UK Oil & Gas Inc. - The Thatcher Years!

The Oilholic has patiently waited for the fans and despisers of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to quieten down, in wake of her death on April 8, 2013, before giving his humble take on what her premiership did (or in many cases didn’t) for the UK oil and gas Inc. and what she got in return.

 

Her influence on the North Sea exploration and production certainly got a mention in passing in all the tributes and brickbats thrown at the Iron Lady, the longest serving (1979-1990) and only female British Prime Minister. The world’s press ranging from The Economist to the local paper in her former parliamentary constituency – The Hendon & Finchley Times (see covers below) – discussed the legacy of the Iron Lady; that legacy is ‘cruder’ than you think.

 

In the run-up to Thatcher's all-but-in-name state funeral on April 17, the British public was bombarded with flashbacks of her time in the corridors of power. In one of the video runs, yours truly glanced at archived footage of Thatcher at a BP production facility and that said it all. Her impact on the industry and the industry’s impact itself on her premiership were profound to say the least.

 

Academic Peter R. Odell, noted at the time in his book  Oil and World Power (c1986) that, “Countries as diverse as Finland, France, Italy, Austria, Spain, Norway and Britain had all decided to place oil partly, at least, in the public sector.” A later footnote observes, “Britain’s Conservative government, under Mrs. Thatcher, subsequently decided [in 1983] to ‘privatize’ the British National Oil Corporation (BNOC) created by an earlier Labour administration.”

 

The virtue of private free enterprise got instilled into the UK oil and gas industry in general and the North Sea innovators in particular thanks to Thatcher. But to say that the industry somehow owed the Iron Lady a debt of gratitude would be a travesty. Rather, the industry repaid that debt not only in full, but with interest.

 

Just as Thatcher was coming to power, more and more of the crude stuff was being sucked out of the North Sea with UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) being much richer in those days than it certainly is these days. The UK Treasury, under her hawk-eyed watch, was quite simply raking it in. According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) data, government revenue from the oil and gas industry rose from £565 million in fiscal year 1978-79 to £12.04 billion in 1984-85. That is worth over three times as much in 2012 real-terms value, according to a guesstimate provided by a contact at Barclays Capital.

 

Throughout the 1980s, the Iron Lady made sure that the revenue from the [often up to] 90% tax on North Sea oil and gas exploration and production was used as a funding source to balance the economy and pay the costs of economic reform. Over three decades on from the crude boom of the 1980s, Brits do wish she had examined, some say even adopted, the Norwegian model.

 

That she privatised the BNOC does not irk the Oilholic one bit, but that not even a drop of black gold and its proceeds – let alone a full blown Norwegian styled sovereign fund – was put aside for a rainy day is nothing short of short-termism or short-sightedness; quite possibly both. One agrees that both macroeconomic and demographical differences between Norway and the UK complicate the discussion. This humble blogger doubts if the thought of creating a sovereign fund didn’t cross the Iron Lady’s mind.

 

But unquestionably, as oil and gas revenue was helping in feeding the rising state benefits bill at the time – all Thatcher saw in Brent, Piper and Cormorant fields were Petropounds to balance the books. And, if you thought the ‘crude’ influence ended in the sale of BNOC, privatisation drives or channelling revenue for short-term economic rebalancing, then think again. Crude oil, or rather a distillate called diesel, came to Thatcher’s aid in her biggest battle in domestic politics – the Miners’ Strike of 1984.

 

Pitting her wits against Arthur Scargill, the National Union of Mineworkers’ (NUM) hardline, stubborn, ultra-left leader at the time, she prevailed. In March 1984, the National Coal Board (NCB) proposed to close 20 of the 174 state-owned mines resulting in the loss of 20,000 jobs. Led by Scargill, two-thirds of the country's miners went on strike and so began the face-off.

 

But Thatcher, unlike her predecessors, was ready for a prolonged battle having learnt her lesson in an earlier brief confrontation with the miners and knew their union’s clout full well based on past histories. This time around, the government had stockpiled coal to ensure that power plants faced no shortages as was the case with previous confrontations.

 

Tongue-tied in his vanity, Scargill had not only missed the pulse of the stockpiling drive but also failed to realise that many UK power plants had switched to diesel as a back-up. Adding to the overall idiocy of the man, he decided to launch the strike in the summer of 1984, when power consumption is lower, than in the winter.

 

Furthermore, he refused to hold a ballot on the strike, after losing three previous ballots on a national strike (in January 1982, October 1982 and March 1983). The strike was declared illegal and Thatcher eventually won as the NUM conceded a year later in March 1985 without any sizable concessions but with its member having borne considerable hardships. The world was moving away from coal, to a different kind of fossil fuel and Thatcher grasped it better than most. That the country was a net producer of crude stuff at the time was a bonanza; the Treasury’s to begin with as she saw it.

 

The Iron Lady left office with an ‘ism’ in the shape of 'Thatcherism' and bred 'Thatcherites' espousing free market ideas and by default making capitalism the dominant, though recently beleaguered, economic system of our time. Big Bang, the day [October 27, 1986] the London Stock Exchange's rules changed, following deregulation of the financial markets, became the cornerstone of her economic policy.

