Showing posts with label Statoil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Statoil. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 15, 2014

That 1980s feeling, Saudi Oil, Ebola & more

Brent dipped below US$84 per barrel at one point this week while the WTI is holding above the $80 level. It’ll be interesting to note how the December futures contract fares as the Northern Hemisphere winter approaches with bearish headwinds lurking in the background. From here on, much will depend on what happens at the next OPEC meeting on November 27, where a production cut has the potential to partially stem the decline.

By the time of the meeting in Vienna, we’d already be well into the ICE Brent January contract. The mere possibility of a production cut isn’t enough to reverse the slide at the moment given wider market conditions. But as ever, OPEC members are presenting a disunited front diluting any market sentiments aimed at pricing in a potential cut.

The answer lies in an interesting graphic published by The Economist (click here) indicating price levels major producers would be comfortable with. There are no surprises in noting that Iran, Venezuela and Russia are probably the most worried of all exporters. While several OPEC members prefer at least a $100 price floor, in recent weeks Saudi Arabia has quite openly indicated it can tolerate the price falling below $90.

The Saudis also lowered their asking price in a bid to maintain market share. That’s bad news for most of OPEC, excluding Kuwait and UAE. In turn, Iran responded by lowering its asking price as well even though it can't afford to. So the debate has already started, whether in not wanting to repeat the mistakes of the 1980s which left it with a weakened market share; Saudi Arabia might in fact trigger OPEC discord and a slump akin to 1986.

While the Oilholic doubts it, certain OPEC members wouldn’t be the only ones hurt by the Saudi stance which abets existing bearish trends. US shale and Canadian oil sands exploration and production (E&P) enthusiasts will be troubled too. While the oil price is tumbling, the price of extracting the crude stuff isn’t.

Fitch Ratings says Brent could dip to $80 before triggering a self-correcting supply response with shale oil drillers cutting investment in new wells. Anecdotal evidence sent forth by the Oilholic’s contacts in Calgary point to similar sentiments being expressed in relation to the oil sands. 

The steep rate at which production from shale wells declines mean companies have to keep drilling new wells to maintain production. Fitch estimates median full-cycle costs for E&P companies have fallen to about $70 in the US. The marginal barrel, not the median one, balances supply and demand and determines price, so the point at which capex falls will probably be higher.

Over the short-term, Fitch considers a resurgence of supply disruptions and positive action from OPEC as the most likely catalysts for a rebound in prices. “But without these, further declines might be possible, especially if evidence grows of further weakening of global demand or increasing OPEC spare capacity,” the agency adds.

Longer term, an uptick in economic activity in China and India will contribute to a growth in oil demand. However, what we’re dealing with is short-term weakness. IEA demand growth for 2015 has been revised by 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) and 2014’s estimate by 200,00 bpd. The Oilholic suspects Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and UAE are only too aware of this and capable enough to withstand it.

Dorian Lucas, analyst at Inenco, says, “We’re seeing the largest in over two years spurred by accumulating evidence of waning global demand, whilst buoyant supply continues to drown the market. The extent to which supply has buoyed is evident when assessing September 2014 in isolation. Global oil supply rose over 900,000 bpd to total of 93.8 million bpd, this is over 2.5 million bpd higher than the same time last year.”

What happens at OPEC’s next meeting would depend on the Saudis. The Oilholic still rates the chances of a production cut at 40%. One feels that having the capacity to withstand a short-term price shock, Saudi Arabia wouldn’t mind other producers squirming in the interest of self-preservation.

Meanwhile, the industry is also grappling with the unfolding Ebola outbreak which has claimed thousands of lives in West Africa. Unsurprising anecdotal evidence is emerging of companies having difficulty in finding engineering experts, roughnecks or support staff willing to work at West African prospection sites.

In order to get a base case idea, browse job openings at a recruitment site (for example – Rigzone) and you’ll find pay rates for working in West Africa climb above sub-zero winter working rates on offer at Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada. Three recruitment consultants known to this blogger have expressed similar sentiments.

While most of the drilling is offshore, workers' compounds are onshore in Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia. Additionally, local workers return to their homes mingling with the general population at risk of getting infected. The fear is putting off workers, and many companies have internal moratoriums on travel to the region.

Forget workers, even investors are having second thoughts for the moment. Both Reuters and USA Today have reported caginess at ExxonMobil about the commencement of offshore drilling in Liberia at the present moment in time.The company already restricts non essential travel by its employees to the region. Shell and Chevron have similar safeguards in an industry heavily reliant on expat workers.

GlobalData says of the affected African countries only Nigeria is equipped to handle the Ebola outbreak.  GDP of the said countries is likely to take a hit from loss of lives and revenue. International SOS, a Control Risks Group affiliate company which provides integrated medical, clinical, and security services to organisations with international operations, has been constantly updating advice for corporate travel to Guinea, Liberia or Sierra Leone, the current one being to avoidance all non-essential travel to the region.

Fitch Ratings says at present, the Ebola outbreak does not have any credit ratings implications for E&P companies in the region. Alex Griffiths, Head of EMEA, Natural Resources and Commodities, notes: “Our key consideration is how well the companies manage the Ebola risk. From a risk rating standpoint, we’re in early days. Fitch will continue to monitor the situation over the coming months.”

Away from Ebola, here’s the Oilholic’s take via a Forbes post on the future of integrated IOCs. Lastly, news has emerged that Statoil CEO Helge Lund has been appointed CEO of the much beleaguered BG Group with effect from March 2015. The soon to be boss said he was looking forward to working with BG’s people “to develop the company’s full potential.”

The announcement was roundly cheered in the City given the high regard Lund is held in by the wider oil and gas industry. To quote Investec analyst Neill Morton, “BG still faces challenges, but we believe it has a better chance of addressing them with Lund on board.”

We shall see whether Statoil’s loss is indeed BG Group’s gain. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

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

© Gaurav Sharma 2014. Photo: Vintage Shell Fuel Pump, San Francisco, USA © Gaurav Sharma.

Monday, November 04, 2013

Crude reality: Time to short as bulls go lethargic?

Most of the Oilholic's contacts in City trading circles had been maintaining in recent months that a US$106 per barrel price would be the psychological floor to the year-end, barring bearish trends induced by a wider and unforeseen macroeconomic tsunami.

To be quite honest, the global economy is probably where it has been for a while – in a bit of a lull. So even though things are neither materially better nor all that worse, the level was still breached this Monday morning. Methinks there is going to be further selling and yet more shorting either side of the Atlantic.

Our old friends the hedge funds – held responsible by many for the assetization of black gold – certainly seem to think so. That's if you believe data published by ICE Futures Europe. It indicates speculative bets that the Brent price will rise (in futures and options combined), outnumbered short positions by 119,451 lots in the week ended October 29.

The London-based exchange says that's a reduction of 21% (or 30,710 contracts) from the previous week and the biggest drop since the week ended June 25. Concurrently, bearish positions on Brent outnumbered bullish wagers by 321,470; a 3.2% decrease in net-short positions from October 22. So there you have it!

