End of 'voluntary' Saudi cuts, no Covid-19 end in sight

In the lead up to the OPEC+ summit on June 6, oil benchmarks continued to rise toward $40 per barrel and subsequently went beyond. Brent even capped $42 levels briefly as OPEC+ decided to predictably rollover ongoing crude production cuts of 9.7 million barrels per day (bpd) - scheduled to end on July 1 - by another month. 

All of it was accompanied by the common din of crude oil demand returning, underpinned by hopes of China reverting to its average importation rate of around 14 million bpd by end-2020. Such an assumption is fanciful in the Oilholic’s humble opinion, as a semblance of normalcy, especially in the aviation sector, is unlikely before Q1 2021. But even that assumption was further punctured by Saudi Arabia withdrawing its additional 'voluntary' cuts of 1 million bpd in June, atop what they were already cutting as part of the OPEC+ agreement. 

To quote Saudi Oil Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman: "The voluntary cut has served its purpose and we are moving on. A good chunk of what we will increase in July will go into domestic consumption."

Be that as it may be, that's bearish joy for those with short positions who can now also count on rising sentiment in favour of a second wave of the Coronavirus or Covid-19 hammering crude oil demand, with rising cases in the U.S. and as well as a fresh outbreak in China. So, oil futures have duly retreated from $40 levels.

However, here's what this blogger doesn't get – how can it be all about a possible second wave, when the initial pandemic is far from over! Just look at the official and anecdotal data coming out of India and Brazil. 

And while European pandemic hotspots might be cooling down, the initial threat is far from over. A crude market recovery remains a long, long way off. The Oilholic reckons it will be Q1 2021 before we get into a proper recovery mode and can think of a nuanced reversal in market fortunes. By that argument near-term volatility is likely be in $30-40 range, unless Covid-19 situation escalates. To assume the only way is up from $40 is pretty daft. 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 Forbes click here.

To follow The Oilholic on Rigzone click here.

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2020. Image by Omni Matryx from Pixabay. 

Brent & WTI fall by over 3% on OPEC call

The Oilholic is still gathering thoughts on a most unusual conclusion to the OPEC meeting here in Vienna, with the formal communiqué issued by the member nations making no mention of the official production quota but noting that its members had opted to keep production where it was. 

So the only thing that's clear - minus an actual figure - is that OPEC will keep on pumping and maintaining its line of holding on to its market share. Having since waited for the US close, and done the relevant calculations, both Brent and WTI shed over 3% based on a five-day, week-on-week basis, with short-sellers predictably all over both futures contract. 

Using 2130 GMT on Friday as cut-off point, Brent was down $1.70 or 3.79% to $43.17 per barrel compared to the charting point last week, while WTI was $1.35 or 3.23% lower at $40.12 per barrel (see chart above left, click to enlarge). Get prepared for short term bearishness!

Finally, here is how far the OPEC oil price basket has plummeted since June 2014 (see chart below, click to enlarge) More from Vienna shortly; but here is some initial reaction in one’s latest Forbes report. 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 2015. Chart 1: Oil benchmark prices Jan to YTD 2015. Chart 2: OPEC Oil Price Basket June 2014 – November 2014 © Gaurav Sharma / Oilholics Synonymous Report, November 2015.

A crude walk down 'Exploration Drive'

The Oilholic finds himself in the 'Granite City' or the 'Oil capital of Europe' as Aberdeen, Scotland has recently come to be known as. Given that context, a street named Exploration Drive in the city's Energy Park has a nice ring to it. In what has been an interesting week – news-wise, market reports-wise and otherwise – right up to this morning, it's good to be here, meeting old friends and making yet newer ones during been. While this blogger's flight got in on time, blustery conditions so common in this part of the world saw one plane overshoot the runway and the airport closed for a few hours. 

That wasn't the only news in town. Reports of the Libyan PM first getting kidnapped and then released, flooded the wires and Shell – Nigeria’s oldest IOC operator – has put up four oil blocks there feeding the Bonny Terminal (the country’s oldest export facility) up for sale, according to the FT.

The chatter, if formally confirmed, would be seen as a retreat by the oil major from a part of the world where theft of crude from pipeline infrastructure is rampant. Shell it seems is getting mighty fed up of constant damage to its pipelines. Moving on from news, it is worth summarising a couple of interesting notes put out by Moody's these past few weeks.

 

In the first, the ratings agency opines that BP can tolerate a moderate penalty related to the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill without compromising its credit quality. However, a severe penalty resulting from a finding of gross negligence would change the equation according to Moody's, with Phase 2 of the trial to determine limitation and liability having begun stateside.

