‘Crude’ sanctions on others always hurt Japan

The Oilholic finds himself in a rain-soaked Tokyo one final time before the big flying bus home! How Asian importing countries cope with sanctions on major oil & gas exporting jurisdictions is an interesting topic in this region reliant on foreign hydrocarbons for obvious reasons.

Mentioning Iran and of late curbs on Russia, deliberations over the past week with market commentators here in Tokyo, as well as Shanghai and Hong Kong, resulted in a consensus of opinion that Japan’s 30-odd oil & gas companies and regional gas-fired utilities feel the pain of such curbs more than corporate citizens of most other Asian importing nations.

The reason is simple enough; of the quartet of major Asian importers – namely China, Japan, India and South Korea – it’s the Japanese who are the most compliant when international pressures surface. Now, whether or not they can afford to is a different matter. According to the EIA and local publications, Japan consumed nearly 4.6 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2013, down from 4.7 million bpd in 2012. 

Going by the IEA’s latest projections, Japan is the third largest petroleum consumer in the world, behind the US and China. Yet domestic reserves are paltry in the region of 45.5 million barrels of oil equivalent, concentrated along the country’s western coastline. Inevitably, Japan imports most of its hydrocarbon requirements as a major industrialised nation.

Given the equation, if sanctions knock out or have the potential to knock out imports from one of its major partners, finding an alternative is neither easy nor simple. Forward planning also gets thrown right out of the window. We’ll discuss the recent Russian conundrum in a moment, but let’s examine the 2012 Iranian sanctions and the Japanese response to them first.

The country, almost immediately complied with requests to import less oil from Iran when European Union and US sanctions escalated in Q1 2012. At the time, Japan accounted for 17% of Iranian exports, above South Korea and India, but below China. The Japanese phased bid to reduce Iranian oil imports was lauded by the West, whereas China largely ignored the call, South Korea asked for more time and the Indians came up with ingenious ways to make remittances to Iran, until curbs on the insurance of tankers carrying Iranian crude began to bite.

Make no mistake, the sanctions on Iran hurt all four back in 2012, but Japan had to contend with the biggest refocusing exercise based on the level and speed of its compliance in moving away from Iranian crude. In the Oilholic’s opinion, for better or worse, that’s the price of being a G7 nation; and “having internationalism factored into the thinking,” adds a contact.

Fast forward to 2014, and the potential for securing of natural gas supplies from Russia to Japan seems to be taking a hit in wake of the Ukraine crisis. At the 21st World Petroleum Congress in June, when the tension had not escalated to the current level, prior to the downing of MH17, policymakers in on both sides were cooing over the potential for cooperation. 

The Institute of Energy Economics, Japan and the Energy Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences even put out a joint white paper at the Congress contemplating a subsea gas pipeline route from Korsakov, Russia, to Kashima, Japan with an onshore Ishikari-Tomakomai section. It was claimed that technical feasibility of the ambitious project, capable of carrying a projected 8 bcm of natural gas to the Pacific Coast of Eastern Japan, had been positive.

Now it’s all gone a bit cold. One can’t directly attribute it to Russia’s face-off with the West, but currently both Japan and Russia describe the project as “just another idea”. This blogger can assure you, people were way more excited about it in June at the WPC than they are at the moment, and one wonders why?

Afterall, post-Fukushima with the rise of natural gas in Japan’s energy mix, however wild a project might be, carries weight rather than being relegated to just an idea. Contrast this with China, which has recently inked a long-term supply contract with the Russians. Quod erat demonstrandum!

With the evening drawing to a close, it’s time to digress a little and disclose the venue of this animated conversation – that’s none other than Tokyo’s iconic Hotel Okura. While a wee tipple is not cheap (average JPY1,700 for a swig of single malt), visiting this modernist institution is something special. 

When Tokyo first hosted the Olympic Games in 1964, the hotel was built in preparation to welcome the world. Since then, Hotel Okura has hosted every serving US President from Richard Nixon onwards.

Author Ian Fleming made James Bond fictitiously check-in to the hotel while in Tokyo in a chapter of "You only live twice". In recent work of fiction, the hotel also makes an appearance in Haruki Murakami’s 1Q84. It’s eclectic lobby, paneling, general sense of tranquility and overall panache of modern Japan is simply splendid (see above left). 

