BP’s sale, South Africa’s move & the North Sea

BP continues to catch the Oilholic’s eye via its ongoing strategic asset sale programme aimed at mitigating the financial fallout from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico spill. Not only that, a continual push to get rid of refining and marketing (R&M) assets should also be seen as positive for its share price.

 

This afternoon, the oil giant inked a deal to sell five of its oil & gas fields in the Gulf of Mexico for US$5.6 billion to Plains Exploration and Production; an American independent firm. However, BP Group Chief Executive Bob Dudley reiterated that the oil giant remains committed to the region.

 

"While these assets no longer fit our business strategy, the Gulf of Mexico remains a key part of BP's global exploration and production portfolio and we intend to continue investing at least US$4 billion there annually over the next decade," he said in statement following the announcement.

 

Last month BP agreed to sell the Carson oil refinery in California to Tesoro for US$2.5 billion. As a footnote, the agreement holds the potential to make Tesoro the largest refiner on the West Coast and a substantial coastal R&M player alongside the oil majors. While regulatory scrutiny is expected, anecdotal evidence from California suggests the deal is likely to be approved. Back in June, BP announced its intention to sell its stake in TNK-BP, the company's lucrative but acrimony fraught Russian venture.

 

One can draw a straight logic behind the asset sales which BP would not contest. A recent civil case filed by the US Department of Justice against BP does not mince its words accusing the oil giant of “gross negligence” over the Gulf of Mexico spill which followed an explosion that led to the death of 11 workers. Around 4.9 million barrels of oil spewed into the Gulf according to some estimates.

 

The charges, if upheld by the court, could see BP fined by as much as US$21 billion. The trial starts in January and BP, which denies the claim, says it would provide evidence contesting the charges. The company aims to raise US$38 billion via asset sales by Q4 2012. However, the Oilholic is not alone is his belief that the sale programme, while triggered by the spill of 2010, has a much wider objective of portfolio trimming and a pretext to get rid of burdensome R&M assets.

 

Meanwhile in Russia, the Kremlin is rather miffed about the European Commission’s anti-trust probe into Gazprom. According to the country’s media, the Russian government said the probe “was being driven by political factors.” Separately, Gazprom confirmed it would no longer be developing the Shtokman Arctic gas field citing escalating costs. Since, US was the target export market for the gas extracted, Gazprom has probably concluded that shale exploration stateside has all but ended hopes making the project profitable.

 

Sticking with Shale, reports over the weekend suggest that South Africa has ended its moratorium on shale gas extraction. A series of public consultations and environmental studies which could last for up to two years are presently underway. It follows a similar decision in the UK back in April.

 

Sticking with the UK, the country’s Office for National Statistics (ONS) says output of domestic mining & quarrying industries fell 2.4% in July 2012 on an annualised basis; the 22nd consecutive monthly fall. More worryingly, the biggest contributor to the decrease came from oil & gas extraction which fell 4.3% in year over year terms.

 

The UK Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne has reacted to declining output. After addressing taxation of new UKCS prospection earlier this year, Osborne switched tack to brownfield sites right after the ONS released the latest production data last week.

 

Announcing new measures, the UK Treasury said an allowance for "brownfield" exploration will now shield portions of income from the supplementary charge on their profits. It added that the allowance would give companies the incentive to "get the most out of" older fields. Speaking on BBC News 24, Osborne added that the long-term tax revenues generated by the change would significantly outweigh the initial cost of the allowance.

 

According to the small print, income of up to £250 million in qualifying brownfield projects, or £500 million for projects paying Petroleum Revenue Tax (PRT), would be protected from a 32% supplementary charge rate applied by the UK Treasury to such sites.

 

Roman Webber, tax partner at Deloitte, believes the allowance should stimulate investment in older fields in the North Sea where it was previously deemed uneconomical. Such investment is vital in preserving and extending the life of existing North Sea infrastructure, holding off decommissioning and maximising the recovery of the UK’s oil & gas resources.