"BP can tolerate about US$40 billion in penalties, after taxes, under its A2, Prime-1 ratings. A ruling in line with the company's current $3.5 billion provision would leave some headroom to absorb other charges, including settlement costs from payouts awarded for business economic loss claims, which ultimately depend on the interpretation of the Economic and Property Damages Settlement Agreement," Moody's noted.

Other defendants in the case include Transocean, Halliburton and Anadarko. Of these, Transocean, which owned the Deepwater Horizon rig, is exposed to sizable fines and penalties. "Indemnifications will protect Transocean from some liabilities. But other items could ultimately cost the company billions of dollars to resolve," says Stuart Miller, senior credit officer at Moody's.

In its second note, the ratings agency said it had downgraded Petrobras' long term debt ratings to Baa1 from A3. The downgrade reflects Petrobras' high financial leverage and the expectation that the company will continue to have large negative cash flow over the next few years as it pursues its capital spending programme.

With that programme being the largest among its peers, Petrobras' spending in 2013 could be almost double its internally generated cash flow. The company's total debt liabilities increased in the first half of 2013 by $16.3 billion, or $8.36 billion net of cash and marketable securities, and should increase again in 2014, based on an outlook for negative cash flow through 2014 and into 2015. The outlook remains negative, Moody's adds.

Moving away from companies to countries, global analytics firm IHS has concluded that North America’s "Tight Oil" phenomenon is poised to go global. In its latest geological study – Going Global: Predicting the Next Tight Oil Revolution – it says the world has large 'potential technical' recoverable resources of tight oil, possibly several times those of North America.

 

In particular, the study identified the 23 "highest-potential" plays throughout the world and found that the potential technically recoverable resources of just those plays is likely to be 175 billion barrels – out of almost 300 billion for all 148 play areas analysed for the study.

While it is too early to assess the proportion of what could be commercially recovered, the potential is significant compared to the commercially recoverable resources of tight oil (43 billion barrels) estimated in North America by previous IHS studies. The growth of tight oil production has driven the recent surge in North American production. In fact, the USA is now the world largest 'energy' producer by many metrics.

"Before the tight oil revolution people thought oil supply would start to fall slowly in the longer term, but now it is booming. This is important because Russian production has been hovering at the same level for some time, and now the US will exceed the Russia’s total oil and gas production," says Peter Jackson, vice president of upstream research at IHS CERA.

In IHS' view, Russian oil production is unlikely to rise in the medium term. In fact, the firm anticipates that it will start falling because of the lack of investment in exploration in emerging areas such as the Arctic and new plays such as tight oil. "But of course, there is a long lead time between deciding to invest and exploring and then getting that oil & gas out of the ground," Jackson adds.

North America's growth in supply from the tight oil and shale revolution means that the USA is now less worried about the security of energy supply. It is now even thinking of exporting LNG, which would have been unheard of ten years ago, as the Oilholic noted from Chicago earlier this year.

This is having an impact on the direction of exports around the world changing direction, from West to East, for example to China and post-Fukushima Japan. Furthermore, light sweet West African crudes are now switching globally, less directed to the US and increasingly to Asian jurisdictions.

OPEC, which is likely to increase its focus in favour of Asia as well, published its industry outlook earlier this month. While its Secretary General Abdalla Salem el-Badri refused to be drawn in to what production quota it would set later this year, he did say a forecast drop in demand for OPEC's oil was not large.

The exporters' group expects demand for its crude to fall to 29.61 million bpd in 2014, down 320,000 bpd from 2013, due to rising non-OPEC supply. "Tight oil" output would be in decline by 2018 and the cost of such developments means that a sharp drop in oil prices would restrain supplies, Badri said.

"This tight oil is hanging on the cost. If the price were to drop to $60 to $70, then it would be out of the market completely." He does have a point there and that point –  what oil-price level would keep unconventional, difficult-to-extract and low-yield projects going – is what the Oilholic is here to find out over the next couple of days. That’s all for the moment from Aberdeen folks! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: Exploration Drive, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK. Photo 2: Weatherford site, Aberdeen Energy Park, Scotland, UK © Gaurav Sharma, October 2013.

The oil market in 2013: thoughts & riddles aplenty

Over a fortnight into 2013 and a mere day away from the Brent forward month futures contract for February expiring, the price is above a Nelson at US$111.88 per barrel. That’s after having gone to and fro between US$110 and US$112 intra-day.

As far as the early January market sentiment goes, ICE Future Europe said hedge funds and other money managers raised bullish positions on Brent crude by 10,925 contracts for the week ended January 8; the highest in nine months. Net long positions in futures and options combined, outnumbered short positions by 150,036 lots in the week ended January 8, the highest level since March 27 and the fourth consecutive weekly advance.