On a related note, albeit for different reasons, the WTI also closed at its lowest since June 26. In fact the forward month futures contract for December shed as much as 55 cents to $94.06 at one point in intraday trading on Monday.

The Oilholic believes the prices aren’t plummeting; rather they are hitting a much more realistic level. Such a sentiment was echoed by two new supply-side contacts this blogger had the pleasure of running into at the UK business lobby group CBI's 2013 annual conference.

As 2014 is nearly upon us, Steven Wood, managing director (corporate finance) at Moody's, says oil prices should stay robust through next year. His and Moody's quantification of robustness for Brent, factoring in Chinese demand and tensions in the Middle East, stands at around $95 per barrel, and West Texas Intermediate "for slightly less, in the next one to two years."

"And with the worst behind the US natural gas industry, prices for benchmark Henry Hub will average about $3.75 per thousand cubic feet next year," he adds.

Additionally, the good folks at Moody's reckon the E&P sector's fortunes will continue to rise over the next year, with big capital spending budgets keeping fundamentals strong (also for the oilfield service and drilling sector).

One minor footnote though, even if it is still some way off – what if international sanctions on Iran get eased should relations between the Islamic Republic and the West improve? We could then see the Iran add over 750,000 barrels per day to the global oil output pool. Undoubtedly, this would be bearish for oil markets, especially so for Brent. The recent dialogue between both sides has made contemplating the possibility possible!

Away from price-related issues, if you needed any further proof of renewed vigour in North Sea E&P activity, then Norway's Statoil has announced it will go ahead with a decision to build a new platform at its Snorre field to extract another 300 million barrels of the crude stuff at an expense of £4.2 billion. This would, according to the Norwegian media, extend the project's lifetime to 2040.

Statoil will take a final decision on engineering aspects in the first quarter of 2015 with the platform scheduled to come onstream in the fourth quarter of 2021. The Norwegian firm owns 33.3% of the exploration project licence. Other shareholders include Petoro (30%), ExxonMobil (17.4%), Idemitsu Petroleum (9.6%), RWE (8.6%) and Core Energy (1.1%). That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

 
© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo: North Sea oil rig © Cairn Energy plc

Friday, October 11, 2013

North Sea & the 'crude' mood in Aberdeen

The Oilholic spent the wee hours of this morning counting the number of North Sea operational support ships docked in Aberdeen Harbour. Interestingly enough, of the nine in the harbour, six were on the Norwegian ships register.

Whether you examine offshore oil & gas activity in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea or the British sector, there is a sense here that the industry is enjoying something of a mini revival if not a full blown renaissance. As production peaked in the late 1990s, empirical evidence that oil majors had begun looking elsewhere for better yields started emerging. Some even openly claimed they’d given up.

Over a decade later, with new extraction techniques and enhanced hydrocarbon recovery mechanisms in vogue – a different set of players have arrived in town from Abu Dhabi National Energy Company (TAQA) to Austria's OMV, from Canada's Talisman Energy to China's Sinopec. Oil recovery from mature fields is now the talk of the town.

Even the old hands at BP, Shell and Statoil – who have divested portions of their North Sea holdings – seem to be optimistic. The reason can be found in the three figure price of Brent! Most commentators the Oilholic has spoken to here, including energy economists, taxation experts, financiers and one roughneck [with 27 years of experience under his belt] are firmly of the view that a US$100 per barrel price or above supports the current level of investment in mature fields.

One contact remarks that the ongoing prospection and work on mature fields can even take an oil price dip to around $90-level. "However, anything below that would make a few project directors nervous. Nonetheless, the connect with between Brent price fluctuation and long term planning is not as linear as is the case between investment in Canadian oil sands projects and the Western Canadian Select (WSC) price."      

To put some context, the WSC was trading at a $30 per barrel discount to the WTI last time yours truly checked. Concurrently, Brent's premium to the WTI, though well below historic highs, is just shy of $10 per barrel. Another contact, who retains faith in the revival of the North Sea hypothesis, says it also bottles down to the UK's growing demand for natural gas.

"It's what'll keep West of Shetland prospection hot. Furthermore, and despite concern about capacity constraints, sound infrastructural support is there in the shape of the West of Shetland Pipeline (WOSP) which transports natural gas from three offshore fields in the area to Sullom Voe Terminal [operated by BP]."

While further hydrocarbon discoveries have been made atop what's already onstream, they are not yet in the process of being developed. That's partially down to prohibitive costs and partially down to concerns about WOSP's capacity. However, that's not dampening the enthusiasm in Aberdeen.

Five years ago, many predicted a rig and infrastructure decommissioning bonanza to be a revenue generator and become a thriving industry itself. "But enhanced oil recovery schemes keep pushing this 'bonanza' back for another day. This in itself bears testimony to what's afoot here," says one contact.

UK Chancellor George Osborne also appears to be listening. In his budget speech on March 20, he said that the government would enter into contracts with companies in the sector to provide "certainty" over tax relief measures. That has certainly cheered industry players in Aberdeen as well the lobby group Oil & Gas UK.

"The move by the Chancellor gives companies the certainty they need over the tax treatment of decommissioning. At no cost to the government, it will speed up asset sales and free up capital for companies to use for investment, extending the productive life of the UK Continental Shelf," a spokesperson says, echoing what many here have opined.

Osborne's budget speech also had one 'non-crude' bit of good news for the region. The Chancellor revealed that one of the two bidders for the UK government's £1 billion support programme for Carbon Capture and Storage (CC&S) is the Peterhead Project here in Aberdeenshire. Overall, the industry sounds optimistic, just don't mention the 'R-word'. Scotland is due to hold a referendum on September 18, 2014 on whether it wants to be independent or remain part of the United Kingdom.

Hardly any contact in a position of authority wants to express his/her opinion on record with the description of political 'hot potato' attributed to the referendum issue by many. The response perhaps is understandable. It's an issue that is dividing colleagues and workforces throughout the length and breadth of Scotland.

General consensus among commentators seems to be that the industry would be better off in a 'United' Kingdom. However, even it were to become a 'Disunited' Kingdom come September 2014, industry veterans believe the global nature of the oil & gas business and the craving for hydrocarbons would imply that the sector itself need not be spooked too much about the result. National opinion polls suggest that most Scots currently prefer a United Kingdom, but also that a huge swathe of the population is as yet undecided and could be swayed either way.

In a bid to conduct an unscientific yet spirited opinion poll of unknown people since known ones were unwilling, the Oilholic quizzed three taxi drivers around town and four bus drivers at Union Square. Result – two were in the 'Yes to independence' camp, four were in the 'No' camp and one said he'd just about had enough of the 'ruddy question' being everywhere from newspapers to radio talk shows, to a stranger like yours truly asking him and that he couldn't give a damn!

Moving away from the politics and the projects to the crude oil price itself, where black gold has had quite a fortnight in the wake of a US political stalemate with regard to the country's debt ceiling. Nervousness about the shenanigans on Capitol Hill and the highest level of US crude oil inventories in a while have pushed WTI’s discount to Brent to its widest in nearly three months by this blogger's estimate.