So here’s to 007, Murakami, Queen and Country and all the rest; but also it could be the Oilholic’s last drink at Hotel Okura as we know it. Alas, this grand place is about to fall prey to cultural philistinism in the name of progress as Tokyo prepares to host the Olympic Games once again in 2020. 

Last time around, for the 1964 games, Tokyo got the wretched Nihonbashi Expressway, a ‘clever’ project which included building an expressway over the Nihonbashi bridge, obscuring the magnificent view of Mount Fuji from the bridge and covering-up an ancient river flowering through the heart of Tokyo with steel and much more (see below left)!

Now atop a lot of flattening and rebuilding plans all over town, it seems Hotel Okura’s original main wing has been marked for demolition in August 2015, leaving only the South Tower operational. A proposed spending plan of US$980 million will see the wing open in the spring of 2019, reborn according to an employee as a “mixed-use tower” with 550 guest rooms and 18 stories of office space.

Life it seems will never be the same again for Hotel Okura and its many admirers including the Oilholic, who’d made it his mission not to leave Tokyo without visiting. Glad one got to see it before the demolition men get in. Well that’s all from the Far East folks as its time to bid a sad goodbye to the region!

Tokyo, Hong Kong, Macau and Shanghai, planes, trains, speedboats and automobiles – it was one heck of a crude ride that one will treasure forever. Next stop is London Heathrow, a reminder that all good things must end! 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 1: Tokyo Stock Exchange. Photo 2: Lobby of the Hotel Okura, Tokyo. Photo 3: The Oilholic at Hotel Okura’s Orchid Bar. Photo 4: Nihonbashi Expressway, Tokyo, Japan  © Gaurav Sharma, September, 2014.

Geopolitical loving: When Abe met Modi

The Oilholic finds himself roughly 6,000 miles east of London in Tokyo, Japan. While yours truly is here for cultural and ‘crude’ pursuits, another visitor was in town to firm up a crucial strategic tie-up. It was none other than India’s recently elected Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who popped in to see Japanese counterpart Shinzo Abe.

There’s been something of a political loving between these two heads of state. Abe hardly follows anyone on Twitter; Modi being one of the only four people he currently does follow! The Japanese PM was the first among international counterparts to congratulate Modi following his stunning mandate after elections in India. If you think that’s not a big deal, well US President Barack Obama got a welcoming handshake from Abe; NHK footage of Modi’s arrival in Japan shows one heck of a ‘best pal’ Abe-Modi bear hug. Protocol and formality not required between friends seems to be the message.

It is only Modi’s second and most prominent foreign visit since he assumed office this year; no offence to Nepal which was the first destination of his choice. Both leaders lean right, though the Indian PM’s right-wing credentials are stronger in a strictly domestic sense. The Japanese and Indian media went positively ballistic over the visit, atop giving it front-page stuff prominence. It’s extraordinary for all of this to be related to a bilateral meeting between two heads of state, with no priors, unless there was a collaborative attitude behind the scenes.

Any analyst worth his/her weight would note that at the heart of it is a move to counterbalance China, a country that has an uneasy relationship with both India and Japan. As if to underscore the point, Modi, visibly moved with the superb reception he received, criticised the “expansionist” maritime agenda of certain states. Wonder who he could possibly be referring to with the South China Sea so close-by?

Both countries are wary of China, have similar economic problems (cue inflationary concerns) and remain major importers of natural resources. As if for good measure, throw religion into the mix as Japan’s primary faith – Buddhism – was founded in the Indian subcontinent. So finding common ground or the pretext of a common ground is not hard for Abe and Modi.

Now is the Abe-Modi summit a big deal? In the Oilholic’s opinion, the answer is yes. We’ll come to natural resources and ‘crude’ matters shortly, but hear this out first – Japan is to invest US$34 billion spread over the next five years in terms of deal valuation. The trade between the two is insipid at the moment, either side of 1% of the total export pile in each case with the Japanese exporting marginally more than they’re importing from India. That makes the announcement a very positive development.

Japan, according to both men, could turn to India for its rare earth needs, a market led by China. While claims of India becoming a wholesale manufacturing base for Japanese electronics and engineering giants are a bit overblown, to quote the Indian PM: “We see a new era of cooperation in high-end defence technology and equipment.”