 

“Enabling legislation for the introduction of this allowance was already included in the UK Finance Act 2012, announced earlier this year. The allowance will work by reducing the profits subject to the 32% Supplementary Charge. The level of the allowances available will depend on the expected project costs and incremental reserves, but will be worth up to a maximum of £160 million net for projects subject to PRT and £80 million for those that are not subject to the tax,” Webber notes.

 

Finally on the crude pricing front, Brent's doing US$114-plus when last checked. It has largely been a slow start to oil futures trading week either side of the pond as traders reflect on what came out of Europe last week and is likely to come out of the US this week. Jack Pollard of Sucden Financial adds that Chinese data for August showed a deteriorating fundamental backdrop for crude with net imports at 18.2 million metric tonnes; a 13% fall on an annualised basis.

 

Broadly speaking, the Oilholic sees a consensus in the City that Brent’s trading range of US$90 to US$115 per barrel will continue well into 2013. However for the remaining futures contracts of the year, a range of US$100 to US$106 is more realistic as macroeconomics and geopolitical risks seesaw around with a relatively stronger US dollar providing the backdrop. It is prudent to point out that going short on the current contract is based Iran not flaring up. It hasn't so far, but is factored in to the current contract's price. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

 

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

Crude profit taking & Browne’s Shale hypothesis

Concerns over a conflict in the Middle East involving Iran did ease off last week but apparently not far enough to prevent a further slide in the price of the crude stuff. A relative strengthening of the US dollar was also seen supporting prices to the upside despite Eurozone woes. So Brent resisted a slide below US$107 on Friday while the WTI resisted a slide below US$91 a barrel.

In fact, the WTI August contract reached a high of US$92.94 while Brent touched US$108.18 at one point; the highest for both benchmarks since May 22. This meant that the end of last week saw some good old fashioned profit taking with conditions being perfect for it.

However, on this crude Monday afternoon, we see both benchmarks dipping again. When the Oilholic last checked, Brent was resisting a slide below US$102 per barrel while the WTI was resisting a US$88 level. With the Middle East risk premium easing marginally, City traders have turned their attention to Spain.

Last week the country’s government predicted that the Spanish recession may well extend into next year. Additionally, the regional administration of Valencia asked for federal help from Madrid to balance its books. So what have we learnt over the last seven or eight trading sessions and what has changed? Well not much except that oil price forecasting often resembles an inexact task based on fickle market conjecture.

The bullish sentiments of last week were an aberration prompted by the perceived risk of a conflict in the Middle East which the Iranians would be incredibly barmy to trigger. Add the temporary lowering of oil production courtesy a Norwegian strike and you provide the legs to a perfect short term prancing bull!

Existing economic fundamentals and current supply demand scenarios did not merit last week’s pricing levels either side of the pond. The Oilholic agrees with the EIA’s opinion that the Brent price would indeed range between US$97.50 and US$99.50 a barrel up until the end of 2013. Analysts at investment banks and ratings agencies are also responding.

For instance, Société Générale has downgraded Brent price estimates by 10% over 2012-14, from US$117 a barrel to US$105. The French bank views oil market fundamentals as neutral for the rest of the year. Nonetheless, should the Brent price weaken below US$90, like others in the City, Société Générale says a Saudi response is to be expected.

For what it is worth, at least Brent’s premium to the WTI has been constantly taking a knock. By some traders' accounts, it is presently below US$15 a barrel for the September settlement contract having been at US$26.75 at one point over Q4 2011. As a direct consequence of the linkage between waterborne light sweet crudes, the Louisiana Light Sweet’s premium to the WTI is down as well to around US$16 a barrel according to Bloomberg.

Moving away from pricing, Lord Browne – the former boss of BP and a director of fracking firm Cuadrilla – believes shale prospection would rid the US of oil imports. Speaking in Oxford at the Resource 2012 forum on water, food and energy scarcity, Browne said the US will not need to import any crude within two decades.

He quipped that the amount of shale gas in the US was effectively “infinite". On a sombre note, Browne said, “Shale gas has a very bad reputation, as a result of the weak players cutting corners. Regulation tightening would be welcome."

His Lordship is known to be a member of the “All hail shale” brigade. Back in March he told The Independent newspaper that if fracking took off meaning fully in the UK, it could generate 50,000 British jobs. The country could very well need its own shale drive especially as a government watchdog recently warned of declining oil and gas revenues.