On the other hand, bearish positions by producers, merchants, processors and users of Brent outnumbered bullish positions by 175,478, down from 151,548 last week. It’s the biggest net-short position among this category of market participants since August 14. So where are we now and where will we be on December 31, 2013?

Despite many market suggestions to the contrary, Barclays continues to maintain a 2013 Brent forecast of US$125. The readers of this blog asked the Oilholic why and well the Oilholic asked Barclays why. To quote the chap yours truly spoke to, the reason for this is that Barclays’ analysts still see the Middle East as “most likely” geopolitical catalyst.

“While there are other likely areas of interest for the oil market in 2013, in our view the main nexus for the transmission into oil prices is likely to be the Middle East, with the spiralling situations in Syria and Iraq layered in on top of the core issue of Iran’s external relations,” a Barclays report adds.

Macroeconomic discontinuities will continue to persist, but Barclays’ analysts reckon that the catalyst they refer to will arrive at some point in 2013. Nailing their colours to mast, well above a Nelson, their analysts conclude: “We are therefore maintaining our 2013 Brent forecast of US$125 per barrel, just as we have for the past 21 months since that forecast was initiated in March 2011.”

Agreed, the Middle East will always give food for thought to the observers of geopolitical risk (or instability) premium. Though it is not as exact a science as analysts make it out to be. However, what if the Chinese economy tanks? To what extent will it act as a bearish counterweight? And what are the chances of such an event?

For starters, the Oilholic thinks the chances are 'slim-ish', but if you’d like to put a percentage figure to the element of chance then Michael Haigh, head of commodities research at Société Générale, thinks there is a 20% probability of a Chinese hard-landing in 2013. This then begs the question – are the crude bulls buggered if China tanks, risk premium or no risk premium?

Well China currently consumes around 40% of base metals, 23% major agricultural crops and 20% of ‘non-renewable’ energy resources. So in the event of a Chinese hard-landing, not only will the crude bulls be buggered, they’ll also lose their mojo as investor confidence will be battered.

Haigh thinks in the event of Chinese slowdown, the Brent price could plummet to US$75. “A 30% drop in oil prices (which equates to approximately US$30 given the current value of Brent) would ultimately boost GDP growth and thus pull oil prices higher. OPEC countries would cut production if prices fall as a result of a China shock. So we expect Brent’s decline to be limited to US$75 as a result,” he adds.

Remember India, another major consumer, is not exactly in a happy place either. However, it is prudent to point out the current market projections suggest that barring an economic upheaval, both Indian and Chinese consumption is expected to rise in 2013. Concurrently, the American separation from international crude markets will continue, with US crude oil production tipped to rise by the largest amount on record this year, according to the EIA.

The independent statistical arm of the US Department of Energy, estimates that the country’s crude oil production would grow by 900,000 barrels per day (bpd) in 2013 to 7.3 million bpd. While the rate of increase is seen slowing slightly in 2014 to 600,000 bpd, the total jump in US oil production to 7.9 million bpd would be up 23% from the 6.4 million bpd pumped domestically in 2012.

The latest forecast from the EIA is the first to include 2014 hailing shale! If the agency’s projections prove to be accurate, US crude oil production would have jumped at a mind-boggling rate of 40% between 2011 and 2014.

The EIA notes that rising output in North Dakota's Bakken formation and Texas's Eagle Ford fields has made US producers sharper and more productive. "The learning curve in the Bakken and Eagle Ford fields, which is where the biggest part of this increase is coming from, has been pretty steep," a spokesperson said.

So it sees the WTI averaging US$89 in 2013 and US$91 a barrel in 2014. Curiously enough, in line with other market forecasts, bar that of Barclays, the EIA, which recently adopted Brent as its new international benchmark, sees it fall marginally to around US$105 in 2013 and falling further to US$99 a barrel in 2014.

On a related note, Fitch Ratings sees supply and demand pressures supportive of Brent prices above US$100 in 2013. “While European demand will be weak, this will be more than offset by emerging market growth. On the supply side, the balance of risk is towards negative, rather than positive shocks, with the possibility of military intervention in Iran still the most obvious potential disruptor,” it said in a recent report.

However, the ratings agency thinks there is enough spare capacity in the world to deal with the loss of Iran's roughly 2.8 million bpd of output. Although this would leave little spare capacity in the system were there to be another supply disruption. Let’s see how it all pans out; the Oilholic sees a US$105 to US$115 circa for Brent over 2013.

Meanwhile, the spread between Brent and WTI has narrowed to a 4-month low after the restart of the Seaway pipeline last week, which has been shut since January 2 in order to complete a major expansion. The expanded pipeline will not only reduce the bottleneck at Cushing, Oklahoma but reduce imports of waterborne crude as well. According to Bloomberg, the crude flow to the Gulf of Mexico, from Cushing, the delivery point for the NYMEX oil futures contract, rose to 400,000 bpd last Friday from 150,000 bpd at the time of the temporary closure.

