight of the environmental impact.

 

Rhetoric is fine, stats are fine and so are verbal jousts. However, one important question has bypassed several key commentators (bar some environmentalists). That being, just how many barrels are being used, to extract one fresh barrel? You bring that into the equation and unconventional prospection – including US and Canadian shale, Canadian oil sands and Brazil’s ultradeepwater exploration – all seem like expensive prepositions.

 

What’s more OPEC’s grip on conventional oil production, which is inherently cheaper than unconventional and is expected to remain so for sometime, suddenly sounds worthy of concern again.

 

Nonetheless “profound” changes are underway as both OPEC and IEA have acknowledged and those changes are very positive for US energy mix. Maybe, as The Economist noted in an editorial for its latest issue: “The biggest bonanza from all this new (US) energy would be if users paid the real cost of consuming oil and gas.”

 

What? Tax gasoline users more in the US of A? Keep dreaming sir! That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it crude!

 

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Oil prospection site, North Dakota, USA © Phil Schermeister / National Geographic.

Speculators, production & San Diego’s views

It is good to be in the ‘unified’ port of San Diego, California for a few days to get some crude views, especially those of the trading types who have a pad on the city’s Ocean Beach waterfront looking out to the Pacific. While the view from one of their living room windows is a testament to the current serenity of the Pacific Ocean (an example on the left), markets are anything but serene with politicians blaming paper traders for the current volatility.

Instead of shrugging and quipping ‘typical’, most admit candidly that the ratio of paper (or virtual) barrels versus physical barrels will continue to rise. Some can and quite literally do sit on the beach and trade with no intention of queuing at the end of pipeline in Cushing, Oklahoma to collect their crude cargo.

Anecdotal evidence suggests the ratio of paper versus physically traded barrels has risen from 8:1 at the turn of millennium to as high as 33:1 in 2012. Furthermore, one chap reminds the Oilholic not to forget the spread betting public. “They actually don’t even enter the equation but have a flutter on the general direction of crude benchmarks and in some cases – for instance you Brits – all winnings are tax free,” he added.

Nonetheless, on his latest visit to the USA, yours truly sees the supply and demand dynamic stateside undergoing a slow but sure change. In fact old merchant navy hands in San Diego, which is a unified port because the air and sea ports are next to each other, would tell you that American crude import and export dispatch patterns are changing. Simply put, with shale oil (principally in Eagle Ford) and rising conventional production in Texas and North Dakota in the frame and the economy not growing as fast as it should – the US is importing less and less of the crude stuff from overseas.

The IEA projects a fall of 2.6 million barrels per day (bpd) in imports by US refiners and reckons the global oil trading map and direction of oil consignments would be redrawn by 2017. Not only the US, but many nations with new projects coming onstream would find internal use for their product. India’s prospection drive and Saudi Arabia’s relatively new oilfield of Manifa are noteworthy examples.

So a dip in Middle Eastern crude exports by 2017 won’t all be down to an American production rise but a rise in domestic consumption of other producer nations as well. Overall, the IEA reckons 32.9 million bpd will trade between different regions around the globe; a dip of 1.6 million bpd over last year. With some believing that much of this maybe attributed to dipping volumes of light sweet crude demanded by the US; the thought probably adds weight to Eastward forays of oil traders like Vitol, Glencore and Gunvor. Such sentiments are also already having an impact on widening Brent’s premium to the WTI with the latter not necessarily reflecting global market patterns.

Elsewhere, while the Oilholic has been away, it seems BP has been at play. In a statement to the London Stock Exchange on Monday, BP said it had agreed 'heads of terms' to sell its 50% stake in Russian subsidiary TNK-BP to Rosneft for US$28 billion via a mixture of US$17.1 billion cash and shares representing 12.84% (of Rosneft). BP added that it intends to use US$4.8 billion of the cash payment to purchase a further 5.66% of Rosneft from the Russian government.

BP Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg said, “TNK-BP has been a good investment and we are now laying a new foundation for our work in Russia. Rosneft is set to be a major player in the global oil industry. This material holding in Rosneft will, we believe, give BP solid returns.”

With BP’s oligarch partners at AAR already having signed a MoU with Rosneft, the market is in a state of fervour over the whole of TNK-BP being bought out by the Russian state energy company. Were this to happen, Rosneft would have a massive crude oil production capacity of 3.15 million bpd and pass a sizeable chunk of Russian production from private hands to state control. It would also pile on more debt on an already indebted company. Its net debt is nearing twice its EBITA and a swoop for the stake of both partners in TNK-BP would need some clever financing.

Continuing with the corporate front, the Canadian government has rejected Petronas' US$5.4 billion bid for Progress Energy Resources. The latter said on Sunday that it was "disappointed" with Ottawa’s decision. The company added that it would attempt to find a possible solution for the deal. Industry Minister Christian Paradis said in a statement on Friday that he had sent a letter to Petronas indicating he was "not satisfied that the proposed investment is likely to be of net benefit to Canada."

Meanwhile civil strife is in full swing in Kuwait according to the BBC World Service as police used tear gas and stun grenades to disperse large numbers of people demonstrating against the dissolution of parliament by Emir Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah whose family have ruled the country for over 200 years.

In June, a Kuwaiti court declared elections for its 50-seat parliament in February, which saw significant gains for the Islamist-led opposition, invalid and reinstated a more pro-government assembly. There has been trouble at the mill ever since. Just a coincidental footnote to the Kuwaiti unrest – the IEA’s projected figure of 2.6 million bpd fall in crude imports of US refiners by 2017, cited above in this blog post, is nearly the current daily output of Kuwait (just to put things into context) ! That’s all from San Diego folks! It’s nearly time to say ‘Aloha’ to Hawaii. But before that the Oilholic leaves you with a view of USS Midway (above right), once an aircraft carrier involved in Vietnam and Gulf War I and currently firmly docked in San Diego harbour as a museum. In its heydays, the USS Midway housed over 4,000 naval personnel and over 130 aircraft.