As for exchanging views on inflation - India’s, until recently was out of control and has only just been somewhat reigned in with the country's economy starting to gain momentum. Japan's on the other hand, “Abenomics” or not, has not managed to gain momentum (economy has shrunk in annualised terms last quarter by 6.8%). Inflation, thanks to a sales tax rise which came into effect in April, is not under control either with the country’s Consumer Prices Index (CPI) up 3.4% in July. That's well above the Bank of Japan’s target rate of 2%.

Given both countries are major importers of crude oil and natural gas, even a minor price rise has a major knock-on effect right from the point of importation to further down the consumer chain. At the moment, both are benefitting from a two-month decline in oil prices. Both PMs think they can work together towards the procurement of liquefied natural gas, according to an Indian source. The idea of two major importers strategising together sounds good, but concrete details are yet to be released.

If there was one hiccup, the two sides did not reach an agreement over the transfer of nuclear technology to India. Politics aside, Japan for its part is still grappling with the effects of Fukushima on all fronts - legal, natural and physical. Tepco, the company which operated the plant, is still in courts. The latest lawsuit - by workers demanding compensation - is a big one.

But not to digress, how did the men describe the summit themselves? For Modi, it was an “upgrade” in bilateral relations. For Abe, it was “a meeting of minds”. China would, and should, view it very differently. There is one not-so-mute point. Abe did not take any direct or indirect swipes at China, Modi (as mentioned above) was not so restrained. One wonders if in Modi’s quest for geopolitical rebalancing in Asia, would it serve in India well to improve relations with Japan and let them deteriorate with China?

That’s all the contemplation from Tokyo for the moment folks. The Oilholic is heading to Hong Kong, albeit briefly, after a gap of over a decade. Its a sunny day here at Narita Airport as one takes off. More soon, 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 1: Tokyo Bay Waterfront. Photo 2: Narita International Aiport, Japan © Gaurav Sharma, September 2014.

Crude permutations of the Ukrainian stand-off

When the Russo-Georgian skirmish happened in 2008, European policymakers got a stark reminder of how reliant they were on Russian natural gas. Regardless of the geopolitics of that conflict, many leading voices in the European Union, especially in Germany, vowed to reduce their reliance on Russian gas.

The idea was to prevent one of the world's leading exporters of natural gas from using its resource as a bargaining tool should such an episode occur again. Now that it has, as the Ukrainian crisis brings Russia and West into yet another open confrontation, the Oilholic asks what happened to that vow. Not much given the scheme of things! What's worse, the Fukushima meltdown in Japan and a subsequent haphazard dismissal of the nuclear energy avenue by many European jurisdictions actually increased medium-term reliance on mostly Russian gas.

According to GlobalData, Russian gas exports to Europe grew to a record of 15.6 billion cubic feet per day last year. The US, which is not reliant on Russian natural resources, finds itself in a quandary as EU short-termism will almost certainly result in a toning down of a concerted response by the West against Russia in the shape of economic sanctions.

The human and socioeconomic cost of what's happening in Crimea and wider Ukraine is no laughing matter. However, President Vladimir Putin should be allowed a smirk or two at the idiocy and short-sightedness of the EU bigwigs – reliant on him for natural gas but warning him of repercussions! Therefore, sabre rattling by Brussels is bound to have negligible impact.

Meanwhile, Russia's Gazprom has said it will no longer offer Ukraine discounted gas prices because it is over US$1.5 billion in payment arrears which have been accumulating for over 12 months. Additionally, Rosneft could swoop for a Ukrainian refinery, according to some reports. While economic warfare has already begun, this blogger somehow does not see Russians and Ukrainians shooting at each other; Georgia was different.

Having visited both countries in the past, yours truly sees a deep familial and historic bond between the two nations; sadly that's also what makes the situation queasy. The markets are queasy too. Ukraine was hoping for a shale gas revolution and Crimea – currently in the Kremlin's grip – has its own shale bed. In November 2013, Chevron signed a $10 billion shale gas production sharing agreement with the Ukrainian government to develop the western Olesska field. Shell followed suit with a similar agreement.

Matthew Ingham, lead analyst covering North Sea and Western Europe Upstream at GlobalData, says shale gas production was inching closer. "Together with the UK and Poland, Ukraine could see production within the next three to four years."

