EU’s Russian gas, who gets what & BP’s Bob

The vexing question for European Union policymakers these days is who has what level of exposure to Russian gas imports should the taps get turned off, a zero storage scenario at importing nations is assumed [hypothesis not a reality] and the Kremlin's disregard for any harm to its coffers is deemed a given [easier said than done].

Depending on whom you speak to, ranging from a European Commission mandarin to a government statistician, the figures would vary marginally but won't be any less worrying for some. The Oilholic goes by what Eurogas, a non-profit lobby group of natural gas wholesalers, retailers and distributors, has on its files.

According to its data, the 28 members of the European Union sourced 24% of their gas from Russia in 2012. Now before you say that's not too bad, yours truly would say that's not bad 'on average' for some! For instance, Estonia, Finland, Lativia and Lithuania got 100% of their gas from Russia, with Bulgaria, Hungary and Slovakia not far behind having imported 80% or more of their requirements at the Kremlin's grace and favour.

On the other hand, Belgium, Croatia, Denmark, Ireland, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the UK have nothing to worry about as they import nothing or negligible amounts from Russia. Everyone in between the two ends, especially Germany with a 37% exposure, also has a major cause for concern.

And it is why Europe can't speak with one voice over the Ukrainian standoff. In any case, the EU sanctions are laughable and even a further squeeze won't have any short term impact on Russia. A contact at Moody's says the Central Bank of the Russian Federation has more than enough foreign currency reserves to virtually guarantee there is no medium term shortage of foreign currency in the country. Industry estimates, cited by the agency, seem to put the central bank's holdings at just above US$435 billion. EU members should know as they contributed handsomely to Russia's trade surplus!

Meanwhile, BP boss Bob Dudley is making a habit of diving into swirling geopolitical pools. Last November, Dudley joined Iraqi Oil Minister Abdul Kareem al-Luaibi for a controversial visit to the Kirkuk oilfield; the subject of a dispute between Baghdad and Iraqi Kurdistan. While Dudley's boys have a deal with the Iraqi Federal government for the oilfield, the Kurds frown upon it and administer chunks of the field themselves to which BP will no access to.

Now Dudley has waded into the Ukrainian standoff by claiming BP could act as a bridge between Russia and the West. Wow, what did one miss? The whole episode goes something like this. Last week, BP's shareholders quizzed Dudley about the company's exposure to Russia and its near 20% stake in Rosneft, the country's state-owned behemoth.

In response, Dudley quipped: "We will seek to pursue our business activities mindful that the mutual dependency between Russia as an energy supplier and Europe as an energy consumer has been an important source of security and engagement for both parties for many decades. We play an important role as a bridge."

"Neither side can just turn this off…none of us know what can happen in Ukraine," said the man who departed Russia in a huff in 2008 when things at TNK-BP turned sour, but now has a seat on Rosneft's board.

While Dudley's sudden quote on the crisis is surprising, the response of BP's shareholders in recent weeks has been pretty predictable. Russia accounts for over 25% of the company's global output in barrels of oil equivalent per day (boepd) terms. But, in terms of booked boepd reserves, the percentage rises just a shade above 33%.

However, instead of getting spooked folks, look at the big picture – according to the latest financials, in petrodollar terms, BP's Russian exposure is in the same investment circa as Angola and Azerbaijan ($15 billion plus), but well short of anything compared to its investment exposure in the US.

Sticking with the  crudely geopolitical theme, this blogger doesn't always agree with what the Henry Jackson Society (HJS) has to say, but its recent research strikes a poignant chord with what yours truly wrote last week on the Libyan situation.

The society's report titled - Arab Spring: An Assessment Three Years On (click to download here) - noted that despite high hopes for democracy, human rights and long awaited freedoms, the overall situation on the ground is worse off than before the Arab Spring uprisings.

For instance, Libyan oil production has dramatically fallen by 80% as neighbouring Tunisia's economy is now dependent on international aid. Egypt's economy, suffering from a substantial decrease in tourism, has hit its lowest point in decades, while at the same time Yemen's rate of poverty is at an all-time high.