According to a spokesperson, the USS Midway, which wasn’t nuclear-powered, had a total tank capacity of 2.5 million gallons of diesel to power it and held 1.5 million gallons of jet fuel for the aircraft. It consumed 250,000 gallons of diesel per day, while jet fuel consumption during operations came in at 150,000 gallons per day during flying missions. Now that’s gas guzzling to protect and serve before we had nuclear powered carriers. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo 1: Ocean Beach, San Diego. Photo 2: USS Midway, California, USA © Gaurav Sharma 2012.

BP to call time on 9 years of Russian pain & gain?

After market murmurs came the announcement this morning that BP is looking to sell its stake in Russian joint venture TNK-BP; a source of nine years of corporate pain and gain. As the oil major refocuses its priorities elsewhere, finally the pain aspect has made BP call time on the venture as it moves on.

A sale is by no means imminent but a company statement says, it has “received unsolicited indications of interest regarding the potential acquisition of its shareholding in TNK-BP.”

BP has since informed its Russian partners Alfa Access Renova (AAR), a group of Russian billionaire oligarchs fronted by Mikhail Fridman that it intends to pursue the sale in keeping with “its commitment to maximising shareholder value.”

Neither the announcement itself nor that it came over Q2 2012 are a surprise. BP has unquestionably reaped dividends from the partnership which went on to become Russia’s third largest oil producer collating the assets of Fridman and his crew and BP Russia. However, it has also been the source of management debacles, fiascos and politically motivated tiffs as the partners struggled to get along.

Two significant events colour public perception about the venture. When Bob Dudley (current Chief executive of BP) was Chief executive of TNK-BP from 2003-2008, the Russian venture’s output rose 33% to 1.6 million barrels per day. However for all of this, acrimony ensued between BP and AAR which triggered some good old fashioned Russian political interference. In 2008, BP’s technical staff were barred from entering Russia, offices were raided and boardroom arguments with political connotations became the norm.

Then Dudley’s visa to stay in the country was not renewed prompting him to leave in a huff claiming "sustained harassment" from Russian authorities. Fast forward to 2011 and you get the second incident when Fridman and the oligarchs all but scuppered BP’s chances of joining hands with state-owned Rosneft. The Russian state behemoth subsequently lost patience and went along a different route with ExxonMobil leaving stumped faces at BP and perhaps a whole lot of soul searching.

In wake of Macondo, as Dudley and BP refocus on repairing the company’s image in the US and ventures take-off elsewhere from Canada to the Caribbean – it is indeed time to for the partners to apply for a divorce. In truth, BP never really came back from Russia with love and the oligarchs say they have "lost faith in BP as a partner". Fridman has stepped down as TNK-BP chairman and two others Victor Vekselberg and Leonard Blavatnik also seem to have had enough according to a contact in Moscow.

The Oilholic’s Russian friends reliably inform him that holy matrimony in the country can be annulled in a matter of hours. But whether this corporate divorce will be not be messy via a swift stake sale and no political interference remains to be seen. Sadly, it is also a telling indictment of the way foreign direct investment goes in Russia which is seeing a decline in production and badly needs fresh investment and ideas.

Both BP and Shell, courtesy its frustrations with Sakhalin project back in 2006, cannot attest to Russia being a corporate experience they’ll treasure. The market certainly thinks BP’s announcement is for the better with the company’s shares trading up 2.7% (having reached 4% at one point) when the Oilholic last checked.

From BP to the North Sea, where EnQuest – the largest independent oil producer in the UK sector – will farm out a 35% interest in its Alma and Galia oil field developments to the Kuwait Foreign Petroleum Exploration Company (KUFPEC) subject to regulatory approval. According to sources at law firm Clyde & Co., who are acting as advisers to KUFPEC, the Kuwaitis are to invest a total of approximately US$500 million in cash comprising of up to US$182 million in future contributions for past costs and a development carry for EnQuest, and of KUFPEC's direct share of the development costs.

Away from deals and on to pricing, Brent dropped under US$100 for the first time since October while WTI was also at its lowest since October on the back of less than flattering economic data from the US, India and China along with ongoing bearish sentiments courtesy the Eurozone crisis. In this crudely volatile world, today’s trading makes the thoughts expressed at 2012 Reuters Global Energy & Environment Summit barely two weeks ago seem a shade exaggerated.

At the event, IEA chief economist Fatih Birol said he was worried about high oil prices posing a serious risk putting at stake a potential economic recovery in Europe, US, Japan and China. Some were discussing that oil prices had found a floor in the US$90 to US$95 range. Yet, here we are two weeks later, sliding down with the bears! That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: TNK-BP Saratov Refinery, Russia © TNK-BP

IEA on demand, Lavrov on Iran plus crude chatter

In its latest monthly report, the IEA confirmed what the Oilholic has been blogging for the past few months on the basis of City feedback – that the likelihood of another global recession will inhibit demand for crude oil this year, a prevalent high oil price might in itself hit demand too and seasonally mild weather already is.

While geopolitical factors such as the Iranian tension and Nigerian strikes have supported bullish trends of late, the IEA notes that Q4 of 2011 saw consumption decline on an annualised basis when compared with the corresponding quarter of 2010. As a consequence, the agency feels inclined to reduce its 2012 demand growth forecast by 220,000 barrels per day (bpd) from its last monthly report to 1.1 million barrels.

"Two inherently destabilising factors are interacting to give an impression of price stability that is more apparent than real. The first is a rising likelihood of sharp economic slowdown, if not outright recession, in 2012. The second factor, which is counteracting bearish pressures, is the physical market tightening evident since mid-2009 and notably since mid-2010," it says in the report.