A consultation period is currently underway in London. All UK fracking activity ground to a halt last year, when a couple of minor quakes majorly spooked dwellers of Lancashire where Cuadrilla was test fracking. Given the incident and environmental constrictions, the Oilholic suspects that Lord Browne knows it is too early to get excited about shale from a British perspective. However, Americans see no cause for curbing their enthusiasm. That’s all for the moment folks. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: Oil tankers in English Bay, British Columbia, Canada © 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.

Canadian & Russian supply risk scenarios

Happy Easter folks! Following on from California, the Oilholic is once again back in Beautiful British Columbia, as vehicle licence plates from the province would point out, should you need reminding in these serene picturesque surroundings. When talking non-OPEC supply of the crude stuff – Russia and Canada always figure prominently in recent discussions, the latter more so than ever.

In fact, when it comes to holding exposure to oil price sensitivity, as recommended by some analysts for the next two quarters, via mixed bag of investments – Russian equities and “natural resources linked” (and not yet showing signs of Dutch disease) Forex including the Russian Rouble and the Canadian dollar are flagged-up more often than ever. In fact the Canadian Dollar, often called south of the border by Americans as the “Loonie” (based on a common bird on the CAD$1 coin), is proving pricier and more worthy than the world’s reserve currency itself in the post-Global financial crisis years.

Between Russia and Canada, given that the latter has a more diverse range of exports, the Russians have a bigger problem when it comes to oil price swings. In fact, ratings agency S&P reckons that a sustained fall in the price of oil could damage the Russian economy and public finances and consequently lead to a cut of the long-term sovereign rating.

"We estimate that a US$10 decline in oil prices will directly and indirectly lead to a 1.4% of GDP decline in government revenues. In a severe stress scenario, where a barrel of Urals oil drops to, and stays at, an average US$60, we would expect the general government to post a deficit above 8% of GDP. In that scenario, the long-term ratings on the Russian Federation could drop by up to three notches," says S&P credit analyst Kai Stukenbrock.

The rise in oil prices over the past decade has supported an expansionary fiscal policy, while still allowing the country to build up fiscal reserves. Still, fiscal expansion, not least significant countercyclical spending during the recent crisis, has led to a significant increase in expenditures relative to GDP.

As a result, despite record revenues from oil in 2011, S&P estimates the general Russian government surplus at merely 0.8% of GDP. To balance the budget in 2012, the agency thinks the government will require an average oil price of US$120 per barrel.

While former Russian finance minister Alexei Kudrin has also expressed fears of Russian over reliance on the price of oil, most analysts have a base price range of US$90 to 100 for 2012. So a fear it may well be; it remains what it is – a fear! Another ratings agency – Moody’s noted last month 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 2011, rated Russian players continued to demonstrate strong operating and financial results, underpinned by elevated oil prices," says Victoria Maisuradze, an Associate Managing Director in Moody's Corporate Finance Group. "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. All issuers have stable outlooks and our outlook for the sector is stable."

Nevertheless, developing reserves in new regions remains a major challenge for Russia as traditional production areas deplete; a problem which the Canadians don’t have to contend with. In 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, whose hand is now politically more stronger than ever, told an audience in London that Canada was ranked third in the world for gas production, seventh in oil production, the market leader in hydroelectricity and uranium. He described it six years ago as “just the beginning.”

Harper’s journey to make Canada an ‘energy superpower’ is well and truly underway. The Oilholic charted the view from Calgary on his visit to Alberta last year and has followed the shenanigans related to the US ‘dis’-approval of Keystone XL pipeline project over the course of 2011-12. Over the coming days, yours truly would revisit the subject with a take on prospective exports to Asia via British Columbia.

Continuing with non-OPEC supplies, the Oilholic’s old contact in Warsaw – Arkadiusz Wicik, Director of Energy, Utilities and Regulation at Fitch Ratings – believes Shale gas in Poland could still be a game changer for the country's energy sector despite the disappointing shale gas reserve estimate published in March by the Polish Geological Institute (PGI).