Should the unthinkable happen and the political stalemate over the US debt ceiling not get resolved, it is the Oilholic's considered viewpoint that Brent is likely to receive much more support at $100-level than the WTI, should bearish trends grip the global commodities market. This blogger has maintained for a while that the WTI price still includes undue froth in any case, thereby making it much more vulnerable to bearish sentiment. 

Just one final footnote, before calling it a day and sampling something brewed in Scotland – according to a recent note put out by the Worldwatch Institute, the global commodity 'supercycle' slowed down in 2012. In its latest Vital Signs Online trends report, the institute noted that global commodity prices dropped by 6% in 2012, a marked change from the dizzying growth during the commodities supercycle of 2002-12, when prices surged an average of 9.5% per annum, or 150% over the stated 10-year period.

Worldwatch Institute says that during the supercycle, the financial sector took advantage of the changing landscape, and the commodities market went from being "little more than a banking service as an input to trading" to a full-fledged asset class; an event that some would choose to describe as "assetization of commodities" and that most certainly includes black gold. Supercycle or not, there is no disguising the fact that large investment banks participate in both financial as well as commercial aspects of commodities trading (and will continue to do so).

Worldwatch Institute notes that at the turn of the century, total commodity assets under management came to just over $10 billion. By 2008 that number had increased to $160 billion, although $57 billion of that left the market that year during the global financial crisis. The decline was short-lived, however, and by the end of the third quarter in 2012, the total commodity assets under management had reached a staggering $439 billion.

Oil averaged $105 per barrel last year and a slowdown in overall commodity price growth was indeed notable, but Worldwatch Institute says it is still not clear if the so-called supercycle is completely over. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: North Sea support ships in Aberdeen Harbour. Photo 2: City Plaque near ferry terminal, Aberdeen, Scotland © Gaurav Sharma, October 2013.

Monday, August 19, 2013

Statoil’s move & a crude view from Oslo

The Oilholic finds himself in Oslo, Norway for the briefest of visits at a rather interesting time. For starters, back home in London town, recent outages at Norway's Statoil-operated Heimdal Riser platform are still causing jitters and firming up spot natural gas prices despite the low demand. Although it’s a lot calmer than last Wednesday as order has been restored. The UK is also soaking in news that Norway's US$760 billion oil fund (the world's biggest investor), has cut its British government debt holdings by a whopping 26% to NKr42.9 billion (£4.51 billion, $7.26 billion) and increased its Japanese government bond holdings by 30% to NKr129.5 billion.

However, the biggest story in Oslo is Statoil’s decision to sell minority stakes in several key offshore fields in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea and far north to Austria's OMV. To digest all of that, the Oilholic truly needed a pint of beer – but alas that hurts here! No, not the alcohol – but the price! On average, a pint of beer at a bar on Karl Johans Gate with a view of the Royal Palace (pictured above left) is likely to set you back by NKr74 (£8.20 yes you read that right £8.20). Monstrous one says! Anyways, this blog is called Oilholics Synonymous not Alcoholics Anonymous – so back to 'crude' matters.

Chatter here is dominated by the Statoil decision to sell offshore stakes for which OMV forked-up US$2.65 billion (£1.7 billion). The Norwegian oil giant said the move freed up much needed funds for capex. Giving details, the company announced it had reduced its ownership in the Gullfaks field to 51% from 70% and in Gudrun field to 51% from 75%.

The production impact for Statoil from the transaction is estimated to be around 40,000 barrels of oil equivalent (boe) per day in 2014, based on equity and 60 boe per day in 2016, according to a company release. However, Chief Executive Helge Lund told Reuters that the company will still have the capacity to deliver on its 2.5 million barrels per day (bpd) ambition in 2020.

"But we will of course evaluate it as we go along, whether that is the best way of creating value.It will impact the short-term production...but we are not making any changes to our guiding at this stage," he added.

For OMV, the move will raise its proven and probable reserves by about 320 million boe or nearly a fifth. What is price positive for Austrian consumers is the fact that it will also boost OMV’s production by about 40,000 bpd as early as 2014.

Statoil’s consideration might be one of capex; for the wider world the importance of the deal is in the detail. First of all, it puts another boot into the North Sea naysayers (who have gone a bit quiet of late). There is very valid conjecture that the North Sea is in decline - hardly anyone disputes that, but investment is rising and has shot up of late. The Statoil-OMV deal lends more weight that there's still 'crude' life in the North Sea.

Secondly, $2.65 billion is no small change, even in terms relative to the oil & gas business. Finally, OMV is a unique needs-based partner for Statoil. The Oilholic is not implying it’s a strange choice. In fact, both parties need to be applauded for their boldness. Furthermore, OMV will also cover Statoil's capex between January 1 and the closing of the deal, which could potentially raise the final valuation to $3.2 billion in total, according to a source.

And, for both oil firms it does not end here. OMV and Statoil have also agreed to cooperate, contingent upon situation and options, on Statoil's 11 exploration licences in the North Sea, West of Shetland and Faroe Islands.

Continuing the all around positive feel, Statoil also announced a gas and condensate discovery near the Smørbukk field in the Norwegian Sea. However, talking to the local media outlets, the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate played down the size of the discovery estimating it to be between 4 and 7.5 million cubic metres of recoverable oil equivalents. Nonetheless, every little helps.

Right that’s about enough of crude chatter for the moment. There’s a Jazz festival on here in Oslo (see above right) which the Oilholic has well and truly enjoyed and so has Oslo which is basking in the sunshine in more ways than one. But this blogger also feels inclined to share a few other of his amateur photos from this beautiful city – (clockwise below from left to right, click image to enlarge) – views of the Oslofjord from Bygdøy museums, sculptures at Frogner Park and the Edvard Munch Museum, which is currently celebrating 150 years since the birth of the Norwegian great in 1863.

Away from the sights, just one final crude point – data from ICE Futures Europe suggests that hedge funds (and other money managers) raised bullish bets on Brent to their highest level in more than two years in the week ended August 13.

In its weekly Commitments of Traders report, ICE noted – speculative bets that prices will rise, in futures and options combined, outnumbered short positions by 193,527 lots; up 2.5% from the previous week and is the highest since January 2011. Could be higher but that’s the date ICE started the current data series – so there’s no way of knowing.

In the backdrop are the troubles in Egypt. As a sound Norwegian seaman might tell you – it’s not about what Egypt contributes to the global crude pool in boe equivalent (not much), but rather about disruption to oil tankers and shipping traffic via the Suez Canal. That’s all from Oslo folks. Next stop – Abu Dhabi, UAE! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.


© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: View of the Royal Palace from Karl Johans Gate, Oslo, Norway. Photo collage: Various views of Oslo, Norway © Gaurav Sharma, August, 2013.

Saturday, May 18, 2013

On a 'crude' UK raid, IEA & the 'Houston glut'

There was only story in London town last week, when late in the day on May 14, European Commission (EC) regulators swooped down on the offices of major oil companies having R&M operations in the UK, investigating fuel price fixing allegations. While the EC did not name names, BP, Shell and Statoil confirmed their offices had been among those ‘visited’ by the officials.
 