The IEA also suggests that a one-third downward revision to GDP growth would see this year's oil consumption unchanged at 2011 levels. On the Iranian situation and its threat to disrupt flows in the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of global oil output passes, the agency notes, “At least a portion of Iran's 2.5 million bpd crude exports will likely be denied to OECD refiners during second half 2012, although more apocalyptic scenarios for sustained disruption to Strait of Hormuz transits look less likely.”

Meanwhile, Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has weighed in to the Iran debate with his own “chaos theory”. According to the BBC, the minister has warned that a Western military strike against Iran would be "a catastrophe" which would lead to "large flows" of refugees from Iran and would "fan the flames" of sectarian tension in the Middle East. Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak earlier said any decision on an Israeli attack on Iran was "very far off".

Meanwhile, one of those companies facing troubles of its own when it comes to procuring light sweet crude for European refiners is Italy’s Eni which saw its long term corporate credit rating lowered by S&P from 'A' from 'A+'. In addition, S&P removed the ratings from CreditWatch, where they were placed with negative implications on December 8, 2011.

Eni’s outlook is negative according to S&P and the downgrade reflects the ratings agency’s view that the Italian oil major’s business risk profile and domestic assets have been impaired by the material exposure of many of its end markets and business units to the deteriorating Italian operating environment. Eni reported consolidated net debt of €28.3 billion as of September 30, 2011. Previously, Moody’s has also reacted to the Italian economy versus Eni situation over Q4 2011.

Elsewhere conflicting reports have emerged about the Obama administration’s decision to deny a permit to Keystone XL project something which the Oilholic has maintained would be a silly move for US interests as Canadians can and will look elsewhere. Some reports said the President has decided to deny a permit to the project while others said a decision was unlikely before late-February. This article from The Montreal Gazette just about sums up Wednesday's conflicting reports.

When the formal rejection by the US state department finally arrived, the President said he had been given insufficient time to review the plans by his Republican opponents. At the end of 2011, Republicans forced a final decision on the plan within 60 days during a legislative standoff.

The Republican Speaker of the US House of Representatives, John Boehner, criticised the Obama administration for its failure over a project that would have created "hundreds of thousands of jobs" while the President responded by starting an online petition so that the general population can express its opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline.

The merits and demerits of the proposal aisde, this whole protracted episode represents the idiocy of American politics. Canadians should now seriously examine alternative export markets; something which they have already hinted at. The Oilholic's timber trade analogy always makes Canadians smile. (Sadly, even Texans agree, though its no laughing matter).

On the crude pricing front, the short term geopolitically influenced bullishness continues to provide resistance to the WTI at the US$100 per barrel level and Brent at US$111. Sucden Financial's Myrto Sokou expects some further consolidation in the oil markets due to the absence of major indicators and mixed signals from the global equity markets, while currency movements might provide some short-term direction. “Investors should remain cautious ahead of any possible news coming out from the Greek debt talks,” Sokou warns.

Finally, global law firm Baker & McKenzie is continuing with its Global Energy Webinar Series 2011-2012 with the latest round – on International Competition Law – to follow on January 25-26 which would be well worth listening in to. Antitrust Rules for Joint Ventures, Strategic Alliances and Other Modes of Cooperation with Competitors would also be under discussion. Thats all for the moment folks. Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: Oil Refinery, Quebec, Canada © Michael Melford / National Geographic.

Examining a crude 2011 & talking Iran vs. 2012

As the Oilholic conjectured at the end of 2010, the year 2011 did indeed see Brent Crude at “around US$105 to US$110 a barrel”. However there was nothing ‘crudely’ predictable about 2011 itself – the oil markets faced stunted global economic growth, prospect of another few quarters of negative growth (which may still transpire) and a Greek crisis morphing into a full blown Eurozone crisis.

The Arab Spring also understandably had massive implications for the instability / risk premium in the price of crude over much of 2011. However, the impact of each country’s regional upheaval on the price was not uniform. The Oilholic summarised it as follows based on the perceived oil endowment (or the lack of it) for each country: Morocco (negligible), Algeria (marginal), Egypt (marginal), Tunisia (negligible), Bahrain (marginal), Iran and Libya (substantial).

Of the latter, when Libya imploded, Europe faced a serious threat of shortage of the country’s light sweet crude. But with Gaddafi gone and things limping back to normal, Libya has awarded crude oil supply contracts in 2012 to Glencore, Gunvor, Trafigura and Vitol. Of these Vitol helped in selling rebel-held crude during the civil war as the Oilholic noted in June.

Meanwhile Iran remains a troubling place and gives us the first debating point of 2012. It saw protests in 2011 but the regime held firm at the time of the Arab spring. However, in wake of its continued nuclear programme, recent sanctions have triggered a new wave of belligerence from the Iranian government including its intention to blockade the Straits of Hormuz. This raises the risk premium again and if, as expected a blanket ban by the EU on Iranian crude imports is announced, the trend for the crude price for Q1 2012 is decidedly bullish.

Société Générale's oil analyst Michael Wittner believes an EU embargo would possibly prompt an IEA strategic release. The price surge – directly related to the Saudi ability to mitigate the Iran effect – would dampen economic and oil demand growth. Market commentators believe an EU embargo is highly likely, especially after it reached an agreement in principle on an embargo on January 4th.

However, a more serious development would be if Iran carries out its threat to shut down the Straits of Hormuz, disrupting 15 million bpd of crude oil flows and we would expect Brent prices to spike into the US$150-200 range albeit for a limited time period according to Wittner.

“A credible threat from missiles, mines, or fast attack boats is all it would take for tanker insurers to stop coverage, which would halt tanker traffic. However, we believe that Iran would not be able to keep the Straits shut for longer than two weeks, due to a US-led military response. The disruption would definitely result in an IEA strategic release. The severe price spike would sharply hurt economic and oil demand growth, and from that standpoint, be self-correcting,” he adds.