PGI assessed most likely recoverable shale gas reserves to be between 0.35 and 0.77 trillion cubic meters (tcm), which is about one-tenth the 5.3 tcm estimated by the US Energy Information Administration in April 2011. PGI estimates maximum recoverable shale gas reserves at 1.92 tcm.

Wicik believes it is still too early to make any meaningful assumptions about the future of shale gas in Poland, believed to have one of the highest development potentials in Europe. “Less than 20 exploration wells have been drilled by domestic and foreign companies, in many cases with disappointing results. From a credit perspective, we view shale gas exploration as high risk and capital intensive. Partnerships among domestic companies to share exploration risks and costs, or more participation by foreigners would be positive,” he says.

Exploration by Poland's energy companies at an early stage gives them a chance to become major players should the commercial availability of gas be proven over the next several years. This was not the case in the US, where the shale gas industry was developed by a number of smaller, independent players as the Oilholic noted in a special report for Infrastructure Journal. Large US oil and gas companies have only recently started to be active in the sector, mostly through acquisitions.

Wicik notes, “We do not expect that the success in the US, which led to about a 50% decrease in US gas prices between 2008 and 2011, will be easily replicated in Poland. Commercial production in the first five to 10 years is unlikely to substantially lower gas prices given high breakeven costs. Also, Poland and the US differ both in terms of shale formations and the gas market structure.”

A number of foreign companies already have exploration concessions for shale gas in Poland, including ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips (through a service agreement with Lane Energy), Marathon Oil and Eni. Local players that have been granted exploration concessions include PGNiG, PKN Orlen, Grupa Lotos and Petrolinvest.

Another three large domestic companies - PGE, Tauron, and KGHM - also plan to enter shale gas exploration. In January 2012, they signed three separate letters of intent with PGNiG regarding cooperation in shale gas projects. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

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

Three Months, Three Cities, Three ‘crude’ reports

The three cities being – Delhi, Doha and Vienna, the three reports being Oilholic’s work on Latin American Offshore, Shale Oil & Gas and Refineries projects outlook, research for which was spread over December, January and February from the 20th World Petroleum Congress to the 160th OPEC Meeting to the streets of ‘crude’ Delhi.

The last of the three reports was published by Infrastructure Journal on Feb 29th and while the analysis in the reports remains the preserve of the Journal’s subscribers, the Oilholic is more than happy to share a few snippets starting with the Latin American offshore landscape, which shows no signs of a post ‘Macondo’ hangover [1].

In fact, the month of May, will be a momentous one for the region’s offshore oil & gas projects market in general and Brazil in particular, as the country would dispatch its first shipment of oil from ultradeepwater pre-sal (‘below the salt layer’) sources. The said export consignment of 1 million barrels destined for Chile is a relatively minor one in global crude oil volume terms. However, its significance for offshore prospection off Latin American waters is immense.

When thinking about Latin American offshore projects think Brazil; think Brazil and think Petrobras’ Lula test well in the Santos basin, named after the former president, which is producing 100,000 barrels per day (bpd). Almost over a third of the Chilean consignment originated from the Lula well according to the Oilholic’s sources.

What should excite project financiers, corporate financiers and technical advisers alike is the fact the company expects to pump nearly 5 million bpd by 2020 and its ambitious drive needs investment.

However, ignoring other jurisdictions in the region and focussing only on Brazil, its promise and problems would be a fallacy. Others such as Argentina, Columbia and prospection in Falkland Islands waters are worth examining, the latter especially from the standpoint of corporate financed asset acquisitions.

Data always helps in contextualising the market movements. Using the present Infrastructure Journal data series on project finance, which commenced in 2005, figures certainly suggest the sun is shining on the Brazilian offshore industry. Of the 15 Latin American offshore projects on record which reached financial close between October 2006 and Sept 2011, 13 were Brazilian along with one apiece from Panama and Peru (Click on pie-chart above to enlarge). With a cumulative deal valuation of just under US$9.3 billion, among these Brazil’s Guara FPSO valued at US$1.2 billion led the way reaching financial close in June 2011.