However, what will happen from here is anyone's guess. A geopolitical bombshell has been dropped into the conundrum of exploratory and commercial risks.

Away from gas markets, the situation's impact on the wider crude oil market could work in many ways. First off, rather perversely, a mobilisation or an actual armed conflict is price positive for regional oil contracts, but not the wider market. A linear supply shortage dynamic applies here.

An economic tit-for-tat between Russia and the EU, accompanied by a conflict on its borders, would hurt wider economic confidence. So a prolonged escalation would be price negative for the Brent contract as economic activity takes a hit. Russia can withstand a dip in price by as much as $20 per barrel; but worries would surface should the $90-resistance be broken. To put things into perspective, around 85% Russia's oil is sold to EU buyers.

Finally, there is the issue of Ukraine as a major transit point for oil & gas, even though it is not a major producer of either. According to JP Morgan Commodities Research over 70% of Russia's oil & gas flow to Europe passes through Ukrainian territory. In short, all parties would take a hit and the risk premium, could just as well turn into a news sensitive risk discount.

Furthermore, in terms of market sentiment, this blogger notes that 90% of the time all of the risk priced and built into the forward month contract never really materialises. So this then begs the question, whose risk is it anyway? The guy at the end of a pipeline waiting for his crude cargo or the paper trader who actually hasn't ever known what a physical barrel is like!

The situation has also made drawing conclusions from ICE's latest Commitments of Traders report a tad meaningless for this week. Speculative long positions by hedge funds and other money managers that the Brent price will rise (in futures and options combined), outnumbered short positions by 139,921 lots in the week ended February 25, prior to the Ukrainian escalation.

For the record, that is the third weekly gain and the most since October 22. Net-long positions rose by 18,214 contracts, or 15%, from the previous period. ICE also said bearish positions by producers, merchants, processors and users of the North Sea crude outnumbered bullish wagers by 266,017 lots, rising 8.2% from the week before.

Away from Ukraine and on to supply diversity, Norway's Statoil has certainly bought cargo from a land far, far away. According to Reuters, Statoil bought 500,000 barrels of Colombian Vasconia medium crude, offered on the open market in February by Canada's Pacific Rubiales.

When a cargo of Columbian crude is sold by a Canadian company to Norwegian one, you get an idea of the global nature of the crude supply chain. That's if you ever needed reminding. The US remains Pacific Rubiales' largest market, but sources say it is increasing its sales to Europe.

Finally, in the humble opinion of yours truly, Vitol CEO Ian Taylor provided the soundbite of the International Petroleum Week held in London last month.

The boss of the world's largest independent oil trading firm headquartered in serene Geneva opined that Dated Brent ought to broaden its horizons as North Sea production declines. The benchmark, which currently includes Brent, Forties, Oseberg and Ekofisk blend crudes, was becoming "less effective" according to Taylor.

"We are extremely concerned about Brent already not becoming a very efficient or effective benchmark. It’s quite a concern when you see that production profile. Maybe the time has come to really broaden out Dated Brent," he said.

Broadening a benchmark that's used to price over half the world's crude could include Algeria's Saharan Blend, CPC Blend from the Caspian Sea, Nigeria's Bonny Light, Qua Iboe and Forcados crudes and North Sea grades DUC and Troll, the Vitol CEO suggested.

Taylor also said Iran wasn't going to be "solved anytime soon" and would stay just about where it is in terms of exports. The Oilholic couldn't agree more. That's all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'! 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com 

© Gaurav Sharma 2014. Photo: Pipelines & gas tank, Russian Federation © Rosneft (TNK-BP archives)

Scrutinising UK’s latest North Sea tax break

The British government announced fresh tax relief measures last week aimed at boosting output in the North Sea. The Oilholic’s first thought, after having scrutinised the small print, is that it’s a positive signal of intent from UK chancellor George Osborne following on from his 2012 union budget. In all fairness he is also looking to put the taxation measures of 2011 budget, which irked the industry, behind him.

From July 25th, new UKCS gas fields with 10-20 billion cubic metres (bcm) in reserves located at depths of less than 30 metres will be exempted from a 32% tax levy on the first £500 million (or US$776 million) of income. Shallow water offshore projects will still pay the 30% Ring Fence Corporation Tax on all income from the field.