Nonetheless, not many in the City see a “high” probability of such a step by Iran. Anyway, enough about Iran; lets resume our look back at 2011 and the release of strategic reserves would be a good joiner back to events of the past year.

Political pressure, which started building from April 2011, onwards saw the IEA ask its members to release an extra 60 million barrels of their oil stockpiles on to the world markets on June 23rd. The previous two occasions were the first gulf war (1991) and the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina (2005). That it happened given the political clamour for it is no surprise and whether or not one questions the wisdom behind the decision, it was a significant event.

For what it was worth, the market trend was already bearish at the time, Libya or no Libya. Concerns triggered by doubts about the US, EU and Chinese economies were aplenty as well as the end of QE2 liquidity injections coupled with high levels of non-commercial net length in the oil markets.

On the corporate front, refineries continued to struggle as expected with many major NOCs either divesting or planning to divest refining and marketing (R&M) assets. US major ConocoPhillips' announcement in July that it will be pursuing the separation of its exploration and production (E&P) and R&M businesses into two separate publicly traded corporations via a tax-free spin-off R&M co. to shareholders did not surprise the Oilholic – in fact it’s a sign of times.

Upstream remains inherently more attractive than the downstream business and the cliché of “high risk, high reward” resonates in the crude world. Continuing with the corporate theme, one has to hand it to ExxonMobil’s inimitable boss – Rex Tillerson – for successfully forging an Arctic tie-up with Rosneft so coveted by beleaguered rival BP.

On August 30th, 2011, beaming alongside Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, Tillerson said the two firms will spend US$3.2 billion on deep sea exploration in the East Prinovozemelsky region of the Kara Sea. Russian portion of the Black Sea has also been thrown in the prospection pie for good measure as has the development of oil fields in Western Siberia.

The US oil giant described the said deal as among the most promising and least explored offshore areas globally “with high potential for liquids and gas.” If hearts at BP sank, so they should, as essentially the deal had components which it so coveted. However, a dispute with local partner TNK-BP first held up a BP-Rosneft tie-up and then finished it off.

One the pipelines front, the TransCanada Keystone XL project continues to be hit by delays and decision is not expected before the US presidential election; but the Oilholic feels the delay is not necessarily a bad thing. (Click here for thoughts)

The Oilholic saw M&A activity in the oil & gas sector over 2011 – especially corporate financed asset acquisitions – marginally exceeding pre-crisis deal valuation levels. Recent research for Infrastructure Journal – suggests the deal valuation figure for acquisition of oil & gas infrastructure assets, using September 30th as a cut-off date, is well above the total valuation for 2008, the year that the global credit squeeze meaningfully constricted capital flows.

Finally, on the subject of the good old oil benchmarks, since Q1 2009, Brent has been trading at premium to the WTI. This divergence has stood in recent weeks as both global benchmarks plummeted in wake of the recent economic malaise. WTI’s discount reached almost US$26 per barrel at one point in 2011.

Furthermore, waterborne crudes have also been following the general direction of Brent’s price. The Louisiana Light Sweet (LLS) increasingly takes its cue from Brent rather than the WTI, and has been for a while. Hence, Brent continues to reflect global conditions better.

Rounding things up, 2011 was a great year in terms of crude reading, travelling and speaking. Starting with the reading bit, 2011 saw the Oilholic read several books, but three particularly stood out; Daniel Yergin’s weighty volume - The Quest, Dan Dicker’s Oil’s Endless Bid and last but not the least Reuters’ in-house Oilholic Tom Bergin’s Spills & Spin.

Switching to crude travels away from London town, the Oilholic blogged from Calgary, Vancouver, Houston, San Francisco, Vienna, Dusseldorf, Bruges, Manama and Doha; the latter being the host city of the 20th World Petroleum Congress. The Congress itself and other signature events in the 2011 oil & gas calendar duly threw up several tangents for discussion.

Most notable among them were the two OPEC summits, the first in June which saw a complete disharmony among the cartel’s members followed by a calmer less acrimonious one in December where a unanimous decision to hold production at 30 million bpd was reached.

On the speaking circuit front, 2011 saw the Oilholic comment on CNBC, Indian and Chinese networks, OPEC webcasts and industry events, most notable among which was the Baker & McKenzie seminar at the World Petroleum Congress which was a memorable experience. That’s all for the moment folks. Here’s to 2012! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: Oil rig © Cairn Energy.

IEA, crude price & Al-Naimi’s strong arm tactics!

The Oilholic arrived in Vienna this morning ahead of the 160th OPEC meeting from sunny Doha via a gale force wind hit London, to hear that the IEA had a new message for the cartel. The agency's latest market report notes that OPEC will need to produce “less” crude over 2012 than previously forecast. Global demand will average 90.3 million barrels per day (bpd) over 2012, which is 200,000 barrels less than the IEA’s November estimate.

This marks the fourth cut in the IEA’s 2012 forecast. Meanwhile, before the OPEC meeting outcome is officially known, the ICE Brent forward month future contract came in at US$109.41 up 2.15 cents or 2% while WTI came in at US$100.00 up 1.17 cents or 1.1 per cent when the Oilholic last checked at 19:00CET. Concurrently, the OPEC basket of crudes price stood at US$107.33 on Monday.

Meanwhile, Saudi oil minister Ali al-Naimi arrived in Vienna with more than the customary aplomb declaring to the World’s press that his country’s output had topped 10 million bpd, the highest it has been in recent memory. If his idea was to get price hawks Algeria, Iran and Venezuela to acknowledge an appreciable rise in Saudi supply, since the shenanigans of the last meeting of the cartel in June, then sources suggest it just might have succeeded.

The geopolitical pretext of course is that the Saudis wanted to make up for lost Libyan supplies.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: OPEC crest © Gaurav Sharma 2011.