 

In this world there are no moral absolutes. So the Oilholic does not accept the rambunctious arguments offered by left wingers that she made ‘greed’ acceptable or that the Big Bang caused the global financial crisis of 2007-08. Weren’t militant British unions who, for their own selfish odds and ends, held the whole country to ransom throughout the 1970s (until Thatcher decimated them), greedy too? If the Big Bang was to blame for a global financial crisis, so was banking deregulation in the UK in 1997 (and elsewhere around that time) when she was not around.

 

Equally silly, are the fawning accolades handed out by the right wingers; many of whom – and not the British public – were actually instrumental in booting her out of office and some of whom were her colleagues at the time. Let the wider debate about her legacy be where it is, but were it not for the UK oil and gas Inc., there would have been no legacy. Luck played its part, as it so often does in the lives of great leaders. As The Economist noted:

 

“She was also often outrageously lucky: lucky that the striking miners were led by Arthur Scargill, a hardline Marxist; lucky that the British left fractured and insisted on choosing unelectable leaders; lucky that [Argentine] General Galtieri decided to invade the Falkland Islands when he did; lucky that she was a tough woman in a system dominated by patrician men (the wets never knew how to cope with her); lucky in the flow of North Sea oil; and above all lucky in her timing. The post-war consensus was ripe for destruction, and a host of new forces, from personal computers to private equity, aided her more rumbustious form of capitalism.”

 

They say that the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez stage-managed 'Chavismo' and bred 'Chavistas' from the proceeds of black gold. The Oilholic says 'Thatcherism' and 'Thatcherites' have a ‘crude’ dimension too. Choose whatever evidence you like – statistical, empirical or anecdotal – crude oil bankrolled Thatcherism in its infancy. That is the unassailable truth and that’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

 

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com
 

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: Baroness Margaret Thatcher’s funeral cortege with military honours, April 17, 2013 © Gaurav Sharma. Photo 2: Front page of the Hendon & Finchley Times, April 11, 2013. Photo 3: Front cover of the The Economist, April 13, 2013.

A ‘crude’ autumn statement in a freezing UK

UK Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne finally got around to delivering his 2012 ‘autumn’ budget on a freezing December afternoon here in London today and there was plenty in it for the Oilholic to mull over. To begin with, in a highly populist move, Osborne not only postponed a 3 pence (5 US cents) rise in UK fuel duty but scrapped the tax measure on motorists altogether. This was followed by an announcement that the Government will set up a new Office for Unconventional Gas with an emphasis on shale gas and coal-bed methane and the role they could play in meeting the country's energy demand.

 

Osborne also announced a consultation exercise with the possibility of new tax incentives for the shale gas industry which is currently in its infancy here. Shale could very well become a part-player in the UK government’s latest strategy as conventional North Sea gas production declines.

 

The Chancellor also said that the UK’s headline rate of corporation tax would fall to 21% in 2014, from 22% in 2013. Additionally, plant and machinery investment allowance was raised from £25,000 to £250,000; duly cheered by independent contractors. Summing up the motive behind his ‘crude’ moves, the Chancellor urged investors to: "Come here, create jobs here; Britain is open for business. This would be the lowest rate of (corporation) tax for any major Western economy."

 

Once Osborne's statement had ended, the Oilholic sought feedback from the crude men around.

 

Robin Cohen, partner in Deloitte’s Energy & Resources practice, felt the government’s positive messages on the potential for shale gas, although tempered by realism on the timelines and challenges for the sector, will be welcomed by those involved in developing a potentially significant future energy resource for the UK.

 

“Recent energy pronouncements from the government and its gas generation strategy reinforce the dramatic (recent) changes in the character of the country’s electricity market from an investor’s perspective. Rather than assessing the viability of future power generation projects by analysing supply, demand and the resulting market prices, investors now need to anticipate the aggregate effect of several key policy measures, some of which have no track record as yet,” he added.

 

These include the carbon price floor, contracts for differences (CFDs) within the levy control framework, the capacity mechanism and the UK’s response to the EU target model for electricity markets. “While the strategy will be broadly welcomed by investors, it highlights the limits to the level of future certainty that the Government can provide,” Cohen added.

 

Anthony Lobo, Head of Oil and Gas at KPMG UK, also said the government's plan to consult on an appropriate fiscal regime for shale gas exploration is a positive sign for the industry.

 

“The UK has been seen as a negative place to invest recently due to very high levels of fiscal uncertainty. The tax increases in 2011 resulted in lowest levels of investment in years. Production also plummeted by 19% in 2011 predominantly as a result of the increase in supplementary charge, this drop negated any tax revenues the government hoped to realise. The announcement today signals the government's intent to support investment in Oil and Gas,” he added.

 

Tim Fox, Head of Energy and Environment at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, felt the Chancellor had provided some very welcome clarification as to the role of gas in bridging the looming energy gap mid-decade. “It is sensible for the UK to invest in gas-fired power plants at this point in time as they are cleaner than coal, needed to back-up intermittent renewable energy sources, and can be built quicker with much lower up-front costs than nuclear plants,” he said.

 

“News that the Government will set up a new Office for Unconventional Gas is positive…Unconventional has the potential to create thousands of high-skilled engineering jobs and export services over the next decade,” Fox added.