The year 2010, was a particularly good one for Brazil with five projects reaching financial close. Over the last three years, sponsors of offshore projects in the country have been consistent in approaching the debt markets and bringing three to five projects per annum to financial close, with 2011 following that trend.

Moving on to the Oilholic’s second report, for all intents and purposes, Shale oil & gas prospection has been the energy story of the last half decade and Q1 2012 would be an apt time to scrutinise the ‘Fracks’ and figures[2].

To say that shale gas has altered the American energy landscape would be the understatement of the decade, or to be more specific at least half a decade. Courtesy of the process of hydraulic ‘fracking’, shale gas prospection – most of which was initially achieved in the US by independent upstart project developers – has been an epic game changer.

US shale gas production stood at 4.9 trillion cubic feet (tcf) by end-2011, which is 25% of total US production up from 4% in 2005. Concurrently, net production itself is rising exponentially owing to the shale drive according to the EIA.

Project finance aside, it is in the corporate finance data where the shale story is truly reflected – i.e. one of a steady rise both in terms of deal valuation as well as the number of projects. From four corporate infrastructure finance deals valued at US$1.89 billion in 2009, both data metrics posted an uptick to seven deals valued at US$8.35 billion in 2010 and 10 deals valued at US$7.58 billion in 2011 (Click on bar-chart above to enlarge).

However, a short term global replication of a US fracking heaven is unlikely and not just because there isn’t a one size fits all model to employ. While American success with shale projects has not escaped the notice of Europeans; financiers and sponsors in certain quarters of the ‘old continent’ are pragmatic enough to acknowledge that Europe is no USA. The recent shale projects bonanza stateside is no geological fluke; rather it bottles down to a combination of geology, American tenacity and inventiveness.

Europe’s best bet is Poland, but European shale oil & gas projects market is unlikely to record an uptick between 2012 to 2017 on a scale noticed in North America in general and the USA in particular between 2007 and 2012. The financing for shale projects – be it corporate finance or project finance – would be a slow, but steady trickle rather than a stream beyond North America.

Finally, to the Refineries report, given the wider macroeconomic climate, refinery infrastructure investment continues to face severe challenges in developed jurisdictions and Western markets[3]. Concurrently, the balance of power in this subsector of the oil & gas infrastructure market is rapidly tipping in favour of the East.

Even if refinery investment of state-owned Chinese oil & gas behemoths, which rarely approach the debt markets, is ignored – there is a palpable drive in emerging economies elsewhere in favour of refinery investment as they do not have to contend with overcapacity issues hounding the EU and North America.

For some it is a needs-based investment; for others it makes geopolitical sense as their Western peers holdback on investing in this subsector. The need for refined products is often seen superseding concerns about low refining margins, especially in the Indian subcontinent and Asia Pacific.

Industry data, empirical, anecdotal evidence and direct feedback from industry participants do not fundamentally alter the Oilholic’s view of tough times ahead for refinery infrastructure. As cracking crude oil remains a strategic business, investing in refinery infrastructure reflects this sentiment, investor appetite and financiers' attitudes.

According to current IJ data, investment in refinery infrastructure via private or semi-private financing continues to remain muted; a trend which began in 2008. In fact, 2011 has been the most wretched year since the publication began recording refinery project finance data.

Updated figures suggest the year 2010, which saw the artificial fillip of Saudi Arabia’s mega Jubail refinery project (valued at US$14.04 billion) reach financial close, has been the best year so far for refinery project finance valuation despite closing a mere two projects. However, industry pragmatists would look at 2008 which saw ten projects valued at US$9.39 billion as a much better year (Click on bar-chart above to enlarge).

From there on it has been a tale of post global financial crisis woes with the market struggling to show any semblance of a recovery and most of the growth coming from non-OECD jurisdictions. In 2009, three projects valued at US$4.79 billion reached financial close, followed by two projects including Jubail valued at US$15.04 billion in 2010, and another two projects valued at US$1.49 billion in 2011. By contrast, the pre-crisis years of 2005, 2006 and 2007 averaged US$6.71 billion in terms of transaction valuations.