Furthermore, extremist and fundamentalist activity is rising in all surveyed states, with a worrying growth in terror activities across the region. As for democracy, HJS says while Tunisia has been progressing towards reform, Libya's movement towards democracy has failed with militias now effectively controlling the state. Egypt remains politically highly-unstable and polarised, as Yemen's botched attempts at unifying the government has left many political splits and scars.

Moving on to headline crude oil prices, both benchmarks have closed the gap, with the spread in favour of Brent lurking around a $5 per barrel premium. That said, supply-side fundamentals for both benchmarks haven't materially altered; it's the geopolitical froth that's gotten frothier. No exaggeration, but we're possibly looking at a risk premium of at least $10 per barrel, as quite frankly no one knows where the latest Eastern Ukrainian flare-up is going and what might happen next.

Amidst this, the US EIA expects the WTI to average $95.60 per barrel this year, up from its previous forecast of $95.33. The agency also expects Brent to average $104.88, down 4 cents from an earlier forecast. Both averages and the Brent-WTI spread are within the Oilholic's forecast range for 2014. 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: Sullom Voe Terminal, UK © BP

Turkey's Russian connection: Bazaars to barrels

The Oilholic finds himself in a soggy Istanbul, with Turkey in the middle of election fever and the Black Sea in the grip of a Cold War style stand-off over Ukraine.

Before landing here, yours truly ran in to a Moody's spokesperson at BA's Heathrow T5 lounge. It seems that the ratings agency predictably sees Gazprom and Russia's banking sector taking a hit, if recent notes to subscribers are anything to go by. With 52% of Gazprom's exports to Europe currently routed through Ukraine and the country contributing up to 8% of its revenues, there is trouble ahead. Nonetheless, it can cope pretty well in the face of an escalation.

When it comes to the banking sector, Moody's reckons the aggregated exposure could be as high as US$30 billion. The Kremlin is likely to step in if needs be but it won't be needed as the figure equates to less than 2% of system assets. Interestingly, just before dashing off to our respective flights, our friend from Moody's gently nudged the Oilholic and quipped, "Wait till you get to Istanbul and see NATO member Turkey's exposure to Russia." And so this blogger came, he saw and he wondered!

We'll come to the barrels later, lets start with the bazaars first. Despite the unusually miserable weather, the city is packed with Russian tourists. From the metro to the tourist spots, you cannot escape Russian chatter in the background. "For sale" signs in retail outlets are up in two languages – Turkish and Russian. In expanding its tourism sector and wider economy, Turkey has welcomed Russian tourists and business investments with open arms including a favourable visa regime for over 10 years now.

The results are tangible. With the Turkish Lira in throes of unpredictability, every big ticket item – from designer stuff and marquee labels to high value Turkish handicrafts – is priced by retailers here in euros; with quite a few Russians around with more than a few euros.

Digressing from retail to banks, the exposure of Turkish banking institutions to Russia is harder to quantify as the current macroclimate in the country [not Ukraine & NATO] has conspired to turn the situation fluid. Unfortunately, no one wants to nail a figure on record as forex permutations are making life difficult extremely difficult for the analysts, but off record it is certainly not "as high as Ukraine."

Excluding exposure of Russian banks to Turkish infrastructure project finance exercises, $5 billion to 10 billion is a reasonable conservative guesstimate. From banks, rather crudely to barrels – Russia is Turkey's 6th largest export market. Mostly consumables, textiles and manufactured goods worth $3 billion were exported by Turkey to Russia in 2012.

What came back from Russian shores was $27 billion worth of imports including crude oil, distillates, natural gas and iron and steel that same year. Of the said figure, $17.26 billion were oil & gas imports! Using a dollar valuation at constant exchange rate (which has been anything but constant), we are looking at a 625% jump in Russian "imports" between 2002 and 2012. The said percentage need not be sensationalised as the starting point was a low base, but it gives you an idea of NATO Turkey's exposure to [and reliance on] Russia.

Furthermore, the Bosphorus is a major maritime artery for oil & gas shipments via the Black Sea. Exports from the Russian loading port of Novorossyisk by tankers via the Turkish straits have been rising steadily over the last 10 years. Recognising this, Turkey even has an embassy in Novorossyisk.