 

There you are! The advisory firms like what the Chancellor said, the engineers and tax consultants did too – now only future investors and big energy companies need convincing. That’s all from the UK House of Commons folks!

 

But before yours truly takes your leave, it emerged overnight that Aberdeen-based Faroe Petroleum has bagged a provisional Icelandic exploration licence in the Dreki area. The company said it was "very excited to get the opportunity to explore and de-risk these extensive prospects” encompassing seven blocks located inside the Arctic Circle to the north east of the Iceland.

 

Faroe added that the move was an important extension of its frontier exploration portfolio in the UK west of Shetlands, Norwegian Sea and Norwegian Barents Sea. Graham Stewart, chief executive of Faroe Petroleum, said, "As with our Norwegian Barents Sea licences, this new Icelandic (Jan Mayen Ridge) licence has significant hydrocarbon potential, and is located in ice-free waters."

 

So on an Arctic note, let’s hope Faroe has better luck than its Scottish cousin Cairn Energy has had (so far) in its icy foray. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

 

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

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.

The fortnight’s ‘crude’ conjecture & UK’s budget

It’s been an interesting few weeks with varying takes on the ‘crude’ state of affairs, but first the UK’s union budget and its impact on the North Sea. Delivering his 2012 budget in the British House of Commons on Wednesday, Chancellor of the exchequer George Osborne announced plans for a major package on tax changes to boost oil and gas extraction in the North Sea, along with a £3 billion new field allowance West of Shetland.

The Chancellor also said a new gas strategy designed to secure investment in the sector will be announced in the autumn. Of the two, the tax incentives announcement allowing British companies operating in the North Sea to enter into contracts with the UK Government aimed at offering long term certainty on future decommissioning cost tax relief was perhaps a more significant announcement from the Chancellor in the Oilholic’s humble opinion given the acrimony caused by last year's tax rises. Most in the City are united in their belief that this will go some way towards restoring trust which had been shaken by last year’s oil tax increase.

Osborne said the government "will end the uncertainty over decommissioning tax relief that has hung over the industry for years by entering into a contractual approach”, adding that he wanted to ensure the UK "extracts the greatest possible amount of oil and gas from our reserves in the North Sea".

Roman Webber, UK head of oil & gas tax at Deloitte, believes the announcement will remove a major fiscal risk for UK North Sea investors and release significant funds for investment if companies can move to post-tax decommissioning guarantees.

“In the longer term this measure should also increase the tax take for the Government. Whilst much work remains to be done to work out the detail and legislation is not expected until 2013, this is a very positive development. Deloitte Petroleum Services Group estimates that the UK North Sea decommissioning costs for the remainder of the life of the UK North Sea will be around £27 to 30 billion (US$44 to $48 billion),” he concludes.

Away from the UK budget and on to market conjecture, Mark Brown of Fitch Ratings hypothesises that Abu Dhabi will become the oil producing member of the Gulf Cooperation Council that is best insulated from a closure of the Strait of Hormuz, once the Habshan-Fujairah pipeline is fully operational later this year.

In January, the UAE's energy minister said that the pipeline, designed to transport 1.5 million barrels per day (bpd), should hopefully be operational within six months. “As we have previously said, a prolonged closure of the Strait is a low probability. As well as the practical challenge of physically blocking it, we think Iran would only choose to close an international shipping lane that is the world's most important oil chokepoint as a last resort, given the potential for international retaliation. Iran also exports oil via the Strait,” Brown says.

However, if the Strait was blocked in the second half of this year, when the Habshan-Fujairah pipeline could be operational, it would potentially give Abu Dhabi the best safety net. “It would enable Abu Dhabi, which has the world's second largest per capita reserves of hydrocarbons, to continue to export up to around two-thirds of its oil output, or around three-quarters of its current net oil exports, by bypassing the Strait and delivering oil to the Gulf of Oman,” he concludes.

Fitch also believes Saudi Arabia currently has the advantage that it already enjoys pipeline access to the Red Sea via the East-West pipeline. The country could export more than half its output through this pipeline, which has a maximum capacity of 5 million bpd and currently transports around 1.8 million bpd.

However, even at maximum capacity, with 2011 output running at 9.3 million bpd and no decline so far this year due to the tensions over Iran, a higher proportion of Saudi oil output and exports would be stuck inside the country if they could not be shipped out of the Persian Gulf than would be the case for Abu Dhabi once the Habshan-Fujairah pipeline is operational.

Switching tack to an unrelated comment from Moody’s, the ratings agency believes that as a result of financial flexibility built up over the past two years, rated Russian integrated oil & gas companies will be able to accommodate volatility in oil prices and other emerging challenges in 2012 within their current rating categories.

In a note to clients, Victoria Maisuradze, an Associate Managing Director in Moody's Corporate Finance Group, writes: "In 2011, rated Russian players continued to demonstrate strong operating and financial results, underpinned by elevated oil prices. Indeed, operating profits are likely to remain stable in 2012 as an increased tax and tariff burden will offset the benefits of high crude oil prices."