More details emerged overnight, as pricing information provider Platts admitted it was also paid a visit. The EC said the investigation relates to the pricing of oil, refined products and biofuels. As part of its probe, it will be examining whether the companies may have prevented others from participating in the pricing process in order to "distort" published prices.
 
That process, according to sources, is none other than Platts’ Market On Close (MOC) price assessment mechanism. "Any such behaviour, if established, may amount to violations of European antitrust rules that prohibit cartels and restrictive business practices and abuses of a dominant market position," the EC said, but clarified in the same breath that the raids itself did not imply any guilt on part of the companies.
 
The probe extends to alleged trading malpractices dating back almost over 10 years. All oil companies concerned, at least the ones who admitted to have been visited by EC regulators, said they were cooperating with the authorities. Platts issued a similar statement reiterating its cooperation.
 
So what does it mean? For starters, the line of inquiry is nothing new. Following a very vocal campaign led by British parliamentarian Robert Halfon, the UK's Office of Fair Trading (OFT) investigated the issue of price fixing and exonerated the oil companies in January. Not satisfied, Halfon kept up the pressure and here we are.
 
"I have been raising the issue of alleged fuel price fixing time and again in the House of Commons. With the EC raids, I'd say the OFT has been caught cold and simply needs to look at this again. The issue has cross-party support in the UK," he said.
 
In wake of the raids, the OFT merely said that it stood by its original investigation and was assisting the EC in its investigations. Question is, if, and it’s a big if, any wrongdoing is established, then what would the penalties be like and how would they be enforced? Parallels could be drawn between the Libor rate rigging scandal and the fines that followed imposed by US, UK and European authorities. The largest fine (to date) has been CHF1.4 billion (US$1.44 billion) awarded against UBS.
 
So assuming that wrongdoing is established, and fines are of a similar nature, Fitch Ratings reckons the companies involved could cope. "These producers typically have between US$10 billion and US$20 billion of cash on their balance sheets. Significantly bigger fines would still be manageable, as shown by BP's ability to cope with the cost of the Macondo oil spill, but would be more likely to have an impact on ratings," said Jeffrey Woodruff, Senior Director (Corporates) at Fitch Ratings.
 
Other than fines, if an oil company is found to have distorted prices, it could face longer-term risks from damage to its reputation. While these risks are less easy to predict and would depend on the extent of any wrongdoing, scope does exist for commercial damage, even for sectors with polarising positions in the public mind, according to Fitch. Given we are in the 'early days' phase, let's see what happens or rather doesn't.
 
While the EC was busy raiding oil companies, the IEA was telling the world how the US shale bonanza was sending ripples through the oil industry. In its Medium-Term Oil Market Report (MTOMR), it noted: "the effects of continued growth in North American supply – led by US light, tight oil (LTO) and Canadian oil sands – will cascade through the global oil market."
 
While geopolitical risks persist, according to the IEA, market fundamentals were indicative of a more comfortable global oil supply/demand scenario over the next five years at the very least. The MTOMR projected North American supply to grow by 3.9 million barrels per day (mbpd) from 2012 to 2018, or nearly two-thirds of total forecast non-OPEC supply growth of 6 mbpd.
 
World liquid production capacity is expected to grow by 8.4 mbpd – significantly faster than demand – which is projected to expand by 6.9 mbpd. Global refining capacity will post even steeper growth, surging by 9.5 mbpd, led by China and the Middle East. According to the IEA, having helped offset record supply disruptions in 2012, North American supply is expected to continue to compensate for declines and delays elsewhere, but only if necessary infrastructure is put in place. Failing that, bottlenecks could pressure prices lower and slow development.
 
Meanwhile, OPEC oil will remain a key part of the oil mix but its production capacity growth will be adversely affected by "growing insecurity in North and Sub-Saharan Africa", the agency said. OPEC capacity is expected to gain 1.75 mbpd to 36.75 mbpd, about 750,000 bpd less than forecast in the 2012 MTOMR. Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the UAE will lead the growth, but OPEC's lower-than-expected aggregate additions to global capacity will boost the relative share of North America, the agency said.
 
Away from supply-demand scenarios and on to pricing, Morgan Stanley forecasts Brent's premium to the WTI narrow further while progress continues to be made in clearing a supply glut at the US benchamark’s delivery point of Cushing, Oklahoma, over the coming months. It was above the US$8 mark when the Oilholic last checked, well down on the $20 it averaged for much of 2012.However, analysts at the investment bank do attach a caveat.

Have you heard of the Houston glut? There is no disguising the fact that Houston has been the recipient of the vast majority of the "new" inland crude oil supplies in the Gulf Coast [no prizes for guessing where that is coming from]. The state's extraction processes have become ever more efficient accompanied by its own oil boom to complement the existing E&P activity.
 
Lest we forget, North Dakota has overtaken every other US oil producing state in terms of its oil output, but not the great state of Texas. Yet, infrastructural limitations persist when it comes to dispatching the crude eastwards from Texas to the refineries in Louisiana.
 
So Morgan Stanley analysts note: "A growing glut of crude in Houston suggests WTI-Brent is near a trough and should widen again [at least marginally] later this year. Houston lacks a benchmark, but physical traders indicate that Houston is already pricing about $4 per barrel under Brent, given physical limitations in moving crude out of the area."
 
The Oilholic can confirm that anecdotal evidence does seem to indicate this is the case. So it would be fair to say that Morgan Staley is bang-on in its assessment that the "Houston regional pricing" would only erode further as more crude reaches the area, adding that any move in Brent-WTI towards $6-7 a barrel [from the current $8-plus] should prove unsustainable.
 
Capacity to bring incremental crude to St. James refineries in Louisiana is limited, so the Louisiana Light Sweet (LLS) will continue to trade well above Houston pricing; a trend that is likely to continue even after the reversal of the Houston-Houma pipeline – the main crude artery between the Houston physical market and St. James.
 
On a closing note, it seems the 'Bloomberg Snoopgate' affair escalated last week with the Bank of England joining the chorus of indignation. It all began earlier this month when news emerged of Bloomberg's practice of giving its reporters "limited" access to some data considered proprietary, including when a customer looked into broad categories such as equities or bonds.
 
The scoop – first reported by the FT – led to a full apology by Matthew Winkler, Editor-in-chief of Bloomberg News, for allowing journalists "limited" access to sensitive data about how clients used its terminals, saying it was "inexcusable". However, Winkler insisted that important and confidential customer data had been protected. Problem is, they aren't just any customers – they include the leading central banks in the OECD.
 
The US Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan have all said they were examining the use of data by Bloomberg. However, the language used by the Bank of England is the sternest so far. The British central bank described the events at Bloomberg as "reprehensible."
 
A spokesperson said, "The protection of confidential information is vital here at the bank. What seems to have happened at Bloomberg is reprehensible. Bank officials are in close contact with Bloomberg…We will also be liaising with other central banks on this matter."
 
In these past few days there have been signs that 'Bloomberg Snoopgate' is growing bigger as Brazil’s central bank and the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (the Chinese territory's de facto central bank) have also expressed their indignation. Having been a Bank of England and UK Office for National Statistics (ONS) correspondent, yours truly can personally testify how seriously central banks take issue with such things and so they should.
 