Recently, Poland's Prime Minister Donald Tusk, in sync with the Oilholic, was correctly berating Germany for its exposure to Russian gas and why it would give the EU a weaker hand over the Ukrainian tussle.

"Germany's reliance on Russian gas can effectively limit European sovereignty. I have no doubt," Tusk told reporters, ahead of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s visit to his country. [Ouch!]

Maybe Tusk ought to look at fellow NATO member Turkey too. If the diplomatic row continues to escalate, Turkey would find it very hard to indulge in verbal or economic jousts with Russia. It took a very vocal stand with Syria, but one suspects it may not be the case this time around. Banks, bazaars and barrels could all feel the squeeze – it's what colleagues in the analyst community down here openly acknowledge.

However, you don't need them or the Oilholic. All you need to do is take the tram from Istanbul's Grand Bazaar through to Kabataş, the last stop on the European shore of the Bosphorus, between Beşiktaş and Karaköy. The journey will help you reach the same conclusions unaided by charts, graphs and economic gobbledegook. And here's hoping, the weather is kinder to you than it has been to the Oilholic. That's all for the moment from Istanbul 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 1: Eminonu Waterfont, Istanbul, Turkey Photo 2: Greek oil tanker Scorpio passes through the Bosphorus, Turkey. ©  Gaurav Sharma, March 2014.

Of Argentina, Petrobras & a few odd pipelines

Last ten days has seen the crude focus shift to Argentina for a multitude of reasons which may be construed as good or bad depending on your point of view. To begin with, BP’s move to sell assets in Argentina has fallen through after its partner withdrew from the deal. BP wanted to sell its 60% stake in Pan American Energy (PAE) to its partner in Argentina, Bridas Energy Holdings, which is subsequently owned by CNOOC, China's largest offshore oil producer.

However, on November 6th CNOOC said it was terminating the deal, signed a year ago as BP was grappling with the fallout from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. The stake sale was worth an estimated US$7 billion and was one of the largest sales agreed by the firm following the disaster. It is understood that BP will now have to repay its US$3.5 billion deposit on the agreement which had been contingent on regulatory approval.

Barely days later, on November 8th, Spanish giant Repsol’s Argentine subsidiary – YPF Sociedad Anónima – said it had found 927 million barrels of recoverable shale oil in Argentina which could catapult the country to the energy elite league.

In a statement, YPF said the discovery – located in the Vaca Muerta basin of Argentina's Neuquen province – "will transform the energy potential of Argentina and South America, boasting one of the world's most significant accumulations of non-conventional resources".

The discovery is likely to give renewed impetus to the country’s creditors who have been chasing the Argentine government for almost a decade since its default in 2002. Most bondholders took part in debt exchanges in 2005 and 2010, but a brave crew of EM and NML Capital – an affiliate of Elliott management – along with a group of 60,000 individual Italian investors have been bravely holding out and using legal avenues to recoup the US$6 billion-worth of debt plus interest. They may think it’s about time the country paid courtesy of a commodities-led boom.

Regrettably for YPF though, the find came only days after Moody's downgraded Argentine oil & gas companies. These included YPF, Pan American LLC, Petrobras Argentina, Petersen Energia and Petersen Energia Inversora.

According to Moody’s, the ratings downgrade and review for further downgrade were prompted by the new presidential decree requiring oil, gas and mining companies to repatriate 100% of their export proceeds and convert them to Argentine pesos. Previously, oil and gas companies operating in Argentina were permitted to keep up to 70% of their export proceeds offshore.

Neighbouring Brazil’s oil & gas behemoth Petrobras has been busy too. On November 3rd, it announced a new oil discovery in the extreme South Western part of the Walker Ridge concession area, located in the Gulf of Mexico’s ultra-deep waters. The discovery confirms the Lower Tertiary's potential in this area. (see map on the left; click to enlarge)

The discovery – Logan – is approximately 400km southwest of New Orleans, at a water depth of around 2,364 meters (or 7,750 feet). The discovery was made by drilling operations of well WR 969 #1 (or Logan 1), in block WR 969. Further exploration activities will define Logan's recoverable volumes and its commercial potential.