UK Treasury figures suggest the measure is expected to cost £20 million per annum in reduced tax receipts, but the government reckons it would generate additional jobs and crucially bolster energy security.

Chancellor Osborne said, "Gas is the single biggest source of energy in the UK. Today the government is signalling its long-term commitment to the role it can play in delivering a stable, secure and lower-carbon energy mix."

A new UK gas strategy is expected this autumn and all indications are that the British will acknowledge the critical role of the gas market in meeting emissions targets alongside a mix of subsidy supported renewable projects. Another passive acknowledgement then that gas, not renewable energy platforms, would be the immediate beneficiary of a post-Fukushima turn-off?

In fact the Oilholic and quite a few others are convinced that gas-fired plants would play a more than complementary role in a future British energy mix. The latest tax relief, aimed at shallow water gas prospection is proof of this.

Derek Henderson, senior partner in the Aberdeen office of Deloitte, also believes the move builds on UK March’s Budget when a number of other reliefs were announced. “This announcement should further support investment, unlock potential gas reserves and increase long term production leading to additional employment and an increase in overall tax revenue,” he said.

“This encouraging action by the Chancellor also provides more evidence of the constructive dialogue that is taking place between industry and the Government. The politicians are demonstrating their commitment to gas, it is now up to the industry to respond with increased activity levels,” Henderson concludes.

Centrica pledged to invest £1.4 billion towards developing its Cygnus gas field with partner GDF Suez barely hours after the announcement of the tax relief. Six days later Prime Minister David Cameron came ‘up North’ to pledge his support to the sector.

“If everything goes well in the oil sector and the renewables sector, is really important, high-quality manufacturing. I think that's something to celebrate and something to stand up for," he said speaking at Burntisland Fabrications in Fife.

The company has just won a contract from Premier Oil to create structures for their platform destined for the Solan oilfield development, west of Shetland. Burntisland Fabrications said the contract will create an additional 350 jobs.

UK’s Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) greenlighted Premier Oil’s plans for the Solan oilfield in April. The field could produce up to 40 million barrels of oil, with a projected production commencement rate of 24,000 barrels per day from Q4 2014. Given the amount of activity in the area, looks like a lot work might be coming from developments west of Shetland and it’s great to see the Prime Minister flag it up.

Meanwhile oil giant BP posted a sharp fall in Q2 2012 profits after it had to cut the value of a number of its key assets. The company made a replacement cost profit, outstripping the effect of crude oil price fluctuation, of US$238 million over Q2; versus a profit of US$5.4 billion in the corresponding quarter last year. The cut in valuation was in a number of its refineries and shale play assets.

With the TNK-BP saga continuing, BP’s underlying replacement cost profit for Q2 2012, leaving out asset value reductions, dipped to US$3.7 billion versus US$5.7 billion noted in Q2 2011.

On the crude pricing data front, both benchmarks have not moved much week on week and price sentiment is still bearish ahead of FOMC and ECB meetings. Given that on the macroeconomic front, the global indicators are fairly mixed, Sucden Financial Research analyst Myrto Sokou believes crude oil prices will continue to consolidate within the recent range.

“We saw this today; trading volume remains fairly low as investors would like to remain cautious ahead of the ECB and Fed decisions,” she concluded.

Andrey Dirgin, Head of Research at Forex Club said, “On Tuesday’s trading session, September’s energy futures performed indifferently. Oil contracts didn’t manage to fix on their levels and moved slightly down. The nearest Brent Crude futures contract fell 0.21% to US$104.7.”

Away from pricing and on a closing note, the Oilholic notes another move in the African crude rush. This one’s in Sierra Leone. A fortnight ago, the Sierra Leone government provisionally awarded two offshore exploration blocks – SL 8A-10 and SL 8B-10 – to Barbados registered ODYE Ltd.

The said exploration blocks SL 8A-10 and SL 8B-10 contain 2584 sq.km and 3020 sq.km of prospection area respectively. According to the Petroleum Directorate of Sierra Leone, the exploration blocks consist of early to late Cretaceous oil prone marine source rocks, primarily shale, sand and shale basin floor fans, channelised sand sequences and potentially high porosity sands.

ODYE says it is looking forward to “working with the other participants in these provisionally awarded blocks, Chevron Sahara and Noble Energy” to develop the assets. So the West African gold rush continues. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: Andrew Rig, North Sea © BP Plc.