Yet, in describing Bloomberg's practice as "reprehensible", the Bank of England has indicated how serious it thinks the breach of confidence was and how miffed it is. The UK central bank has since received assurances from Bloomberg that there would be no repeat of the issue! You bet! That's all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!
 
To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
 
© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo: Abandoned gas station © Todd Gipstein / National Geographic 

Tuesday, May 07, 2013

UK Oil & Gas Inc. - The Thatcher Years!

The Oilholic has patiently waited for the fans and despisers of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to quieten down, in wake of her death on April 8, 2013, before giving his humble take on what her premiership did (or in many cases didn’t) for the UK oil and gas Inc. and what she got in return.
 
Her influence on the North Sea exploration and production certainly got a mention in passing in all the tributes and brickbats thrown at the Iron Lady, the longest serving (1979-1990) and only female British Prime Minister. The world’s press ranging from The Economist to the local paper in her former parliamentary constituency – The Hendon & Finchley Times (see covers below) – discussed the legacy of the Iron Lady; that legacy is ‘cruder’ than you think.
 
In the run-up to Thatcher's all-but-in-name state funeral on April 17, the British public was bombarded with flashbacks of her time in the corridors of power. In one of the video runs, yours truly glanced at archived footage of Thatcher at a BP production facility and that said it all. Her impact on the industry and the industry’s impact itself on her premiership were profound to say the least.
 
Academic Peter R. Odell, noted at the time in his book  Oil and World Power (c1986) that, “Countries as diverse as Finland, France, Italy, Austria, Spain, Norway and Britain had all decided to place oil partly, at least, in the public sector.” A later footnote observes, “Britain’s Conservative government, under Mrs. Thatcher, subsequently decided [in 1983] to ‘privatize’ the British National Oil Corporation (BNOC) created by an earlier Labour administration.”
 
The virtue of private free enterprise got instilled into the UK oil and gas industry in general and the North Sea innovators in particular thanks to Thatcher. But to say that the industry somehow owed the Iron Lady a debt of gratitude would be a travesty. Rather, the industry repaid that debt not only in full, but with interest.
 
Just as Thatcher was coming to power, more and more of the crude stuff was being sucked out of the North Sea with UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) being much richer in those days than it certainly is these days. The UK Treasury, under her hawk-eyed watch, was quite simply raking it in. According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) data, government revenue from the oil and gas industry rose from £565 million in fiscal year 1978-79 to £12.04 billion in 1984-85. That is worth over three times as much in 2012 real-terms value, according to a guesstimate provided by a contact at Barclays Capital.
 
Throughout the 1980s, the Iron Lady made sure that the revenue from the [often up to] 90% tax on North Sea oil and gas exploration and production was used as a funding source to balance the economy and pay the costs of economic reform. Over three decades on from the crude boom of the 1980s, Brits do wish she had examined, some say even adopted, the Norwegian model.
 
That she privatised the BNOC does not irk the Oilholic one bit, but that not even a drop of black gold and its proceeds – let alone a full blown Norwegian styled sovereign fund – was put aside for a rainy day is nothing short of short-termism or short-sightedness; quite possibly both. One agrees that both macroeconomic and demographical differences between Norway and the UK complicate the discussion. This humble blogger doubts if the thought of creating a sovereign fund didn’t cross the Iron Lady’s mind.
 
But unquestionably, as oil and gas revenue was helping in feeding the rising state benefits bill at the time – all Thatcher saw in Brent, Piper and Cormorant fields were Petropounds to balance the books. And, if you thought the ‘crude’ influence ended in the sale of BNOC, privatisation drives or channelling revenue for short-term economic rebalancing, then think again. Crude oil, or rather a distillate called diesel, came to Thatcher’s aid in her biggest battle in domestic politics – the Miners’ Strike of 1984.
 
Pitting her wits against Arthur Scargill, the National Union of Mineworkers’ (NUM) hardline, stubborn, ultra-left leader at the time, she prevailed. In March 1984, the National Coal Board (NCB) proposed to close 20 of the 174 state-owned mines resulting in the loss of 20,000 jobs. Led by Scargill, two-thirds of the country's miners went on strike and so began the face-off.
 
But Thatcher, unlike her predecessors, was ready for a prolonged battle having learnt her lesson in an earlier brief confrontation with the miners and knew their union’s clout full well based on past histories. This time around, the government had stockpiled coal to ensure that power plants faced no shortages as was the case with previous confrontations.
 
Tongue-tied in his vanity, Scargill had not only missed the pulse of the stockpiling drive but also failed to realise that many UK power plants had switched to diesel as a back-up. Adding to the overall idiocy of the man, he decided to launch the strike in the summer of 1984, when power consumption is lower, than in the winter.
 
Furthermore, he refused to hold a ballot on the strike, after losing three previous ballots on a national strike (in January 1982, October 1982 and March 1983). The strike was declared illegal and Thatcher eventually won as the NUM conceded a year later in March 1985 without any sizable concessions but with its member having borne considerable hardships. The world was moving away from coal, to a different kind of fossil fuel and Thatcher grasped it better than most. That the country was a net producer of crude stuff at the time was a bonanza; the Treasury’s to begin with as she saw it.
 
The Iron Lady left office with an ‘ism’ in the shape of 'Thatcherism' and bred 'Thatcherites' espousing free market ideas and by default making capitalism the dominant, though recently beleaguered, economic system of our time. Big Bang, the day [October 27, 1986] the London Stock Exchange's rules changed, following deregulation of the financial markets, became the cornerstone of her economic policy.
 
In this world there are no moral absolutes. So the Oilholic does not accept the rambunctious arguments offered by left wingers that she made ‘greed’ acceptable or that the Big Bang caused the global financial crisis of 2007-08. Weren’t militant British unions who, for their own selfish odds and ends, held the whole country to ransom throughout the 1970s (until Thatcher decimated them), greedy too? If the Big Bang was to blame for a global financial crisis, so was banking deregulation in the UK in 1997 (and elsewhere around that time) when she was not around.
 
Equally silly, are the fawning accolades handed out by the right wingers; many of whom – and not the British public – were actually instrumental in booting her out of office and some of whom were her colleagues at the time. Let the wider debate about her legacy be where it is, but were it not for the UK oil and gas Inc., there would have been no legacy. Luck played its part, as it so often does in the lives of great leaders. As The Economist noted:
 
“She was also often outrageously lucky: lucky that the striking miners were led by Arthur Scargill, a hardline Marxist; lucky that the British left fractured and insisted on choosing unelectable leaders; lucky that [Argentine] General Galtieri decided to invade the Falkland Islands when he did; lucky that she was a tough woman in a system dominated by patrician men (the wets never knew how to cope with her); lucky in the flow of North Sea oil; and above all lucky in her timing. The post-war consensus was ripe for destruction, and a host of new forces, from personal computers to private equity, aided her more rumbustious form of capitalism.”
 
They say that the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez stage-managed 'Chavismo' and bred 'Chavistas' from the proceeds of black gold. The Oilholic says 'Thatcherism' and 'Thatcherites' have a ‘crude’ dimension too. Choose whatever evidence you like – statistical, empirical or anecdotal – crude oil bankrolled Thatcherism in its infancy. That is the unassailable truth and that’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!
 