Speaking of prices, WTI-Brent price differential did narrow down to under US$18 over the course of the last fortnight. Brent is resisting a price level of US$123, while WTI is resisting a price level of US$106 and market trends remain moderately bullish with Greece having been “sorted”, US data being encouraging and geopolitical factors nudging the forward month futures price upwards.

Following minor bearish trends, crude oil prices were again correcting higher on Wednesday, tracking a broader rally in risk assets as the dollar eases back from yesterday’s gains. Specifically, front-month WTI is trading around the US$106.50 mark ahead of US data, notes Jack Pollard of Sucden Financial research.

“Bears will happily refer to repeated Saudi claims of increased production, though the threat in the Straits of Hormuz as well as the reduction in Saudi spare capacity (amid broad based geopolitical volatility) will remain the bulls’ best bet,” concludes Pollard.

This brings the Oilholic to a superb editorial in The Economist. The inimitable publication, of which yours truly has been a loyal reader for the past 14 years, debates in a recent edition whether another oil shock maybe on the cards. It comes-up with its own unique equation, in an American context: "Politician + pump prices + poll = panic"

From a global standpoint, The Economist notes that Iranian threats are only one of many scares facing oil markets drawing an analogy with a horror flick:

“When things get too quiet in horror films it is a sure sign that something nasty is just around the corner. Stability in oil prices (earlier in the year) may have been the forerunner of something unpleasant too…But as in any scary movie, the obvious suspect is not always to blame…Many analysts reckon that Iran would not close the strait because of the damage it would do to its own oil exports and vital imports. And anyway such a move would almost certainly lead to military retaliation.” (Oil Markets: High Drama, The Economist, February 25, 2012)

Well said sir! In fact many in the City agree and do believe Sudan, Nigeria and maintenance issues in the North Sea are as much to blame for the price rise. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

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

Corporate crude chatter: Xstrata, Glencore & more

There appears to be only one story in town these past few days - the valuation and implication of a Glencore and Xstrata merger. According to communiqués issued yesterday poured over the Oilholic and his peers, the Switzerland based commodities trader and the mining major aim to create a merged natural resources, mining and trading company with a combined equity market value of US$90 billion.

Xstrata’s operating businesses and Glencore’s marketing functions will continue to operate under their existing brands. It is proposed that the combined entity will be called Glencore Xstrata International plc, listed on the London and Hong Kong Stock Exchanges, with its headquarters in Switzerland and will continue as a company incorporated in Jersey. The deal was labelled by the two firms as a "merger of equals" but the Oilholic suspects Glencore would carry the upper hand.

While the new corporate entity will be the world's biggest exporter of coal for power plants and the largest producer of zinc, the ever secretive Glencore’s involvement gives the merger a ‘crude’ dimension. The latter’s Chief Executive Ivan Glasenberg has made a fortune for his company selling crude oil and oil products alongside other commodities. Controversy and Glencore go hand in hand as its Wikipedia page records.

Where from here remains to be seen as ratings agency Moody's has placed all the ratings of Glencore and Xstrata, as well as those of their guaranteed subsidiaries, on review for possible upgrade following the announced all-share merger. The initiation of this review reflects Moody's favourable assessment of the planned merger in terms of diversification and synergies, as well as the uncertainties surrounding the final details and execution of the proposed transaction.

Moving away from the Glencore-Xstrata story but sticking with Moody's, the agency also commented on the completion of Sunoco Inc.'s strategic review. It notes that the American petroleum company is better positioned to focus on midstream logistics and retail product marketing as its core operations, with greater clarity around its plans to re-deploy a sizeable portion of its cash liquidity.

Sunoco announced a number of steps last week to allow it to focus on its large investment in Sunoco Logistics Partners LP and on retail marketing as the drivers of its future growth and returns. It began shuttering the Marcus Hook refinery in December and is likely to do the same with its Philadelphia refinery by July 2012 unless it can conclude a suitable sale. These exposures and the limited sales prospects for the refineries have resulted in an additional pre-tax charge of US$612 million in Q4 2011, including non-cash book charges and provisions for severance and other cash expenses.

Continuing with corporate news, Petrobras announced another discovery of a new oil and natural gas accumulation – this time in the Solimões Basin (Block SOL-T-171), in the State of Amazonas. The discovery took place during drilling of Igarap é Chibata Leste well located in Coari, 25 km from the Urucu Oil Province. The well was drilled to a final depth of 3,295 meters and tests have indicated a production capacity of 1,400 barrels per day of good quality oil (41º API) and 45,000 m3 of natural gas. Obviously, Petrobras holds 100% of the exploration and production rights in the Concession.

The Brazilian major also closed the issuance of global notes in the international capital markets worth US$7 billion on Monday. The transaction was executed in one day, with a demand of approximately US$25 billion as a result of more than 1,600 orders coming from more than 700 investors. The final allocation was more concentrated in the United States (58.4%), Europe (28.1%) and Asia, mostly dedicated to the high grade market. The oversubscription is symptomatic of the huge interest in Brazilian offshore.

Finally, BP raised its dividend payout after quarterly earnings rose on rising crude prices. Replacement cost profit for the three months to December-end 2011 was US$7.6 billion up on US$4.6 billion for the corresponding period in 2010. For FY 2011, BP's profit was US$23.9 billion versus a US$4.9 billion loss in 2010. This meant allowing for a 14% rise in the dividend to 8c (5p) per share, a first increase since the 2010 Gulf of Mexico spill.