Well ‘Why-EA’? Agency wilts as politicians win!

Earlier this afternoon, for only the third time in its history, the IEA asked its members to release an extra 60 million barrels of their oil stockpiles on to the world markets.

The previous two occasions were the first gulf war (1991) and the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina (2005). That it has happened given the political clamour for it is no surprise and whether or not one questions the wisdom behind the decision, it is a significant event.

The impact of the move designed to stem the rise of crude prices was felt immediately. At 17:15GMT ICE Brent forward month futures contract was trading at US$108.45 down 4.99% or US$5.74 in intraday trading while the WTI contract fell 3.64% or US$3.51 to US$91.46.

Nearly half of the 60 million barrels would be released from the US government’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). In relative terms, UK’s contribution would be three million barrels – which tells you which nation the IEA was mostly looking to. The agency’s executive director Nobuo Tanaka feels the move will contribute to “well-supplied markets” and ensure a soft landing for the world economy.

This begs the question if the market is “well-supplied” especially with overcapacity at Cushing (Stateside) why now? Why here? For starters, and as the Oilholic blogged earlier, some politicians like Senator Jeff Bingaman – a Democrat from New Mexico and chairman of the US Senate energy committee – have been clamouring for his country’s SPR to be raided to relieve price pressures since April.

OPEC’s shenanigans earlier this month gave them further ammunition amid concerns that the summer or “driving season” rise in US demand would cause prices to rise further still. That is despite the fact that the American market remains well supplied and largely unaffected by 132 million barrels of Libyan light sweet crude oil which the IEA reckons have disappeared from the market (until the end of May since the hostilities began).

Nonetheless, all this mega event does is add to the market fear and confirm that a perceptively short term problem is worsening! Long term hope remains that the Libyan supply gap would be plugged. Releasing portions of the SPRs would not alleviate market concerns and could even be a disincentive for the Saudis to pump more oil – although they made it blatantly obvious after the OPEC meeting deadlock on June 8 that they will up production. Now how they will react is anybody's guess?

Jason Schenker, President and Chief Economist of Prestige Economics, feels that while the decision is price bearish for crude oil in the immediate term, these measures are being implemented with the intent to stave off significantly higher prices in the near and medium term.

In a note to clients, Schenker notes: “The fact that the IEA had to go to these lengths in the second year of an expanding business cycle says something very bullish about crude oil prices in the medium and long term. The global economy is up against a wall in terms of receiving additional oil supplies to meet demand. Additional demand or supply disruption would have a massively bullish impact on prices. After all, releasing emergency inventories is a last resort.”

But must we resort to last resorts, just yet? While Sen. Bingaman would be happy, most in the market are worried. Some moan that Venezuelan and Iranian intransigence in Vienna brought this about. For what it is worth, the market trend was already bearish, Libya or no Libya. Concerns triggered by doubts about the US, EU and Chinese economies were aplenty as well as the end of QE2 liquidity injections coupled with high levels of non-commercial net length in the oil markets.

Some for instance like Phil Flynn, analyst at PFG Best, think the IEA’s move was “the final nail in the coffin for the embattled oil markets.” Let’s see what the agency itself makes of its move 30 days from now when it reassesses the situation.

Those interested in the intricacies of this event would perhaps also like to know how the sale takes place but we only have the US example to go by. Last time it happened – under the Bush administration on September 6, 2005 – of the 30 million barrels made available, only 11 million were actually sold to five bidders by the US energy department. Nine of a total of 14 bidders were rejected, with deliveries commencing in the third week of the month. What the take-up would be in all IEA jurisdictions this time around remains to be seen.

Medium term price sentiments according to the Oilholic’s feedback have not materially altered and so they shouldn’t either. An average of five City forecasts sees Brent at US$113.50 in Q3 2011, US$112.50 in Q4 11 and US$115 in Q1 2012. Finally, most city forecasters, and to cite one, remain “marginally” bullish for 2012 though no one, this blogger including, sees a US$150 price over 2012.

Finally to all of the Oilholic's American readers concerned about the rising price of gas, spare a thought for some of us across the pond. OPEC’s research suggests (click graph above) that much higher taxes in most national jurisdictions in this part of the world means we pay way more than you guys. That is not changing any time soon. Releases of SPRs woould not meaningfully ease price pressures at the pump for us.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: Gas Station, Sunnyvale, California, USA © Gaurav Sharma, April 2011. Graphics: Who gets what from a litre of Oil? © OPEC Secretariat, Vienna 2010.

IEA, OPEC & a few more bits on BP

It has been a month of quite a few interesting reports and comments, but first and as usual - a word on pricing. Both Brent crude oil and WTI futures have partially retreated from the highs seen last month, especially in case of the latter. That’s despite the Libyan situation showing no signs of a resolution and its oil minister Shukri Ghanem either having defected or running a secret mission for Col. Gaddafi depending on which news source you rely on! (Graph 1: Historical average annual oil prices. Click on graph to enlarge.)

Either way, the 159th OPEC meeting in Vienna which the Oilholic will be attending in a few weeks promises to be an interesting one; we’re not just talking production quotas here. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is also expected to be in Austrian capital – so it should be fun. The market undoubtedly still craves and will continue to crave the quality of crude that Libya exports but other factors are now at play; despite whatever Gaddafi may or may not be playing at.

Contextualising the Libyan situation, Société Générale CIB analyst Jesper Dannesboe notes that Cushing (Oklahoma), the physical delivery point for WTI crude oil, has recently been oversupplied resulting in contango at the very front end of the WTI forward curve.

“This situation is likely to persist until at least mid-2012 as higher supply to Cushing from Canadian oil sands and from North Dakota should result in high Cushing stocks as new pipelines from Cushing to the coast will not be ready until late 2012 at the earliest. This makes it attractive to put on WTI time spreads further out the forward curve at backwardation as they should over time roll into contango,” he wrote in a note to clients.