On a closing note, and going back to Fitch Ratings, the agency believes that cheap US shale gas is not a material threat to the Europe, Middle East and Africa’s (EMEA) oil and gas sector in 2013. It noted that a lack of US export infrastructure, a political desire for the US to be self-sufficient in gas, and the prevalence of long term oil-based gas supply contracts in Europe all suggest at worst modest downward pressure on European gas prices in the short to medium term.

Fitch’s overall expectation for oil and gas revenues in EMEA in 2013 is one of very modest growth, supported by continued, if weakened, global GDP expansion and potential supply shocks. The ratings agency anticipates that top line EMEA oil and gas revenue growth in 2013 will be in the low single digits. There remains a material – roughly 30% to 40% – chance that revenue will fall for the major EMEA oil producers, but if so this fall is unlikely to be precipitous according to a Fitch spokesperson.

That’s all for the moment folks! One doubts if oil traders are as superstitious about a Nelson or the number 111 as English cricketers and Hindu priests are, so here’s to Crude Year 2013. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo: Holly Rig, Santa Barbara, California, USA © James Forte / National Geographic.

OPEC hawks are back in town (too)!

So the crude games have begun, the camera crews have begun arriving and the Saudis have begun throwing down the gauntlet by first suggesting that OPEC actually raise its output and then indicating that they might well be happy with the current production cap at 30 million bpd. However, hawks demanding a cut in production are also in Vienna in full flow.

With benchmark crude futures dipping below US$100, the Venezuelans say they are “concerned” about fellow members violating the agreed production ceiling. In fact, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez expressed his sentiments directly over the air-waves rather than leave it to his trusted minister at the OPEC table - Rafael Ramirez.

For his part, on arrival in Vienna, Ramirez said, “We are going to make a very strong call in the meeting that the countries that are over-producing cut. We think we need to keep the ceiling on production of 30 million that was agreed at our last meeting in December."

Iraq's Abdul Kareem Luaibi, told a media scrum that a “surplus in OPEC supplies” exists which has led to “this severe decline in prices in a very short time span.” Grumblings also appear to be coming from the Algerian camp, while the Kuwaitis described the market conditions as “strange.”

Speaking to reporters on Monday, Kuwait’s Oil Minister Hani Hussein said, “Some of OPEC members are concerned about the prices and what’s happening…about what direction prices are taking and production.”

However, Hussein refused to be drawn into a discussion over a proposed OPEC production cut by the hawks.

Meanwhile, one cartel member with most to fear from a dip in the crude price – Iran – has also unsurprisingly called for an adherence to the OPEC production quota. Stunted by US and EU sanctions, it has seen its production drop to 3 million bpd - the lowest in eight quarters. Much to its chagrin, regional geopolitical rival Saudi Arabia has lifted its global supply to make-up the absence of Iranian crude in certain global markets.

At the cartel’s last meeting in December, OPEC members agreed to hold ‘official’ output at 30 million bpd. Yet, extra unofficial production came from Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait. Say what you will, the Oilholic is firmly in the camp that a reintroduction of individual OPEC quotas to help the cartel control its members’ production is highly unlikely. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: Broadcast media assembly point outside OPEC HQ, Vienna, Austria © Gaurav Sharma 2011.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Crude 7 days & wayward Hayward’s comeback?

It is not often that we talk about Jean-Claude Trichet – the inimitable and outgoing European Central Bank president here, but last week he said something rather interesting at a London School of Economics event which deserves a mention in light of the unfolding Greek tragedy (part II) and before we talk crude pricing.

Trichet said the ECB needs to ensure that oil (and commodity) price increases witnessed in recent months do not trigger inflationary problems. Greece aside, Trichet opined that the Euro zone recovery was on a good footing even though unemployment (currently at a ten year high) was “far too high.”

While he did not directly refer to the deterioration in Greece’s fiscal situation, it may yet have massive implications for the Euro zone. Its impact on crude prices will be one of confidence, rather than one of consumption pattern metrics. Greece, relative to other European players, is neither a major economy and nor a major crude consuming nation. Market therefore will be factoring in the knock-on effect were it to default.

Quite frankly, the Oilholic agrees with Fitch Ratings that if commercial lenders roll over their loans to Greece, it will deem the country to be in “default". Standard & Poor's has already issued a similar warning while Moody’s says there is a 50% chance of Greece missing a repayment within three to five years.

With confidence not all that high and the OPEC meeting shenanigans from a fortnight now consigned to the history books, the crude price took a dip with the ICE Brent forward month futures contract at US$112.54 last time I checked. Nonetheless, oil market fundamentals for the rest of 2010 and 2011 are forecasted to be reasonably bullish.