To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
 
© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: Baroness Margaret Thatcher’s funeral cortege with military honours, April 17, 2013 © Gaurav Sharma. Photo 2: Front page of the Hendon & Finchley Times, April 11, 2013. Photo 3: Front cover of the The Economist, April 13, 2013.

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

US LNG exports to the UK: The ‘Stateside’ Story

The Oilholic finds himself in Chicago IL, meeting old friends and making new ones! A story much discussed this week in the Windy City is US firm Cheniere Energy’s deal to export LNG to UK’s Centrica. More on why it is such a headline grabber later, but first the headline figures related to the deal.

The agreement, inked by Centrica and Cheniere on March 25, sees the latter provide 20-years' worth of LNG shipments starting from September 2018, which according to the former is enough to fuel 1.8 million British homes.

Centrica said it would purchase about 1.75 million metric tonnes per annum of annual LNG volumes for export from the Sabine Pass Project in Louisiana. (see Cheniere Energy’s graphic on the left, click image to enlarge). The contract covers an initial 20-year period, with an option for a 10-year extension.

Centrica, which owns utility British Gas, has fished overseas in recent years as the North Sea’s output plummets. For instance, around the 20th World Petroleum Congress in 2011, it inked deals with Norway’s Statoil and Qatar Petroleum. US companies have also flirted with the export market. So the nature of the deal is not new for either party; the timing and significance of it is.

According to City analysts and their peers here in Chicago, the announcement is a ground breaking move owing to two factors – (1) it’s the first ever long-term LNG supply deal for the Brits and (2) a market breakthrough for a US gas exporter in Europe.

Additionally, it blows away the insistence by the Russians and Qataris to link longer term supply contracts to the crude oil price (hello?? keep dreaming) instead of contracts priced relative to gas market movements. As for gas market prices, here is the math – excluding the recent (temporary) spike, gas prices in the UK are on average 3 to 3.5 times higher than the current price in the US. So we’re talking in the range of US$9.75 to $10.25 per million British thermal units (mmBtu). The Americans want to sell the stuff, the Brits want to buy – it’s a no brainer.

Except – as a contact in Chicago correctly points out – things are never straightforward in this crude world. Sounding eerily similar to what Chatham House fellow Prof. Paul Stevens told the Oilholic earlier this month, he says, “Have you forgotten the politics of ‘cheap’ US gas exports landing up on foreign shores? Even if it’s to our old friends the Brits?”

The US shale revolution has been price positive for American consumers – the exchequer is happy, the political classes are happy and so is the public which sees their country edging towards “energy independence.” (A big achievement in the current geopolitical climate and despite the quakes in Oklahoma).

The only people who are not all that happy, apart from the environmentalists, are the pioneers who persevered and kick-started this US shale gas revolution which was three decades in the making. To quote one who is now happily retired in Skokie, IL, “We no longer get more bang for our bucks anymore when it comes to domestic contracts.”

Another valid argument, from some in the trading community here in Chicago, is that as soon as US gas exports gain traction, bulk of which would head to Asia and not mother England, domestic prices will start climbing. So the Centrica-Cheniere deal, while widely cheered in the UK, has got little more than a perfunctory, albeit positive, acknowledgement from the political classes stateside.

In contrast, across the pond, none other than the UK Prime Minister David Cameron himself took to the airwaves declaring, “Future gas supplies from the US will help diversify our energy mix and provide British consumers with a new long term, secure and affordable source of fuel.”

The Prime Minister is quite right – the UK would rather buy from a ‘friendly’ country. Problem is, the friendly country might cool off on the idea of gas exports, were US domestic prices to pick-up in tandem with a rise in export volumes.

That’s all for the moment from Chicago folks! More from here over the next few days; keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.


© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo: Sabine Pass Project, USA © Cheniere Energy Inc.

Sunday, January 20, 2013

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

The terrorist strike on Algeria’s In Amenas gas field last week and the bloodbath that followed as the country’s forces attempted to retake the facility has dominated the news headlines. The siege ended on Saturday with at least 40 hostages and 32 terrorists dead, according to newswires. The number is likely to alter as further details emerge. The hostage takers also mined the whole facility and a clear-up is presently underway. The field is operated as a joint venture between Algeria's Sonatrach, Statoil and BP. While an estimated 50,000 barrels per day (bpd) of condensate was lost as production stopped, the damage to Algeria’s oil & gas industry could be a lot worse as foreign oil workers were deliberately targeted.
 
In its assessment of the impact of the terror strike, the IEA said the kidnapping and murder of foreign oil workers at the gas field had cast a ‘dark cloud’ over the outlook for the country's energy sector. The agency said that 'political risk writ large' dominates much of the energy market, 'and not just in Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya or Venezuela' with Algeria returning to their ranks. Some say it never left in the first place.
 
Reflecting this sentiment, BP said hundred of overseas workers from IOCs had left Algeria and many more were likely to join them. Three of the company’s own workers at the In Amenas facility are unaccounted for.
 
Continuing with the MENA region, news emerged that Saudi Arabia’s output fell 290,000 bpd in December to 9.36 million bpd. Subsequently, OPEC’s output in December also fell to its lowest level in a year at 30.65 million bpd. This coupled, with projections of rising Chinese demand, prompted the IEA to raise its global oil demand forecast for 2013 describing it as a 'sobering, 'morning after' view.'
 
The forecast is now 240,000 bpd more than the IEA estimate published in December, up to 90.8 million bpd; up 1% over 2012. "All of a sudden, the market looks tighter than we thought…OECD inventories are getting tighter - a clean break from the protracted and often counter-seasonal builds that had been a hallmark of 2012," IEA said.
 
However, the agency stressed there was no need for rushed interpretations. "The dip in Saudi supply, for one, seems less driven by price considerations than by the weather. A dip in air conditioning demand - as well as reduced demand from refineries undergoing seasonal maintenance - likely goes a long way towards explaining reduced output. Nothing for the global market to worry about," the IEA said.
 
"The bull market of 2003‐2008 was all about demand growth and perceived supply constraints. The bear market that followed was all about financial meltdown. Today's market, as the latest data underscore, has a lot to do with political risk writ large. Furthermore, changes in tax and trade policies, in China and in Russia, can, at the stroke of a pen, shakeup crude and products markets and redraw the oil trade map," the agency concluded.
 
Simply put, it’s too early for speculators to get excited about a possible bull rally in the first quarter of 2013, something which yours truly doubts as well. However, across the pond, the WTI forward month futures contract cut its Brent discount to less than US$15 at one point last week, the lowest since July. As the glut at Cushing, Oklahoma subsides following the capacity expansion of the Seaway pipeline, the WTI-Brent discount would be an interesting sideshow this year. 
 
The IEA added that non-OPEC production was projected to rise by 980,000 bpd to 54.3 million bpd, the highest growth rate since 2010. Concurrently, BP said that US shale oil production is expected to grow around 5 million bpd by 2030. This, according to the oil major, is likely to be offset by reductions in supply from OPEC, which has been pumping at historical highs led by the Saudis in recent years.
 