Dannesboe also observes that while the entire Brent crude oil forward price curve is currently in backwardation (i.e. near-dated prices higher than further-dated prices) out to about 2017, the front-end of the WTI crude oil forward price curve has remained in contango.

The Brent forward curve flipped from contango to backwardation in late February as a result of the unrest in the Middle East & North Africa (MENA). However, contango at the front-end of the WTI forward curve has persisted because WTI's physical delivery point, Cushing (US midcontinent), has remained oversupplied despite a generally tight global market for sweet crude as a result of the loss of Libyan exports, he concludes.

Meanwhile, ahead of the OPEC meeting, the International Energy Agency (IEA) called for “action” from oil producers that will help avoid the negative global economic consequences which a further sharp market tightening could cause. Its governing board meeting last Thursday expressed “serious concern” that there are growing signs the rise in oil prices since September is affecting the economic recovery. As ever, the IEA said it stood ready to work with producers as well as non-member consumers.

The Oilholic also recently had the pleasure of reading a Fitch Ratings report, authored earlier this month in wake of the Libyan situation, which notes that the airline sector is by far the most vulnerable to rising oil and gas prices of all corporate sectors in the EMEA region given the heavy weight of fuel costs in operating cost structures (20%-30%), execution risks from companies' use of hedging instruments to mitigate their fuel exposure and fierce industry competition. (Graph 2: Price movement - Jet fuel vs. Brent oil. Click on graph to enlarge)

Erwin van Lumich, a Managing Director in Fitch's corporate departments, said, "The gap between the jet fuel price curve and the Brent curve narrowed to approximately 13% during 2010, with airlines in emerging markets generally most exposed to fuel price fluctuations due to a lack of market development for fuel hedging."

It gives food for thought that a temporary impact of the Icelandic volcanic ash can send jitters down the spine of airline investors but the jet fuel pricing spread, airlines’ hedging techniques (or the lack of it) and how it might impact operating margins is mostly raised at their AGMs. Where there are losers, there are bound to be winners but Fitch notes that the ratings of companies in the extractive industries are not expected to benefit from the price increases as the agency uses a mid-cycle pricing approach to avoid cyclical price changes having an impact on ratings. At this stage, Fitch does not anticipate a revision to its mid-cycle price deck to an extent that it would result in rating changes.

Finally, a couple of things about BP. To begin with, BP’s share swap deal with Rosneft failing to meet the May 16th deadline does not imply by default that that deal would not happen. In wake of the objection of AAR – its TNK-BP joint venture partner – there are still issues to be resolved and they will be in the fullness of time contrary to reports on the deal’s demise. A source close to the negotiations (at AAR not Rosneft) says talks are continuing.

Continuing with BP, it finally got recognition that blame for the Macondo incident is not exclusively its. Mitsui (which holds 10% of the well’s licence) and Anadarko (25%) had both blamed accident on BP’s negligence, refusing to pay or bear costs. However, Mitsui finally agreed to settle claims relating to the disaster with BP. It now agrees with BP that it was the result of oversights and mistakes by multiple parties. Undoubtedly, the pressure will now be on Anadarko to settle with BP.

According to US government figures, BP has paid out US$20.8 billion. It has invoiced Mitsui for approximately US$2.0 billion with the Japanese company expected to pay half of that at the present moment in time. A US trial on limitation of liabilities is expected to rule on the issue of gross negligence by parties concerned sometime over Q1 2012. Watch this space!

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Graphics © Fitch Ratings, May 2011

Oh the market ‘insouciance’ outside is frightful!

It is no longer strange to see Americans and Canadians complain about the rising price of gasoline. After all, it’s the price at the pump which hurts us all – something which has seen a steady rise.

A short-term respite is quite frankly not in sight; more so for Europeans but complaints from North American consumers and change in consumption patterns (in relative terms) have grown in the last five years. Although some in the English town of Bradford, who pay more for their petrol/per litre than North Americans, got a temporary one-off respite according to the BBC, after the station staff put a decimal point in the wrong place. The story is hilarious, aptly timed for April Fools Day and one for the little guy troubled by rising inflation in UK.

US President Obama finally pointed to Canada, Mexico as reliable sources of crude oil and said they could play their part in his consuming nation’s bid to slash imports from unfriendly governments. Both countries rank higher than Saudi Arabia in terms of crude exports to the US, so very welcome quotes – but as with all else about him – a bit late.

The short-term problem – and a global one it is too – is the widening of premium between easier to refine sweet crude oil and sour crude which is the opposite. Anecdotal evidence, either side of the Atlantic is that refiners (either European or European subsidiaries of overseas owners), are paying record physical premiums to secure supplies of sweet crude in wake of the Libyan stand-off.

The quality of Libyan sweet crude is excellent and as a short-term problem starts resembling a longer termed stand-off, the market is getting spooked as no one can make up their minds about who is in charge of the country. That’s despite the on / off media reports of oil being loaded on to tankers both on the rebels’ side and Gaddafi’s side.

End result - Brent Crude forward month futures (May) contract, more reflective of global conditions, has spiked to a 30-month high. Oilholic believes this is no ordinary or linear spike resulting from a geopolitical bias/risk premium to the upside. Rather it is clearly reflective of the rise in price differentials between sweet and sour crude in wake of Libya and hence impacts Brent as a benchmark to a greater extent than the WTI.

As early as a fortnight ago, the IEA rightly warned that we are underestimating the impact of the temporary (or otherwise) loss of Libyan sweet crude on traded paper barrels. In its monthly report for March, it noted, "Market insouciance may change abruptly as April approaches, when global crude demand is expected to increase by around 1 million barrels a day as Atlantic Basin refinery maintenance ends."