Away from corporate matters, the UK government launched its 27th offshore oil and gas licensing round last Wednesday making 2,800 blocks available to prospectors. The last British licensing round set an all-time high at 190 awards with high crude prices enticing exploration companies big and small. Lets see how it all shapes up this time around especially as the British government maintains that some 20 billion barrels of the crude stuff is still to be extracted. The Oilholic cannot possibly dispute the figure with authority, but what one can note with some conviction is that all the easy (to extract) oil has already been found. Extracting the remaining 20 billion would be neither easy nor cheap, especially in a tough macroclimate.

Meanwhile, as tensions mount over Iran, Saudi Arabia’s crown prince has said the Kingdom would not let the price of crude oil stay above US$100 using the WTI as a benchmark. Concurrently, and in order to allay Asian fears about crude oil supplies, the UAE government says it is looking to export more to Asia should there be a need to mitigate the supply gap caused by a ban on Iranian oil by Asian importers. That’s all for the moment folks. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

© Gaurav Sharma 2012. Photo: Offshore oil rig in North Sea © Cairn Energy Plc.

UK PM flags up crude credentials

The Oilholic attended the British lobby group CBI’s annual conference earlier today listening to UK Prime Minister David Cameron flag-up his crude credentials (admittedly among other matters). The PM feels investment in the Oil & Gas sector and British expertise in it could be part of his wider economic rebalancing act.

“In last few weeks alone I have visited an £4.5 billion new investment from BP in the North Sea…And today I hosted Britain and Norway signing a 10-year deal to secure gas supplies and develop together over £1 billion of Norwegian gas fields,” he said.

That deal of course was part of British utility Centrica’s 10-year agreement worth £13 billion to buy natural gas from Norway's Statoil and jointly develop fields.

"Gas plays a central role in powering our economy, and will continue to do so for decades to come. Today's agreement will help to ensure the continued security and competitiveness of gas supplies to Britain, from a trusted and reliable neighbour," the PM concluded.

Admittedly, from a gasoline consumers’ standpoint successive British governments have long lost street cred when it comes to taxing fuel a long while ago; still the present lot fare better in relative terms if the UK ONS is to be relied upon. The British statistics body announced last week that the Government’s Share of petrol pump price dropped to 66p in the pound in 2009/10; from nearly 81p in 2001/02.

The data also show that the poorest 20% of UK households paid almost twice as much of their income in duties on fuel than the richest 20%. In 2009/10, the poorest 20% of households paid 3.5% of their disposable income on duty, compared with only 1.8% for the top 20%. Overall, the average UK household spent 2.3% of its disposable income on duties on fuel.

However, in cash terms, the richest 20% of households paid almost three-times the amount paid by the bottom 20%. In 2009/10 the richest 20% of households spent £1,062 on petrol taxes, compared with £365 for the poorest 20% of households. Overall, the average UK household spent £677 on duties on fuel in 2009/10.

Finally, the UK, US and Canada announced new sanctions against Iran following growing concern over its nuclear programme in wake of the IAEA report. In a statement the US government said that Iran's petrochemical, oil and gas industry (including supply of technical components for Upstream and downstream ops) and its financial sector would be targeted by the sanctions.

Canada will ban all exports for the petrochemical, oil and gas industries without exceptions while the British government would demand that all UK credit and financial institutions had to cease trading with Iran's banks from Monday afternoon. The Oilholic notes that this is first time the UK has cut off a petro-exporting country’s banking sector, in fact any country’s banking sector in this fashion. Its highly doubtful if the move will tame misplaced Iranian belligerence.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: British Prime Minister David Cameron speaking at the CBI Conference, November 21^st, 2011 © Gaurav Sharma 2011.

Crude M&A activity, Majors' profits & more

As we approach the end of the year, the Oilholic is convinced that 2011 will see M&A activity in the oil & gas sector returning to, or perhaps even exceeding pre-crisis deal valuation levels. Research for Infrastructure Journal by this blogger suggests that while the year still has a little over two months left the deal valuation figure for acquisition of oil & gas infrastructure assets, using September 30th as a cut-off date, is well above the total valuation for 2008, the year that the global credit squeeze meaningfully constricted capital flows.

In fact, back in 2008, Infrastructure Journal noted 23 oil & gas M&A corporate finance transactions valued at US$19.33 billion. Deal valuation then declined to US$18.14 billion and US$16.70 billion in 2009 and 2010 while the number of transactions first fell to 19 and then rose to 32. In fact 2009 would have been a wretched year in relative terms, had it not been for a US$6.3 billion transaction concerning the acquisition of Stogit & Italgas. Big ticket deals were largely absent in 2010 and while the number of transactions rose, valuation declined. IJ analysts have so far noted 21 transactions and a deal valuation to the tune of US$27.11 billion (and counting) in 2011. (Click on graph to enlarge © Infrastructure Journal)

Michael Byrd, Houston-based partner at Baker & McKenzie feels that conditions for making an oil & gas asset acquisition are quite conducive, more so for upstream assets. “Opportunities exist in all three – Downstream, Midstream and Upstream projects, but in case of the latter, projects in remote offshore and onshore basins have become more economical due to new technologies and more favourable oil prices (long-term),” he said in recent webinar which makes for compelling listening, caveats and all, if asset acquisition is on your mind. You could possibly download a recording here.