Analysts at Société Générale feel many of the prevalent downside risks are non-fundamental. These include macro concerns about the US, Europe (as noted above) and China; the end of QE2 liquidity injections; concerns about demand destruction; uncertainty about Saudi price targets; fading fears of further MENA supply disruptions; and still-high levels of non-commercial net length in the oil markets.

In an investment note to clients, Mike Wittner, the French investment bank’s veteran oil market analyst wrote: “Based on these offsetting factors, our forecast for ICE Brent crude is neutral compared to current prices. We forecast Brent at US$114 in Q3 11 (upward revision of $3) and US$113 in Q4 11 (+$6). Our forecast for 2012 is for Brent at US$115 (+$5). Compared to the forward curve, we are neutral for the rest of 2011 and slightly bullish for 2012.”

Meanwhile the IEA noted that a Saudi push to replace “lost” Libyan barrels would need to be competitively priced to bring relief. Market conjecture and vibes from Riyadh suggest that while the Saudis may well wish to up production and cool the crude price, they are not trying to drive prices sharply lower.

The problem is a “sweet” one. The oil market for the rest of 2011, in the agency’s opinion, looks potentially short of sweet crude, should the Libyan crisis continue to keep those supplies restrained. Only “competitively priced OPEC barrels” whatever the source might be could bring welcome relief, it concludes.

Now on to corporate matters, the most geopolitically notable one among them is a deal signed by ConocoPhillips last Thursday, with the government of Bangladesh to explore parts of the Bay of Bengal for oil and gas. This is further proof, if one needed any, that the oil majors are venturing beyond the traditional prospection zones and those considered “non-traditional” thus far aren’t any longer.

The two zones, mentioned in the deal, are about 175 miles offshore from the Bangladeshi port of Chittagong at a depth of 5,000 feet covering an area of approximately 1.27 million acres. According to a ConocoPhillips' corporate announcement exploration efforts will begin “as soon as possible.”

In other matters, the man who founded Cairn Energy in 1980 – Sir Bill Gammell is to step down as the independent oil upstart’s chief executive to become its non-executive chairman under a board reshuffle. He will replace current chairman Norman Murray, while the company’s legal and commercial director Simon Thomson will take over the role of chief executive.

However, Sir Bill would continue as chairman of Cairn India and retain responsibility for the sale of Cairn Energy's Indian assets to Vedanta in a deal worth nearly US$10 billion. The deal has been awaiting clearance for the last 10 months from the Indian government which owns most of ONGC, which in turn has a 30% stake in Cairn India's major oil field in Rajasthan.

It was agreed in 1995, that ONGC would pay all the royalties on any finds in the desert. But that was before oil had been found and the government is now trying to change the terms of that arrangement with some typical Indian-style bickering.

Elsewhere, after becoming a publicly-listed company last month, Glencore – the world's largest commodities trader – reported a net profit for the first three months of the year to the tune of US$1.3 billion up 47% on an annualised basis. Concurrently, in its first public results, the trader said revenue was up 39% to US$44.2 billion.

Glencore's directors and employees still hold about 80% of the company and the figures should make them happier and wealthier still. Glencore leads the trading stakes with Vitol and Gennady Timchenko’s Gunvor second and third respectively.

Finally, the so-called most hated man in America – Tony Hayward – commenced a rather spectacular comeback last week flanked by some influential friends. Together with financier Nathaniel Rothschild, investors Tom Daniel and Julian Metherel, Hayward has floated Vallares, an oil and gas investment vehicle which raised £1.35 billion (US$2.18 billion) through an IPO recently.

This is well above market expectations according to most in the City and all four have nailed their colours to the mast by putting in £100 million of their own money. Some 133 million ordinary shares nominated at £10 each were offered and taken-up rather enthusiastically. Rumour has it that hedge funds, selected Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds and institutional investors (favouring long-only positions) are among the major buyers.

Vallares’ focus will be on upstream oil and gas assets away from "tired, second-hand assets" in the North Sea or in politically unstable areas such as Venezuela or central Asia. The Oilholic thinks this is way more than an act of hubris. However, the investment vehicle’s success will not particularly reverse Hayward’s deeply stained reputation. A failure well be the end. Only time will tell but the front man has brought some powerful friends along on the “comeback” trail. They are likely to keep a more watchful eye over Hayward and perhaps prevent him from going wayward.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: Fairfax, Virginia, USA © O. Louis Mazzatenta, National Geographic

Discussing Offshore, BP & all the rest on TV

After researching the impact of BP’s disaster on offshore drilling stateside using Houston as a hub to criss-cross North America for almost a month, I published my findings in a report for Infrastructure Journal noting that both anecdotal and empirical evidence as well as industry data suggested no material alteration when it comes to offshore drilling activity. The reason is simple enough – the natural resource in question – crude oil has not lost its gloss. Consumption patterns have altered but there is no seismic shift; marginally plummeting demand in the West is being more than negated in the East.