A general market trend in favour of non-OECD project finance investment in refineries is obviously mirrored in the table of the top deals between 2005 and 2011 (above). Of the five, four are in non-OECD countries – led by Jubail Refinery (Saudi Arabia) valued at US$14.04 billion which closed in 2010, followed by Guru Gobind Singh Bhatinda Refinery, India (valued at US$4.69 billion, financial close – 2007), Jamnagar 2 Refinery, India (US$4.50 billion, financial close – 2006) and Paradip refinery, India (US$2.99 billion, financial close – 2009).

Only one deal from an OECD nation, which is a very recent member of the club, made it to the top five, namely Poland’s Grupa Lotos Gdansk Refinery Expansion valued at US$2.85 billion which reached financial close in 2008. Simply put, the future of infrastructure investment in this sub-component of the oil & gas business lies increasingly in the East wherein India could be a key market. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

NOTES:

[1] Latin American Offshore O&G Outlook 2012: Brazil’s decade, By Gaurav Sharma, Infrastructure Journal, January 17, 2012. Available here.

[2] Shale Oil & Gas Outlook 2012: The ‘Fracks’ and figures, By Gaurav Sharma, Infrastructure Journal, January 25, 2012. Available here.

[3] Refinery Projects Outlook 2012: ‘Cracking’ times for Eastern markets, By Gaurav Sharma, Infrastructure Journal, February 29, 2012. Available here.

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Graphics: Pie Chart 1 – Latin American Offshore Project Finance transactions (October 2006 to Sept 2011), Bar Chart 1 – Number of Shale Corporate Finance transactions (2009-2011), Bar Chart 2 – Refinery Project Finance Valuation (2005-2011) © Infrastructure Journal.

Talking to Deloitte, Kentz and Baker & McKenzie

As Day three ends, the Oilholic had the pleasure of great chats with friends at Deloitte, Kentz Engineers & Constructors and Baker & McKenzie here at the 20th WPC. Starting with the latter first – B&M – who have taken the initiative to discuss NOCs and IOCs from a different angle.

While the age old debate about NOCs versus IOCs is history, new opportunities for synergies and investment are emerging between the two and the Chicago-headquartered law firm wants to discuss these over a seminar here at the Congress. Let’s face it, NOCs overtook IOCs ages ago and most IOCs now seek partnerships with NOCs. Furthermore, since now would be a good time for asset acquisition; it is worth talking about the opportunities that exist for NOCs.

The Oilholic has been kindly invited by B&M to moderate the seminar wearing his Infrastructure Journal’s writer as well as this humble blog author’s hat. In sunny Qatar – its two hats better than one. Details on how it all went to follow when the seminar is over.

Since, the hot weather makes one thirsty, a parched Oilholic also had the pleasure of a few dwinkys with friends at Kentz. A chance and pleasant meeting with CEO Dr. Hugh O'Donnell courtesy Reuters’ very own resident oilholic Tom Bergin, author of the splendid book Spills & Spin, was deeply appreciated.

Dr. O'Donnell sees huge regional opportunities here in the Middle East and feels Asia Pacific and Australia would be good bet for investment in the oil & gas sector in this macroclimate for his firm. Sorry the conversation was off record at a social setting so it would not be appropriate to reveal more.

Last but certainly not the least, met several friends (new and old) from Deloitte, including Carl D. Hughes, the advisory firm’s global head of energy and resources. Like Dr. O’Donnell, Hughes sees potential in looking East. The Oilholic and Deloitte colleagues were in agreement about the challenges faced by the refining sector in Western jurisdictions and why new build in India is necessitated by demand.

Shale invariably had to creep in to the discussion – who would have thought that at the 20th Congress the US delegation would be heading here as the world’s leading producer of gas? By the way, got up close to an F1 McLaren car at ExxonMobil's stand! Pretty cool methinks! (See photo above left & click to enlarge). More later; keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: 20th World Petroleum Congress exhibition floor & entrance © Gaurav Sharma 2011.

‘Quest’ for energy security vis-à-vis geopolitics

The current disruption of the geostrategic balance that had underpinned the Middle East for decades is bound to cause ripples in energy markets. But don't these recent developments only add to scares of the past. In his latest work 'The Quest', a follow-up to his earlier work 'The Prize', author Daniel Yergin notes that in a world where fossil fuels still account for more than 80% of the world's energy, crises underscore a fundamental reality - how important energy is to the world.