BP's chief economist Christof Ruehl said, "This will generate spare capacity of around 6 million bpd, and there's a fault line if there is higher shale production then the consequences would be even stronger." But the shale revolution will remain largely a "North American phenomenon," he added.
 
"No other country outside the US and Canada has yet succeeded in combining these factors to support production growth. While we expect other regions will adapt over time to develop their resources, by 2030 we expect North America still to dominate production of these resources," Ruehl said.
 
Along the same theme, CNN reported that California is sitting on a massive amount of shale oil and could become the next oil boom state. That’s only if the industry can get the stuff out of the ground without upsetting the state's powerful environmental lobby. Yeah, good luck with that!

Returning to Saudi Arabia, Fitch Ratings said earlier this month that an expansionary 2013 budget based on a conservative oil price will support another year of healthy economic growth for the country and a further strengthening of the sovereign's net creditor position. However, overall growth will slow “due to a decline in oil production that was already evident in recent months.”
 
In the full year to December-end 2013, the Saudi budget, unveiled on December 29, projected record spending of US$219 billion (34% of GDP), up by almost 20% on the 2012 budget. Budgeted capital spending is 28% higher than in 2012, though the government has struggled to achieve its capital spending targets in recent years.
 
While an 18% rise in Saudi revenues is projected in the budget, they are based on unstated oil price and production assumptions, with the former well below prevailing market prices. Fitch anticipates Saudi production and prices will be lower in 2013 than 2012.

"With no new revenue-raising measures announced and little scope for higher oil revenues, the revenue projection appears less cautious than usual. However, actual revenues generally substantially exceed budget revenues (by an average of 82% over the past five years) and should do so again in 2013," the agency said.
 
Meanwhile, political uncertainty continues in Venezuela with no clarity about the health of President Hugo Chavez. It has done Petróleos de Venezuela's (PDVSA), the country’s national oil company, no favours. On January 16, ratings agency Moody’s changed PDVSA's rating outlook to negative.

It followed the change in outlook for the Venezuelan government's local and foreign currency bond ratings to negative. "The sovereign rating action reflects increasing uncertainty over President Chavez's political succession, and the impact of a possibly tumultuous transition on civil order, the economy, and an already deteriorating government fiscal position," Moody’s said.
 
On PDVSA, the agency added that as a government-related issuer, the company's ratings reflect a high level of imputed government support and default correlation between the two entities. Hence, a downgrade of the government's local and foreign currency ratings would be likely to result in a downgrade of PDVSA's ratings as well.
 
Away from a Venezuela, two developments in the North Sea – a positive and a negative apiece – are worth taking about. Starting with the positive news first, global advisory firm Deloitte found that 65 exploration and appraisal wells were drilled on the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS), compared with 49 in 2011.
 
The activity, according to Deloitte, was boosted by a broader range of tax allowances and a sustained high oil price. The news came as Dana Petroleum said production had commenced at the Cormorant East field which would produce about 5,500 bpd initially. Production will be processed at the Taqa-operated North Cormorant platform, before being sent to BP's Sullom Voe terminal (pictured above) for sale.
 
Taqa, an Abu Dhabi government-owned energy company, has a majority 60% stake in the field. Alongside Dana Petroleum (20%), its other partners include Antrim Resources (8.4%), First Oil Expro (7.6%) and Granby Enterprises (4%).
 
While Taqa was still absorbing the positives, its Cormorant Alpha platform, about 160 km from the Shetland Islands, reported a leak leading to a production shut-down at 20 other interconnected North Sea oilfields.
 
Cormorant Alpha platform handles an output of about 90,000 bpd of crude which is transported through the Brent pipeline to Sullom Voe for dispatch. Of this only 10,000 bpd is its own output. Thankfully there was no loss of life and Taqa said the minor leak had been contained. It is currently in the process of restoring 80,000 bpd worth of crude back to the Brent pipeline system along with sorting its own output.
 
Finally, as the Oilholic blogged back in October on a visit to Hawaii, Tesoro is to close its Kapolei, O'ahu refinery in the island state in April as a buyer has failed to turn-up (so far). In the interim, it will be converting the facility to a distribution and storage terminal in the hope that a buyer turn up. The Oilholic hopes so too, but in this climate it will prove tricky. Tesoro will continue to fulfil existing supply commitments.
 
That’s all for the moment folks except to inform you that after resisting it for years, yours truly has finally succumbed and opened a Twitter account! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!
 
To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
 
© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo: Sullom Voe Terminal, BP © BP Plc.

Monday, December 31, 2012

Final ‘crude’ points of 2012

As 2012 draws to a close, a few developments over the last fortnight are worth mulling over, ahead of uncorking the champagne to usher in the New Year. But first, a word on pricing - the final ICE Brent February futures contract price cut-off noted by the Oilholic came in at US$110.96 per barrel with US budget talks in the background.
 
Over the last two weeks, and as expected, the cash market trade was rather uneventful with a number of large players starting the countdown to the closure of their books for the year. However, the ICE’s weekly Commitment of Traders report published on Christmas Eve made for interesting reading.
 
It suggested that money managers raised their net long positions in Brent crude futures (and options) by 11.2% in the week that ended on December 18; a trend that has continued since November-end. Including hedge funds, money managers held a net long position of 106,138 contracts, versus 95,447 contracts the previous week.
 
Away from Brent positions, after due consideration the UK government finally announced that exploration for shale gas will resume albeit with strict safety controls. Overall, it was the right decision for British consumers and the economy. It was announced that there would be a single administrative authority to regulate and oversee shale gas and hydraulic fracking. A tax break may also apply for shale gas producers; further details are due in the New Year.
 
Close on the heels of UK Chancellor George Osborne’s autumn statement and the shale announcement, came a move by Statoil to take a 21-year old oil discovery in the British sector of the North Sea off its shelf.
 
On December 21, the Norwegian company approved a US$7 billion plan to develop its Mariner project, the biggest British offshore development in over a decade. According to Statoil, it could produce around 250 million barrels of oil or more over a 30-year period and could be brought onstream as early as 2017 with a peak output of 55,000 barrels per day.
 
Mariner, which is situated 150 km southeast of the Shetland Islands, was discovered in 1981. The Oilholic thinks Statoil’s move is very much down to the economics of a Brent oil price in excess of US$100 per barrel. Simply put, now would be a good time to develop this field in inhospitable climes and make it economically viable.
 
Being the 65.11% majority stakeholder in Mariner, Statoil would be joined by minority stakeholders JX Nippon E&P (28.89%) and Cairn Energy (via a subsidiary with a 6% stake).
 
Elsewhere, Moody's changed the outlook for Petrobras’ A3 global foreign currency and local currency debt to negative from stable. It said the negative outlook reflects the company's rising debt levels and uncertainty over the timing and delivery of production and cash flow growth in the face of a massive capital budget, rising costs and downstream profit pressures.
 
“We also see increasing linkage between Petrobras and the sovereign, with the government playing a larger role in the offshore development, the company's strategic direction, and policies such as local content requirements that will affect its future development plans,” said Thomas S. Coleman, senior vice president, Corporate Finance Group at Moody’s.
 