Alternatively, Baker & McKenzie have another one of these webinars coming-up on November 16 under their Global Energy Webinar Series. This one would discuss the full cycle of tax planning and compliance issues around permanent establishments for major energy and power projects.

Moving away from IJ’s figures and Baker & McKenzie webinars, financial advisers Ernst & Young’s research on a related note suggests that increases in M&A of London-based AiM-listed oil & gas firms are to be expected following substantial falls in their market valuation.

The firm’s quarterly index shows the value of AiM-listed oil and gas companies fell 26% in the three months to September. The index has been in decline since the start of 2011. Additionally, fundraising by AiM-listed oil and gas companies totalled £168.7 million during the third quarter - a fall of 48% on the same quarter last year.

Jon Clark, oil & gas partner at Ernst & Young, said, "Those companies with weaker balance sheets and particularly those with development projects will be looking towards larger, better capitalised acquirers. The slowdown in the global economic recovery and the market turbulence created by issues including the US credit downgrade and the eurozone sovereign debt crisis will continue to turn investors off riskier assets. This doesn't bode well for the fourth quarter."

All-in-all, the remainder of 2011 would be a good time to swoop for an asset or even an entire mid-cap company. Concurrently, the oil majors are queuing up to announce decent profits. The third quarter’s current cost of supply net income at Shell doubled to US$7.2 billion, compared with US$3.5 billion during the same period a year ago. ExxonMobil saw its quarterly profits rise by 41% to US$10.3 billion.

Earlier in the week, BP said its operations were “regaining momentum” and that it had “turned a corner” reporting third quarter profits of US$5.14 billion, a near tripling of the US$1.85 billion replacement cost profit it made in the same period a year ago. The firm is also increasing its asset selling programme from US$30 billion to US$45 billion.

Meanwhile, the British Energy and Climate Change Select Committee of MPs has criticised the UK Treasury's move earlier this year to increase a levy on the oil & gas industry calling it an "opportunistic raid". On the back of recent good news from the North Sea – they said in a report that the way in which the £2 billion hike was announced may have undermined investor confidence.

The report notes: "If the (UK) government is serious about maximising production from the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS), it needs to consider the long-term impact of changes to the tax regime on investment. The evidence on the impact of 2006 increase in the supplementary tax charge on oil and gas production in the North Sea is inconclusive, but there is a clear need to sustain investor confidence by avoiding surprises, such as the further increase announced in the 2011 Budget. It is not sensible to make opportunistic raids on UKCS producers." Powerful stuff – well delivered!

Finally, in Thursday intraday trading the crude oil price registered a strong rebound of over 2%, accompanied by a rally in the equity markets following the positive vibes from the European leaders’ summit overnight where an agreement to raise the European rescue fund to €1 trillion was finally reached.

Sucden Financial research expects further gains in crude oil prices, as the market seems relieved after the European Summit. The stronger euro provides further support, while most commodity prices enjoying a strong rally. WTI crude oil has further upside potential toward US$95/$96 per barrel, while Brent oil might find modest resistance near the US$115 per barrel area, Sucden analysts note further.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Graph: Corporate Finance infrastructure M&A deals 2008-2011 (year to date) © Infrastructure Journal, October 10, 2011. Photo: Shell Gas Station © Royal Dutch Shell

North Sea murmurs, Q1 profits & Bin Laden

To begin with good riddance to Bin Laden! The tragedy of 9/11 still feels like yesterday. I can never forget that morning as a junior reporter watching the BBC when initial reports began trickling in and we were asked to vacate the Canary Wharf building I was at. Miles away across the pond a great tragedy was unfolding – this brings closure to the many who suffered, many known to me.

Being mechanical, there is a near negligible impact on the wider market or crude market despite brave efforts of the popular press to find connections. How markets fluctuated since morning has no direct connection with Bin Laden being killed and instability premium reflected in the price of crude remains untroubled. The threat of Al-Qaeda remains just as real in a geopolitical sense and a Middle Eastern context.

Moving away from today’s news, ratings agency Moody’s noted last week that sharply higher prices for oil and natural gas liquids have boosted business conditions for the independent exploration and production (E&P) industry, and should remain high well into 2012, offsetting persistently weak natural gas prices. In the same week, ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell reported appreciable rises in Q1 profits.

ExxonMobil posted quarterly profits of US$10.7 billion, up 69% over the corresponding quarter last year. It also announced a spend of US$7.8 billion over the quarter on developing new energy supplies and said its shareholders had benefited to the tune of US$7 billion in Q1 dividends.

Shell for its part reported quarterly profits of US$6.9 billion on a current cost of supply basis, up 41% on an annualised basis. It said cost saving measures as well as higher oil prices had contributed to its Q1 profitability. Earlier, BP reported first quarter profits of US$5.5 billion, down marginally from the corresponding period last year. Its production over the quarter was also down 11% after asset sales to help pay for the cost of Macondo clean-up.