Norway’s Statoil is the consortium's operator, with 35% stake. Petrobras America Inc. (a subsidiary of Petrobras headquartered in Houston, Texas) holds 35% of the stake, while Ecopetrol America and OOGC hold 20% and 10%, respectively.

Petrobras holds other exploratory concession areas in this region, which will be tested later on, growing the Company's operations in the Gulf of Mexico. The Brazilian major is the operator of Cascade (100%) and Chinook (66.7%) oilfields and holds stakes in the Saint Malo (25%), Stones (25%) and Tiber (20%) discoveries, all with significant oil reserves in the Lower Tertiary. Additionally, Petrobras has stakes in the very recent Hadrian South (23.3%), Hadrian North (25%) and Lucius (9.6%) discoveries, all with significant oil reserves and in the Mio-Pliocene.

The company has been pretty busy at home as well, announcing that the first well drilled after the execution of the Transfer of Rights agreement confirmed the extension of the oil reserves located northwest of the Franco area discovery well, in the Santos Basin pre-salt cluster (see map on the left; click to enlarge).

The new well, informally known as Franco NW, is at a water depth of 1860 meters, approximately 188km from the city of Rio de Janeiro and 7.7km northwest of discovery well Franco (or 2-ANP-1-RJS).

The discovery was confirmed by oil samples of good quality (28º API) obtained through cable tests. The well is still in the drilling phase with the aim of reaching the base of the reservoirs containing oil. Once the drilling phase is complete, Petrobras will continue with the investment activities provided in the Mandatory Exploratory Program (or Programa Exploratório Obrigatório, PEO as it’s referred to locally).

From South American discoveries to North American pipelines as it emerged last night that the Obama administration has chickened-out of making a decision on Keystone XL. Faced with the environmental lobby on one side and the Unions craving jobs on the other, the US government has requested further studies on the project which would in theory delay the decision to build the 2700km pipeline well after 2012 presidential election. Frustration across the border in Canada is likely to grow as the Oilholic noted from Calgary earlier this year.

If he rejected the project, Obama could be accused of destroying jobs. If allowed it to go ahead, it could lose him the support of some activists who helped him win the Presidency. So he chose to do what political jellyfish usually do before a crucial vote – nothing.

Additionally, reports surfaced earlier in the week that Houston-based Cardno Entrix – a company involved in the environmental review – had listed developer TransCanada, the pipeline’s sponsor, as a "major client".

A review is now likely to look into this as well as state department emails related to a TransCanada lobbyist who had worked in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign. TransCanada says that while it is disappointed with the delay, it continues to “conduct affairs with integrity and in an open and transparent manner.”

Continuing with pipelines, Moody's has assigned a Baa3 rating to Ruby Pipeline's US$1.075 billion senior unsecured notes. The senior unsecured notes have staggered maturities and will be used to refinance US$1.5 billion of project construction loans. The rating outlook is stable.

Stuart Miller, Moody's Vice President and Senior Analyst, said last week that the pipeline is a strategic link that provides diversity of supply to the utilities and industrial markets in Northern California and the Pacific Northwest.

"Hence, the primary drivers for Ruby's Baa3 rating are its initially high leverage tempered by a high level of ship-or-pay firm contracts with counterparties with a weighted average credit rating of Baa1 as well as our expectation that the ratio of debt to EBITDA will rapidly decline to below 4.5x," he concluded.

Ruby's leverage is expected to improve over the next five years as its capital structure includes a five year amortising term loan. Because of the required amortisation, Ruby's leverage, as measured by debt to EBITDA, should decline from approximately 5.2x to less than 4.5x by the end of 2013. Any revenue earned from the 28% un-contracted pipeline capacity would reduce leverage quicker, the agency noted. Finally, Nordstream I gas pipeline came onstream earlier in the week. Here's the WSJ's Oilholic approved take on it.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Map 1: Petrobras prospections in Gulf of Mexico © Petrobras 2011. Map 2: Petrobras in Santos Basin, Brazil (Courtesy: Petrobras)