So over a year on from Apr 20, 2010, on that infamous day when the Deepwater Horizon rig at the Macondo oil well in Gulf of Mexico exploded and oil spewed into the ocean for 87 days until it was sealed by BP on July 15, 2010, the oilholic safely observes that if there was a move away from offshore – its clearly not reflected in the data whether you rely on Smith bits, Baker Hughes or simply look at the offshore project finance figures of Infrastructure Journal.

After publication of my report on the infamous first anniversary of the incident, I commented on various networks, most notably CNBC (click to watch), that (a) while offshore took a temporary hit in the US, that did not affect offshore activity elsewhere, (b) no draconian knee-jerk laws were introduced though the much maligned US Minerals Management Service (MMS) was deservedly replaced by Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) and (c) Brazil is fast becoming the “go to destination” for offshore enthusiasts. Finally as I blogged earlier, the sentiment that BP is somehow giving up or is going to give up on the lucrative US market – serving the world biggest consumers of gasoline – is a load of nonsense!

So what has happened since then? Well we have much more scrutiny of the industry – not just in the US but elsewhere too. This increases what can be described as the diligence time load – i.e. simply put the legal compliance framework for offshore projects. Furthermore, without contingency plans and costly containment systems, the US government is highly unlikely to award offshore permits. So the vibe from Houston is that while the big players can take it; the Gulf may well be out of reach of smaller players.

Now just how deep is 'deepwater' drilling as the term is dropped around quite casually? According a Petrobras engineer with whom I sat down to discuss this over a beer – if we are talking ultra-deepwater drilling – then by average estimates one can hit the ocean floor at 7,000 feet, followed by 9800 feet of rock layer and another 7,000 feet of salt layer before the drillbit hits the deep-sea oil. This is no mean feat – its actually quite a few feet! Yet no one is in a mood to give-up according to financial and legal advisers and the sponsors they advise both here in London and across the pond in Houston.

To cite an example, on Oct 12, 2010 – President Obama lifted the moratorium on offshore drilling in the Gulf. By Oct 21, Chevron had announced its US$7.5 billion offshore investment plans there – a mere 9 days is all it took! Whom are we kidding? Offshore is not dead, it is not even wounded – we are just going to drill deeper and deeper. If the demand is there, the quest for supply will continue.

As for the players involved in Macondo, three of the five involved – BP, Anadarko Petroleum and Transocean – may be hit with severe monetary penalties, but Halliburton and Cameron International look less likely to be hit by long term financial impact.

How Transocean – which owned the Deepwater Horizon rig – manages is the biggest puzzle for me. Moody's currently maintains a negative outlook on Transocean's current Baa3 rating. This makes borrowing for Transocean all that more expensive, but not impossible and perhaps explains its absence from the debt markets. How it will copes may be the most interesting sideshow.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: Gaurav Sharma on CNBC, April 20, 2011 © CNBC

Crude Oil prices & some governments

I have spent the last two weeks quizzing key crude commentators in US and Canada about what price of crude oil they feel would be conducive to business investment, sit well within the profitable extraction dynamic and last but certainly not the least won't harm the global economy.

Beginning with Canada, since there’s no empirical evidence of the Canadian Dollar having suffered from the Dutch disease, for the oil sands to be profitable – most Canadians remarked that a price circa of US$75 per barrel and not exceeding US$105 in the long term would be ideal. On the other hand, in the event of a price dive, especially an unlikely one that takes the price below US$40 per barrel would be a disaster for petro-investment in Canada. A frozen Bow River (pictured above) is ok for Calgarians, but an investment freeze certainly wont be!

The Americans came up with a slightly lower US$70-90 range based on consumption patterns. They acknowledge that should the price spike over the US$150 per barrel mark and stay in the US$120-150 range over the medium term, a realignment of consumption patterns would occur.

This begs the question – what have Middle Eastern governments budgeted for? Research by commentators at National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia, the Oilholics’ feedback from regional commentators and local media suggests the cumulative average would be US$65 per barrel. Iran and Iraq are likely to have budgeted at least US$10 above that, more so in the case of the former while Saudi Arabia (and maybe Kuwait) would have budgeted for US$5 (to US$10) below that.

Problem for the Oilholic is getting access to regional governments’ data. Asking various ministries in the Middle East and expecting a straight forward answer, with the notable exception of the UAE, is as unlikely as getting a Venezuelan official to give accurate inflation figures.