Finally, unhappy murmurs about rising taxation amid the North Sea oil & gas producers are growing. In his Budget tabled in March, UK Chancellor George Osborne raised supplementary tax on production from 20% to 32%. Reports in the British media this morning suggest the owner of British Gas Centrica says it might shut one of its major gas fields because of increased UK taxes. It is closing three fields in Morecambe Bay for a month of maintenance, may not reopen one of them.

A fortnight ago, Chevron warned of possible "unintended consequences" from the UK Budget decision to raise North Sea taxes. Its Chairman John Watson told the Financial Times, “When you increase taxes every few years, particularly without consulting with industry, there will be unintended consequences of that in terms of where we choose to invest."

In 2010, Chevron received UK government’s permission to drill an exploration well to evaluate a major prospect - the deep-water Lagavulin prospect - is 160 miles north of Shetland Islands. All this comes after a report published on April 8th by Deloitte’s Petroleum Services Group noted that North Sea offshore drilling activity fell 25% over Q1 2011.

The North West Europe Review, which documents drilling and licensing in the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS), reveals just five exploration and four appraisal wells were spudded in the UK sector between January 1 and March 31; compared to a total of 12 during the fourth quarter of 2010.

Analysts at Deloitte’s Petroleum Services Group said while the drop cannot be attributed to the recent Budget announcement, which proposed increased tax rates for oil and gas companies, it could set the pattern for activity in the future.

Graham Sadler, managing director of Deloitte’s Petroleum Services Group said, “It is important to clarify that we are talking about a relatively small number of wells that were drilled during the first quarter of the year - the traditionally quieter winter months - so this is not, in itself, an unexpected decrease. The lead-in time on drilling planning cycles can be long – even up to several years - so any impact from the recent changes to fiscal terms are unlikely to be seen until much later in the year.”

“What is clear is that despite the decrease in drilling activity towards the end of last year, and during the first months of 2011, the outlook for exploration and appraisal activity in the North Sea appeared positive. The oil price continued to rise and there were indications that this, combined with earlier UK government tax incentives, was encouraging companies to return to their pre-recession strategies. Since the Budget, a number of companies have announced that they intend to put appraisal and development projects on hold and we will have to wait to see the full effect of this change on North Sea activity levels over the coming months,” he concluded.

Deloitte’s review shows that the Central North Sea has seen the highest level of drilling activity, with the region representing 55% of all exploration and appraisal wells spudded on the UKCS during the first quarter of this year.

It also showed that the price of Brent Crude oil has experienced sustained growth throughout the period, rising 20% between December 2010 and March 2011 to a monthly average of US$114.38. This increase in price is a continuation of a trend that started in 2010, however, so far this year, the rate and pattern of growth has been much more constant with regular increases rather than the rise and dip pattern seen during 2010.

© Gaurav Sharma 2011. Photo: ExxonMobil plaque outside its building, Houston, Texas, USA © Gaurav Sharma, March 2011

UK Drilling Activity Down But Exploration is Rising

Offshore drilling in the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) dipped 20% Q3 2010 on an annualised basis, according to the latest oil and gas industry figures obtained from Deloitte.

It’s Petroleum Services Group (PSG), revealed in a report published on Friday that a total of 24 exploration and appraisal wells were spudded in the UK sector between July 1 and September 30, compared with 30 exploration and appraisal wells during the corresponding period last year.

Concurrently, PSG also said a 4% quarter over quarter rise was noted in the number of wells spudded in the UKCS in the third quarter of this year, attributed to higher levels of exploration drilling in the UKCS, up 32% for the first three quarters of 2010 when compared to the same period of 2009.

Overall, international deal activity saw a marked increase during the third quarter of 2010, following a period of no activity at all in the previous quarter. Most notable were the corporate acquisitions announced following KNOC’s acquisition of Dana and EnQuest’s decision to buy Stratic Energy.

However, corporate level activity within the UK has decreased since the second quarter of 2010 with only one corporate asset sale announced compared to three announcements and one completion in the previous quarter.

Graham Sadler, managing director of Deloitte’s PSG, commented in a statement that seeing deal activity in the UK decreasing for a second consecutive quarter was not a major surprise.

“There is evidence of a shift in company strategy as organisations are opting for less costly and less risky policies as they look to adjust their portfolios. This is reflected in the fact that the number of farm-ins announced has almost tripled this quarter to 11, in comparison with just four announcements during the second quarter. Until more confidence in the recovery of the market becomes further evident, this may be a trend that continues in the future,” Sadler said.

Elsewhere in the UKCS, Norway saw seven exploration and appraisals wells spudded, which represents a 56% decrease when compared to the number of wells drilled in the second quarter of this year.

Netherlands, Denmark and Ireland also reported low levels of drilling activity according to the Deloitte report while the four wells spudded in the Cairn Energy drilling programme in Greenland marked the first activity in the region for a decade.

On the pricing front, despite the overall decreased activity, the price of Brent Crude oil has remained stable throughout the whole of the third quarter of 2010, achieving a quarterly average of US$76.47 per barrel.

Carrying on with the theme, I met several analysts here at OPEC who think Brent appears to be winning the battle of the indices. The sentiment is gaining traction. David Peniket, President and Chief Operating Officer of Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) Futures Europe remarked in May that WTI is an important US benchmark but that it does not reflect the fundamentals of the global oil market in the way that Brent reflects them.