Sweet crude varieties are trading at a premium of US$2.80 to US$4.10 per barrel above sour varieties, according to the Oilholic’s sources. This is the highest for some time. Try as they might, Saudis won’t materially alter this; the premium has solid foundations!

Finally before I leave Canada for San Francisco, here is a brilliant editorial in The Economist about European nations trying to forget embarrassing ties in the Middle East and a BBC report on Transocean’s 'crude' announcement of bonuses related to their "best year of safety."

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: Gas Station, Houston, Texas, USA © Gaurav Sharma, March 2011

Of IEA, OPEC and the Hoo-Hah over BP & Rosneft

Both the IEA and OPEC are now more upbeat about the global economic recovery over 2011, which could mean only one thing – an upward revision of global crude oil demand. Starting with the IEA, the agency says it now expects global crude demand to rise by 1.4 million barrels a day in year over year terms over 2011 to 89.1 million barrels per day; a revision of 360,000 barrels per day compared to its last forecast.

OPEC also revised its global oil demand forecast putting demand growth at 1.2 million barrels a day for the year; an upward revision of 50,000 barrels per day from its last estimate. In its monthly report, the cartel also noted that demand for its own crude is expected to average 29.4 million barrels of oil per day in 2011; an upward revision of 200,000 barrels over the previous forecast.

Both OPEC and IEA expect the increase in crude oil demand to be driven entirely by emerging markets, while OECD demand is projected to reverse to its "underlying, structural decline in 2011," according to the latter. Their respective response to the forecasts is one of understandable contrasts.

Nobuo Tanaka, head of the IEA, said a subsequent "alarming" rise in the oil price would be damaging. "We are concerned about the speed of the rising oil price, which can harm the growth of economies. If the current price continues, it will have a negative impact," he added. However, OPEC remains unmoved, as the forward month futures spread between Brent and WTI crude continues to widen to US$5-plus in favour of the latter. Both benchmarks lurk close to the US$100-mark.

OPEC’s position unsurprisingly is that the market remains well supplied. Cartel members UAE, Iran, Venezuela and Algeria say they are not concerned about a US$100 per barrel price. In fact, Venezuela's Energy Minister, Rafael Ramirez, described the price of $100 as "fair value" while speaking to the Reuters news agency. There are no prizes for guessing that an emergency meeting of the cartel to raise production is highly unlikely!

Now to the BP-Rosneft tie-up which sent the markets into a tizzy. In a nutshell, news of BP’s acquisition of a 9.5% stake in Rosneft which in turn would bag a 5% stake in BP was good, but it did not quite merit the response it got. Markets cheered it; environmentalists jeered it (given the open invitation to dig in the Arctic).

Rest of the narrative is a bit barmy. First of all, agreed it is a solid deal but given the involvement of a company 75% owned by the Russian government – I am unsure how it would be instrumental or for that matter detrimental to the UK’s petroleum security. Surely, the jury should still be out on that one. Secondly, this in no way implies that BP has turned its back on the US market in light of recent events as some market commentators have opined.

Finally, it is more of a marriage of convenience rather than a historic deal. Rosneft needed technical expertise and does not care much for political rhetoric in western markets about digging deeper and deeper for crude. BP needs access to resources. Both parties should be happy and it is rumoured in the Russian press that TNK-BP would also like a slice of the potentially lucrative Arctic ice cake. Away from the main event, the sideshow was just as engaging.

Curiously city sources revealed that BP did not use its preferred broker JPMorgan Cazenove, but rather opted to go with London-based Lambert Energy Advisory. It did amuse some in the City. All I can say is good luck to Philip Lambert. Finally, talking of the little guys in this crude world – have you heard of AIM-listed Matra Petroleum?

Last I checked, this independent upstart expects to be producing a rather modest 600-700 barrels per day by H1 2011 and its share price is around 3.52p. So assuming, Brent caps US$100-plus by end of H1 2011 and Matra delivers – the share price could treble in theory. I am not making a recommendation – let’s call it an observation!

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo © Adrian R. Gableson

Crude Year 2011 Begins With a Bang

I must say the New Year has commenced with a flurry of crude news. Traders and oil men had barely resumed work for the first trading day of 2011 that the IEA declared rising oil prices to be a risk to economic recovery. In a publication on Jan 5th, the agency said oil import costs for OECD countries had risen 30% in the past year to US$790 billion which is equal to a loss of income of 0.5% of OECD gross domestic product (GDP).

Speaking to the BBC’s world service, IEA’s Fatih Birol said, "There is definitely a risk of major negative implications for the global economy." I agree and accept this, but truth be told we are some way away from a US$150-plus per barrel high. This morning though, the Brent forward month futures contract was flirting with the US$100 mark. The cold weather we have had either side of the pond does generally tend to support crude prices.

Analysts at SocGen believe the Alaska pipeline shutdown, following a leak, provided only limited support to WTI. Last weekend, a minor leak was discovered at Pump Station 1 on the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) causing a shutdown on the pipeline and prompting Alaska North Slope (ANS) production to be cut from 630,000 bpd to just 37,000 bpd. The pipeline, which carries almost 12% of US crude output, should be restarted "soon", according to its operator Alyeska which is 47% owned by BP, while ConocoPhillips and ExxonMobile have 28% and 20% stakes respectively.

Continuing with forecasts, a new report from ratings agency Moody’s notes that oil prices should stay "moderately high" in 2011, boosting energy companies that produce crude and natural gas liquids, but weak natural gas prices will continue to dog the energy sector this year. More importantly, rather than the volatility of recent years, Moody's expects a continuation of many of the business conditions seen in 2010, despite the Macondo incident.

Steven Wood, managing director of Moody's Oil and Gas/Chemicals group believes that certain business conditions will tighten during the year, and pressures could emerge beyond the near term. Moody's price assumptions – which are not forecasts, but guidelines that the agency uses in its evaluations of credit conditions – call for moderately high crude prices of US$80 per barrel for 2011, along with natural gas prices of US$4.50 per million Btus.