Meanwhile, price is not the only thing holding or promoting investment. For instance, the recent political unrest has meant that the Egypt Petroleum Corp. has delayed the Mostorod refinery construction until at least May. The reason is simple – some 20-odd participating banks, who arranged a US$2.6 billion loan facility want the interim government to reaffirm its commitment to the project, according to a lawyer close to the deal. The government, with all due respect, has quite a few reaffirmations to make.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: Bow River, Calgary, Alberta, Canada © Gaurav Sharma, April 2011

There’s Something about the Chronicle

The largest daily newspaper in Texas – is still the Houston Chronicle, but while its reach extends well beyond the city, its character is uniquely Houstonian. It is that and that alone, makes the paper Oilholics approved.

The content or better still – the coverage is much attuned to crude developments local, global or should we say glocal. You might say that in a town with deep historic ties with the oil & gas business that should not come as a surprise. However, it is how the coverage is slanted and present which I love reading both online and well nothing beats a paper copy when you can get a hold of it.

So on this visit to Houston, I see The Chronicle split as front section, city & state, sports, business (my favourite), the ‘Lone Star’ and classifieds and on Mar 26th there were four ‘crude’ stories. One mute point - the Hearst Corporation has owned it since 1987 and according to local sources it employs over 2000 people including 300 fellow scribes.

The publication will celebrate its 110th anniversary in October this year, and seeped in its rich history is the fact that Jesse Holman Jones, a local politician, US Secretary of Commerce during World War II and President Hoover’s stalwart for reconstruction and development owned/published the publication from 1926-56.

The late Jesse H. Jones' life is celebrated and commemorated in several monuments (and parks) in the city, but The Chronicle’s connection with the great man is a unique component of his legacy to his city & his country. While retaining the title of publisher until his death in 1956, Jones passed on the ownership to a trust in 1937.

Sources suggest it has over 70 million page views in the internet age and amen to that! I had the pleasure of walking past its modern downtown headquarters earlier and couldn’t but help clicking the imposing building.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo 1: Houston Chronicle, Front Page, Mar 26, 2011, Image - Gaurav Sharma © Houston Chronicle, 2011. Photo 2: Photo: Headquarters, Houston Chronicle, Houston, Texas, USA © Gaurav Sharma, March 2011

1500 Louisiana Street's journey: Enron to Chevron

If you happen to be in downtown Houston, can you afford to miss 1500 Louisiana Street? It is not as if the building is the tallest in town. In fact, I am reliably informed that it is the 17th tallest.

Quite simply the infamy that Enron came to signify for corporate America in general and the energy business in particular has given the building a place in history that it neither craves at present nor ever sought in the past.

In fact prior to its collapse, Enron wanted 1500 Louisiana Street to be its headquarters but never actually occupied it in wake of its corporate scandal in October 2001. Following Enron’s collapse, the building’s leasing company touted it to quite a few including ExxonMobil next door but to no avail. Finally, in 2005 ChevronTexaco bought the building and moved its Houston offices there.

The Oilholic couldn’t but help note with a wry chuckle this morning when an “out of towner” like him enquired of a rather irritated Chevron security guard whether the building was where Enron used to be.

Enron never formally entered the building, but it seems the ghost of Enron never left. That’s judging by number of people outside clicking photos away in the three mornings that I have walked past it since arriving in Houston! So here's mine in keeping with that spirit.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: 1500 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas, USA © Gaurav Sharma, March 2011

Final Notes of Crude Year 2010

Recapping the last fortnight, I noted some pretty interesting market chatter in the run-up to the end of the year. Crude talk cannot be complete without a discussion on the economic recovery and market conjecture is that it remains on track.

In its latest quarterly Global Economic Outlook (GEO) Dec. edition, Fitch Ratings recently noted that despite significant financial market volatility, the global economic recovery is proceeding in line with its expectations, largely due to accommodative policy support in developed markets and continued emerging-market dynamism.

In the GEO, Fitch has marginally revised up its projections for world growth to 3.4% for 2010 (from 3.2%), 3.0% for 2011 (from 2.9%), and 3.3% for 2012 (from 3.0%) compared to the October edition of the GEO. Emerging markets continue to outperform expectations and Fitch has raised its 2010 forecasts for China, Brazil, and India due to still buoyant economic growth. However, the agency has revised down its Russian forecast as the pace of recovery proved weak, partly as a result of the severe drought and heatwave in the summer.

Fitch forecasts growth of 8.4% for these four countries (the BRICs) in 2010, and 7.4% for each of 2011 and 2012. While there are ancillary factors, there is ample evidence that crude prices are responding to positive chatter. Before uncorking something alcoholic to usher in the New Year, the oilholic noted that either side of the pond, the forward month crude futures contract capped US$90 per barrel for the first time in two years. Even the OPEC basket was US$90-plus.