That’s all for 2012 folks! A round-up of crude year 2012 to follow early in the New Year; in the interim here’s wishing you all a very Happy New Year. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!
 
© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: Vintage Shell pump, San Francisco, USA © Gaurav Sharma.

Monday, November 12, 2012

A brilliant catalogue of ‘crude’ expressions

As paper barrels increasingly get the upper hand in an intertwined global network of crude oil and distillates trading, whether it is the virtual crude you are after or the physical stuff – getting a hang of the market jargon is crucial.
 
Perhaps you are familiar with terms such as contango, backwardation or crack spreads – as many readers of this blog would be. But can you confidently define what a PIONA test is? Or for that matter what’s a No. 6 Fueloil? Or maybe what demulsibility implies to in a crude context or what are charter parties?
 
If you are stumped or curious or unsure or perhaps all three, then – The Oil Traders’ Word(s) – a brilliant compendium of ‘crude’ knowledge containing oil traders’ expressions, trading floor jargon, measurements, metrics and terms put together by Statoil executive Stefan Van Woenzel is just the tonic!
 
In a painstaking endeavour, Van Woenzel has penned the A to Z of oil trading jargon banking on his decades of experience as a trader. In order to put the veracity of his research work to test, the Oilholic subjected The Oil Traders’ Word(s) to a simple test. To begin with yours truly tallied common oil trading expressions to check the author’s description of them, then on to terms that only readers with a mid to high level of investment knowledge would be familiar with and finally to random jump searches by alphabet.
 
The Oilholic is delighted to say that Van Woenzel’s ‘glossary-plus’ emerges with full marks and more on all counts. Expressions, words and jargon aside, metric to imperial measures and explanatory notes make this work of just under 550 pages one of the most purposeful reference books of the oil sector. With close to 2,000 definitions, one would struggle to find a better or even a comparable product to the author’s arduous effort.

This book is not limited to a role of a ‘crude’ dictionary or an industry communications guide. Going beyond that, Van Woenzel has shared his two decades-plus worth of industry wisdom with readers in a separate chapter. Overall, it was a joy to read the book and put the glossary to a very enjoyable test. A multibillion dollar industry must appreciate the value of the author’s commendable research.
 
For his humble part, the Oilholic would be happy to recommend it to fellow ‘crude’ individuals, oil & gas executives, oil traders, energy project financiers, shipping personnel, banking sector professionals, energy journalists and academics. Students of economics, business and energy studies might also find it worth their while to have it handy. If you needed a one-stop oil industry jargon guide, then this book really is the ‘real deal’.
 
© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: Front Cover – The Oil Traders' Word(s) © AuthorHouse.

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

UK & Norway: A ‘crudely’ special relationship

Unconnected to the current systemic financial malaise in Europe, a recent visit to Oslo by British Prime Minister David Cameron for a meeting with his Norwegian counterpart Jens Stoltenberg went largely unnoticed. However, its ‘crude’ significance cannot be understated and Cameron’s visit was the first by a British Prime Minister since Margaret Thatcher’s in 1986.

Beaming before the cameras, Stoltenberg and Cameron announced an "energy partnership" encompassing oil, gas and renewable energy production. As production from established wells has peaked in the Norwegian and British sectors of the North Sea, a lot has changed since 1986. The two principal proponents of exploration in the area are now prospecting in hostile climes of the hitherto unexplored far North – beyond Shetland Islands and in the Barents Sea.

Reading between PR lines, the crux of what emerged from Oslo last week is that both governments want to make it easier for firms to raise money for projects and to develop new technologies bearing potential benefits in terms of energy security. That Cameron is the first British PM to visit Norway in decades also comes as no surprise in wake of media reports that the Norwegian sector of the North Sea is witnessing a second renaissance. So of the growing amount of oil the UK imports since its own production peaked in 1999 – Norway accounts for over 60% of it. The percentage for British gas imports from Norway is nearly the same.

"I hope that my visit to Oslo will help secure affordable energy supplies for decades to come and enhance investment between our two countries. This will mean more collaboration on affordable long-term gas supply, more reciprocal investment in oil, gas and renewable energies and more commercial deals creating thousands of new jobs and adding billions to our economies," Cameron said.

For their part the Norwegians, who export over five times as much energy as they use domestically, told their guest that they see the UK as a reliable energy partner. We hear you sir(s)!

Meanwhile, UK Office for National Statistics’ (ONS) latest production data released this morning shows that extractive industries output fell by 15% on an annualised basis in April with oil & gas production accounting for a sizeable chunk of the decline.

A further break-up of data suggests oil & gas production came in 18.2% lower in April 2012 when compared with the recorded data for April 2011. Statisticians say production would have been higher in April had it not been for the shutdown of Total’s Elgin platform in the North Sea because of a gas leak.

Elsewhere, farcical scenes ensued at the country’s Manchester airport where the airport authority ran out of aviation fuel causing delays and flight cancellations for hours before supplies were restored. Everyone in the UK is asking the same question – how on earth could this happen? Here’s the BBC’s attempt to answer it.

Finally the Oilholic has found time and information to be in a position to re-examine the feisty tussle for Cove Energy. After Shell’s rather mundane attempt to match Thai company PTTEP’s offer for Cove, the Thais upped the stakes late last month with a £1.22 billion takeover offer for the Mozambique-focused oil & gas offshore company.

PTTEP’s 240 pence/share offer improves upon its last offer of 220 pence or £1.12 billion in valuation which Shell had matched to nods of approval from Cove’s board and the Government of Mozambique. The tussle has been going on since February when Shell first came up with a 195 pence/share offer which PTTEP then bettered.

Yours truly believes Cove’s recommendation to shareholders in favour of PTTEP’s latest offer does not guarantee that the tussle is over. After all, Cove recommended Shell’s last offer too which even had a break clause attached. Chris Searle, corporate finance partner at accountants BDO, feels the tussle for control may end up with someone overpaying.

“I’m not surprised that PTTEP have come back in for Cove since the latter’s gas assets are so attractive. Of course the danger is that we now get into a really competitive auction that in the end will lead to one of the bidders overpaying. It will be interesting to see how far this goes and who blinks first,” he concludes.

Cove’s main asset is an 8.5% stake in the Rovuma Offshore Area 1 off the coast of Mozambique where Anadarko projects recoverable reserves of 30 tcf of natural gas. Someone just might end-up overpaying.

On the pricing front, instead of the Spanish rescue calming the markets, a fresh round of volatility has taken hold. One colleague in the City wonders whether it had actually ever left as confusion prevails over what messages to take from the new development. Instead of the positivity lasting, Spain's benchmark 10-year bond yields rose to 6.65% and Italy's 10-year bond yield rose to 6.19%, not seen since May and January respectively.

Last time yours truly checked, Brent forward month futures contract was resisting US$97 while WTI was resisting US$82. That’s all for the moment folks! The Oilholic is off to Vienna for the 161st OPEC meeting of ministers. More from Austria soon; keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: Oil Rig in the North Sea © Royal Dutch Shell.