Elsewhere, a US government commission opined in a report that 'bad management' led to BP disaster. Across the pond in London, a parliamentary committee of British MPs raised "serious doubts" about the UK's ability to combat offshore oil spills from deep sea rigs. However, they stopped short of a calling for a moratorium on deep sea drilling noting that it would undermine British energy security.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: Veneco Oil Platform, California © Rich Reid / National Geographic

No OPEC Production Change & No Surprise

As expected, no major surprises came out of OPEC's 158th Meeting in the Ecuadorian capital Quito where the cartel left its production quotas unchanged this weekend. Some four of the twelve oil ministers from member nations – namely those of Kuwait, Qatar, Nigeria and Iraq – did not even turn up and sent junior officials instead.

It was interesting listening to an APTV recording of a press conference prior to the commencement of the OPEC meeting wherein none other than the Saudi Arabian Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi told a media scrum, “You guys really worry too much about prices. They go up, they go down. What’s new?”

We ask only because there is the little matter of the price of black gold capping US$90 per barrel either side of the pond for the first time in two years. He predicted a few seconds later that there would be no increase in OPEC production and here we are a few days hence. Interestingly, on the same day as Naimi was chiding reporters in Quito, the Paris-based International Energy Agency (IEA) opined that OPEC may come under pressure over 2011 to raise production.

IEA currently expects oil demand in 2011 to rise by 1.3 million bpd; 260,000 bpd more than previously forecast. In an accompanying statement, it said, "Although economic concerns remain skewed to the downside, not least if current high prices begin to act as a drag on growth, more immediately demand could surprise to the upside."

Overall, Global oil supply reached 88.1 million barrels a day last month, hitherto its highest ever level. Furthermore, the IEA forecasts world demand to expand 1.5 per cent in 2011 to 88.8 million barrels a day, which if recorded would also be a record. Its medium term projections for world oil demand for 2009-2015 is an average rise of 1.4 million bpd each year; an increment from its June assessment.

© Gaurav Sharma 2010. Photo: OPEC Logo © Gaurav Sharma

Russian Production Capped Saudi Output in 2009

Russian production of crude oil overtook that of Saudi Arabia in 2009, thereby making the former the world’s leading oil producer, according to BP’s Statistical Review of World Energy.

Russian crude production rose 1.5% year over year, increasing the country's global oil output share to 12.9%. This compared favourably, for the Russians at least, with Saudi Arabia’s decline in market share to 12% of global output, following an annualised production fall of 10.6%. The difference may be marginal, but it gives the Russians some much needed bragging rights.

Proven oil global reserves rose by 700 million barrels to 1.33 trillion barrels in 2009, the report adds. It also notes that after the global financial crisis, oil consumption dipped 1.7% or 1.2 million barrels per day last year; highest decline since 1982.

It does seem a shade ironic that BP should be bringing this data while the Gulf of Mexico oil spill saga carries on. However, to be fair, they have been publishing this particular data-set for years and are among the most reliable sources of oil industry data.

Following publication of the BP report, the International Energy Agency (IEA) revised its 2010 global oil demand forecast upwards by 60,000 barrels a day to 86.4 million barrels, on the basis of above expectation preliminary economic data from the OECD countries.

The new demand forecast suggests annual demand growth is seen up by 1.7 million barrels or 2% year over year from 2009.

© Gaurav Sharma 2010. Photo Courtesy © Adrian R. Gableson

A Bashed-up BP and a Desperate President

Just how much political capital is worth is one tough question? President Obama is playing a strange and desperate game in his repetitive bashing of BP over the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. A clear strategy seems to be emerging – whenever the President feels the heat, he calculates that a rant (sprinkled with real or staged anger) against BP will help. It makes for good political theatre and to a certain extent it plays out well to an American audience. Having trawled the blogosphere as well as key US news reports, I found very little, if any, mention of Transocean or Halliburton or the fact that it was a rig built, operated and managed by Americans.

Obama can’t bash BP and see all of the pain being felt across the Pond. As many commentators on either side of the Atlantic, including the BBC’s Business Editor Robert Peston, have noted nearly 40% of its shares are held in the US. The financial pain will and perhaps already is being felt in Britain – whether we’re talking pension funds or investment trust ISAs. But the Brit’s wallets, Gulf Coastline Residents and wildlife would not be the only ones to suffer.

Long-term investors are not panicking (yet!) according to my investigations. If anything, from what I hear in the City, many opine now would be a “good time to buy BP shares” on the cheap. One mute point is that crude oil is trading in the circa of US$71 – 77 per barrel in recent weeks. It stood at $74-plus levels the last time I checked. It is not as if crude futures are trading at sub $10 levels, and the US is the only market BP operates in?

I would stress that no one denies the Deepwater Horizon Gulf oil spill is an appalling tragedy in more ways than one. However, drilling in the Gulf is crucial for the energy security of the United States. Obama acknowledged just as much in a speech in March prior to this incident. This morning the International Energy Agency (IEA) opined that a long-term impact on future off-shore supply was unlikely in wake of the incident.

“The longer-lasting impact of Deepwater Horizon on U.S. oil supplies may depend on whether operational negligence on the part of companies or regulators, or rather shortcomings in current operating procedures and regulatory structures, were the key cause. The former might suggest a less profound impact on future oil supply than the latter,” the agency said.

Additionally, the IEA made another interesting comment. It said the US government was now belatedly following the steps taken by the UK after the Piper Alpha disaster (1988) - but noted that scores of new offshore fields were developed in the subsequent demand.

In the interim, what’s influencing markets’ sentiment about BP momentarily is that both the US President and the company’s executives sound desperate given the battering they’ve taken in recent weeks. Neither is helping either which is a real shame.

© Gaurav Sharma 2010. Logo Courtesy © BP Plc