This weighty volume is Pulitzer Prize winner Yergin's attempt to explain that importance intertwined in a story about the quest for energy security, oil business, search for alternatives to fossil fuels and the world we live in. Three fundamental questions shape this free-flowing and brilliant narrative spread over 800 pages split by six parts containing some 35 detailed chapters. To begin with, will enough energy be available to meet the needs of a growing world and crucially at what cost and with what technologies?

Secondly, how can the security of the energy system on which the world depends be protected and finally, what will be the impact of environmental concerns? The author gives his answers to these profound questions citing international events and technological developments of the decades past and present.

Part I discusses the new and more complex world order after the Gulf War, Part II focuses on energy security issues while Part III discusses the advent of electricity and "gadgetwatts". Part IV discusses climate change, Part V clean technologies and lastly in Part VI, Yergin offers the reader his take on the road ahead.

Shale, oil sands, 'rise' of gas, wind, solar, biofuels, offshore and peak oil versus the perceptively "ever expanding range of the drillbit" have all been discussed in detail by the author. In all honestly, it is neither a pro-fossil fuel rant nor does it belittle the renewables business. Rather it highlights the complexities of both sides of the carbon divide with the macroeconomic and geopolitical climate serving a constant backdrop.

Current the book surely is, accompanied by a healthy dosage of historical contextualisation and Yergin's own take on whether nation states - chiefly the US and China - are destined for a clash over energy security. The Oilholic read page after page fascinated by an extraordinary range of 'non-fiction' characters, places, technologies, theories and the dramatic stories they resulted in.

What really struck the Oilholic was that the narrative is free from industry gobbledegook (or its duly explained where applicable) and as such should appeal to a wider mainstream readership base than just energy professionals and those with a mid to high level of market knowledge. Its crisp mix of storytelling and analysis suits petroleum economists and leisure readers alike.

While the Oilholic attaches a caveat that a book of 800 pages is not for the faint hearted, he is happy to recommend it to business professionals, students of economics and the energy business, and as noted above - those simply interested in current events and the history of the oil trade. It is of course, a must for fellow Oilholics.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: Cover of ‘The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World’ © Allen Lane/Penguin Publishers 2011.

Of PetroChina, Gazprom and Hackers!

But first...Brent remains well into US$100+ per barrel territory while WTI remains in sub-US$90 region. Let’s face it the Nymex WTI-ICE Brent spreads remain extremely weak and it is becoming a recurring theme. The front-month spread even capped -US$16 per barrel mark (US$16.29 to be exact) on Feb 11; the date of expiry of the Brent forward month futures contract.

Moving away from pricing, it emerged last week that Russia’s Gazprom reported a fall in profits from RUR173.5 billion to RUR160.5 billion; an annualised dip of 9% for the quarter from July to Sept 2010 period. The cost of purchasing oil and gas jumped 29% according to the state owned firm while operational costs rose 12%. Dip in profit even prompted Russian PM Putin to “ask” them to raise their game.

Elsewhere, the “All Hail Shale” brigade had to contend with PetroChina – the Chinese state-controlled energy firm – acquiring a 50% stake in a Canadian Shale Gas project run by Encana. The stake cost is pegged at a cool US$5.4 billion. PetroChina already has majority stakes in two oil projects in Canada with Encana. There doesn’t appear to be much of a ruckus about the Chinese shopping in Canada. I guess Canadians are less uptight about Chinese investment in perceived strategic energy assets than the Americans.

Finally, computer security firm McAfee claimed in a report published on February 10th that hackers have attacked networks of a number of oil and gas firms for a good few years now. The full report is available for downloading here and it makes for interesting reading. However, I am not entirely surprised by the revelations.

In a nutshell, McAfee claims that in a series of co-ordinated attempts at least a dozen multinational oil, gas and energy companies were targeted – named by it as Night Dragon attacks – which began in November 2009. Five firms have now confirmed the attacks, it adds.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: Oil tanker © Michael S. Quinton/National Geographic Society