© Gaurav Sharma 2010. Photo: Andrew Rig-North Sea © BP

North Sea’s glory days have long gone

Oil extracted from North Sea once made UK the world’s six-biggest producer of oil and natural gas. However, the tide turned after 1999 when production peaked at 4.5 million barrels per day. Estimates suggest that production is down nearly 40% since then.

At end of 2006 and 2007, UK production had dropped to 2.9 million and 2.8 million barrels per day respectively, indicative of a terminal decline. Geologists are not yet suggesting the North Sea oil has nearly run out. Government and private sector research indicates there is still about 15 to 25 billion barrels beneath the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS). However, all the “easy oil”, to be read as easier to extract, has nearly dwindled.

Most new discoveries contain less than 50 million barrels; minuscule amount by global standards. Harder to extract oil requires additional investment as production becomes more and more capital intensive. Research by Oil and Gas UK (OGUK) suggests that there are already signs of a sharp slowdown in exploration and appraisal drilling activity. In its Economic Report (2009), it noted that the first quarter of 2009 saw a 78% drop in the number of exploration wells drilled.

OGUK expects investment to fall significantly and fears it could even drop below £3 billion in 2010. Historic data suggests investment stood at £4.9 billion in 2007. Furthermore, a fall in the value of the pound sterling against the US dollar and relatively smaller discoveries per exploratory project would imply that 2010 would result in investment of a comparable level yielding less than one third of the oil did in 2001.

OGUK is not shying away from admitting things are not what they used to be. To its credit, the lobby group meaningfully acknowledges UK’s internal “Peak Oil” argument. It believes the surge in oil price during 2007 and 2008 masked a steady decline in the competitiveness of UKCS extraction.

Pure economics also comes into the picture. Quite frankly, despite a decline in relative value of the pound sterling, it is clear that UK oil and gas exploration projects will lose out to other regions around the world which offer more substantial investment opportunities on better terms. For instance, Cairn Energy (LSE: CNE) made its mark in the North Sea, but is banking its future strategy on South Asia (India and Bangladesh), Tunisia and Greenland.

UKCS' decline is unlikely to be stemmed unless the government provides tax breaks to ensure some semblance of competitiveness, according to business lobby groups. Even at the time of the oil price touching dizzy heights of US$147 per barrel many were concerned. I recollect a conversation I had at a House of Commons event early in 2008 with Geoff Runcie, Chief Executive, Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce (AGCC) and Howard Archer, chief UK economist, IHS Global Insight.

Runcie believed that despite repeated warnings of escalating oil extraction costs, the UK oil industry had to contend with two major tax increases in recent years. He said that investment in real terms had fallen by £1 billion between the first quarter of 2006 and the first quarter of 2008, despite rising commodity prices.

Archer noted that giving tax breaks to oil companies at a time when crude oil price was at $147 per barrel, household energy prices were rising and oil companies were booking record profits, was politically suicidal for any government. The financial tsunami that followed over 2008-09 and the current precarious state of the UK public purse currently makes allowance for such tax breaks unthinkable.

Furthermore, energy economists believe North Sea investment was hit both ways. High oil price masked under-investment and made tax breaks unpalatable for most of 2007-08. Subsequently, a greater decline in activity was an obvious consequence of a lower oil price which fell to $34 per barrel in December 2008 with no tax break in sight for entirely different reasons.

Despite evidence to the contrary, fall in oil production and two of Scotland’s largest banks being owned by the UK taxpayer, the Scottish National Party (SNP) still bases its case for Scottish Independence on North Sea oil deposits, majority of which lie in what could geographically be described as Scottish waters. The figures may add up today, but do not stand up to scrutiny for much longer. SNP does find common ground with oilmen and lobbyists who wish to see more exploratory activity west of Shetland Islands. Even before significant prospecting, geologists believe it could hold up to 4 billion barrels of oil.

However, commencing projects in the area is not easy. A sea bed with prospective hydrocarbons stored at high pressures, inhospitable climate and a lack of infrastructure temper enthusiasm as easier exploration options are available globally. Total has got one gas project going which was commenced in 2007. It believes the West of Shetland area represents about 17% of UK’s remaining oil and gas resource base and could contribute up to 6% of the country's gas requirements by 2015.

If even a new exploratory zone represents 17% of what is left, one wonders how much actually does remain. Shetland Islands Council EDU sees the inevitable but not immediate decline. West Shetland will not prevent the North Sea’s decline. Furthermore, several government papers between 2003 and 2007 recognise the problem. However, in my opinion none of the papers seem to provide any concrete contingency plans when and if, as expected, UKCS production falls to a third of its 1999 peak level sometime between 2020 and 2030.

Concurrently, Office for National Statistics (ONS) data after the second quarter of 2007 suggests the UK is fast becoming a net importer of crude for the first time in decades. Glory days have long, off-shore industry faces tough challenges, government finances are precarious and no one is in denial. In short, it’s a jolly rotten mess, albeit one which has been in the pipeline for some time.

© Gaurav Sharma 2010. Photo Courtesy © BP Plc, Andrew Rig, N. Sea