Most analysts expect Brent to end 2012 at around US$105-110 a barrel and some are predicting higher prices. The city clearly feels a US$15-20 appreciation from end-2010 prices is not unrealistic.

Moving away from prices, in a report published on December 15th, Moody's changed its Oilfield Services Outlook to positive from stable reflecting higher earnings expectations for most oilfield services and land drilling companies in 2011.

However, the report also notes that the oilfield services sector remains exposed to significant declines in oil and natural gas prices, as well as heightened US regulatory scrutiny of hydraulic fracturing and onshore drilling activity, which could push costs higher and limit the pace and scale of E&P capital investment.

Peter Speer, the agency’s Senior Credit Officer, makes a noteworthy comment. He opines that although natural gas drilling is likely to decline moderately in 2011, many E&Ps will probably keep drilling despite the weak economics to retain their leases or avoid steep production declines. Any declines in gas-directed drilling are likely to be offset by oil drilling, leading to a higher US rig count in 2011.

However, Speer notes that offshore drillers and related logistics service providers pose a notable exception to these positive trends. "We expect many of these companies to experience further earnings declines in 2011, as the U.S. develops new regulatory requirements and permitting processes following the Macondo accident in April 2010, and as activity slowly increases in this large offshore market," he concludes.

Couldn’t possibly have ended the last post for the year without mentioning Macondo; BP’s asset sale by total valuation in the aftermath of the incident has risen to US$20 billion plus and rising. Sadly, Macondo will be the defining image of crude year 2010.

© Gaurav Sharma 2010. Photo: Oil Rig © Cairn Energy Plc

Black Gold @ US$90-plus! No, Surely? Is it?

“You can’t be serious,” was often the trademark thunder of American tennis legend John McEnroe when an umpiring decision went against him. In a different context some commodities analysts might be thundering exactly the same or maybe not. In any case, deep down Mr. McEnroe knew the umpire was being serious.

On a not so sunny Tuesday afternoon in London, ICE Futures Europe recorded Brent crude oil spot price per barrel at US$91.32. This morning the forward month Brent futures contract was trading around US$90.80 to US$91.00. While perhaps this does not beggar belief, it certainly is a bit strange shall we say. I mean just days ago there was the Irish overhang and rebalancing in China and all the rest of it – yet here we are. Société Générale’s Global Heal of Oil research Mike Wittner believes the fundamental goalposts may have shifted a bit.

In a recent note to clients, he opines that underpinned by QE2, the expected environment of low interest rates and high liquidity next year should encourage investors to move into risky assets, including oil. “With downward pressure on the US dollar and upward pressure on inflation expectations, the impact should therefore be bullish for crude oil prices,” he adds.

The global oil demand growth for this year has been revised up sharply to 2.4 Mb/d from 1.8 Mb/d previously by SGCIB, mainly due to an unexpected surge in Q3 2010 OECD demand. The demand growth for next year has also been increased, to 1.6 Mb/d from 1.4 Mb/d previously (although still, as expected, driven entirely by emerging markets).

What about the price? Wittner says (note the last bit), “For 2011, we forecast front-month ICE Brent crude oil near US$93/bbl, revised up by $8 from $85 previously. With continued low refinery utilisation rates, margins are still expected to be mediocre next year, broadly similar to this year. The oil complex in 2011 should again be mainly led by crude, not products.”

YooHoo – see that – “mainly led by crude, not products.” Furthermore, SGCIB believes crude price should average US$95 in H2 2011, in a $90-100 range. Well there you have it and it is a solid argument that low interest rates and high liquidity environment is bullish for oil.

Elsewhere, a report published this morning on Asian refining by ratings agency Moody’s backs up the findings of my report on refinery infrastructure for Infrastructure Journal. While refinery assets are rather unloved elsewhere owing to poor margins, both the ratings agency and the Oilholic believe Asia is a different story[1].

Renee Lam, Moody's Vice President and Senior Analyst, notes: “Continued demand growth in China and India in the short to medium term will be positive for players in the region serving the intra-Asia markets. Given the stabilization of refining margins over the next 12 to 18 months, a further significant deterioration of credit metrics for the sector is not expected.”

While Moody's does not foresee a significant restoration of companies' balance-sheet strength in the near term, they are still performing (and investing in infrastructure) better than their western, especially US counterparts.

[1] Oil Refinery Infra Outlook 2011: An Unloved Energy Asset By Gaurav Sharma, Infrastructure Journal, Nov 10, 2010 (Blog regarding some of the basic findings and my discussion on CNBC Europe about it available here.)

© Gaurav Sharma 2010. Graphic: ICE Brent Futures chart as downloaded at stated time © Digital Look / BBC, Photo: Oil Refinery © Shell