David Fuller and Eoin Treacy's Comment of the Day
Category - Energy

    Beyond Algiers

    Thanks to a subscriber for this report from Goldman Sachs which was issued on the 27th, ahead of the OPEC meeting. Here is a section: 

    Nonetheless, our 4Q16 oil supply-demand balance is weaker than previously expected given upside surprises to 3Q production and greater clarity on new project delivery into year-end. This leaves us expecting a global surplus of 400 kb/d in 4Q16 vs. a 300 kb/d draw previously. Importantly, this forecast only assumes a limited additional increase in Libya/Nigeria production of 90 kb/d vs. current estimated output. As a result, we are lowering our 4Q16 forecast to $43/bbl from $50/bbl previously. While a potential deal could support prices in the short term, we find that the potential for less disruptions and still relatively high net long speculative positioning leave risks skewed to the downside into year-end. Importantly, given the uncertainty on forward supply-demand balances, we reiterate our view that oil prices need to reflect near-term fundamentals – which are weaker – with a lower emphasis on the more uncertain longer-term fundamentals.

    Despite a weaker 4Q16, our 2017 outlook is unchanged with demand and supply projected to remain in balance. We expect demand growth to remain resilient while greater than previously expected production declines in US/Mexico/Venezuela/ Brazil/China are offset by greater visibility in the large 2017 new project ramp up in Canada/Russia/Kazakhstan/North Sea. While our price forecast remains unchanged at $52/bbl on average for next year with a 1H17 expected trading range of $45- $50/bbl, we continue to view low cost and disrupted supply as determining the path of an eventual price recovery with our forecasts conservative on both. As we wait for headlines from Algiers, it is worth pointing out that Iran, Iraq and Venezuela have each guided over the past month to a 250 kb/d rise in production next year.

    This section continues in the Subscriber's Area.

    Tesla Wins Massive Contract to Help Power the California Grid

    This article by Tom Randall for Bloomberg may be of interest to subscribers. Here is a section:

    Tesla Motors Inc. will supply 20 megawatts (80 megawatt-hours) of energy storage to Southern California Edison as part of a wider effort to prevent blackouts by replacing fossil-fuel electricity generation with lithium-ion batteries. Tesla's contribution is enough to power about 2,500 homes for a full day, the company said in a blog post on Thursday. But the real significance of the deal is the speed with which lithium-ion battery packs are being deployed. 

    "The storage is being procured in a record time frame," months instead of years, said Yayoi Sekine, a battery analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance. "It highlights the maturity of advanced technologies like energy storage to be contracted as a reliable resource in an emergency situation."

     

    This section continues in the Subscriber's Area.

    SunEdison's TerraForm Units Both Say They're Seeking Buyers

    This article by Tiffany Kary and Christopher Martin for Bloomberg may be of interest to subscribers. Here is a section:

    Multiple companies have expressed interest in TerraForm Power. Golden Concord Holdings Ltd., a Chinese clean-energy group, is planning to bid for SunEdison’s controlling stake in the company, people familiar with the plans said in August. That would challenge a joint offer from Canada’s biggest alternative- asset manager, Brookfield Asset Management Inc., and billionaire David Tepper’s Appaloosa Management LP hedge fund.

    TerraForm Power said in August that it was considering plans to set up an auction to sell itself, according to people familiar with the matter. SunEdison, which has been selling off assets in Chapter 11, said earlier this month that it had reached an agreement with the two non-bankrupt yieldcos over when and how they would bring claims as part of the bankruptcy.

    The process may not lead to a deal, according to Swami Venkataraman, an analyst at Moody’s Investors Service.

    If the bids “highly undervalue” TerraForm Power and its assets, “they may choose to operate as an independent company for some time,” Venkataraman said in an e-mail Monday.

    The case is SunEdison Inc., 16-10992, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan)  

     

    This section continues in the Subscriber's Area.

    Enbridge May Have Just Touched Off a 'Supermajor' Race for Pipes

    This article by Tim Loh for Bloomberg may be of interest to subscribers. Here is a section:

    With Enbridge Inc. planning a $28 billion takeover of Spectra Energy Corp., some investors say the industry’s in store for more deals as pressure mounts on the likes of Enterprise Products Partners LP and Kinder Morgan Inc. to follow suit. The biggest pipeline deal of the year foreshadows a feeding frenzy as those companies that survived the collapse in oil and natural gas prices step up the hunt for bargains. TransCanada Corp. got the ball rolling with the $10.2 billion purchase of Columbia Pipeline Group Inc. earlier in the year.

    “We’ve just come through a very tumultuous period,” said Libby Toudouze, a partner and portfolio manager at Cushing Asset Management in Dallas. “Being able to survive the trough in the energy cycle, especially one like this last one that was so long, means you have to be bigger, faster, stronger.”

    Enbridge’s deal would vault the Calgary-based company into North America’s largest energy pipeline and storage player. It could also mark the beginning of the "supermajor" era for the industry, according to Rebecca Followill, head of research at U.S. Capital Advisors, since it might “light a fire in the bellies” of the larger pipeline players, setting off a wave of consolidation that could accelerate through the end of 2016.

    “Enterprise Products Partners is the other big 800-pound gorilla out there,” Toudouze said. “This puts a little more pressure on them to try to do something in the space.”

     

    This section continues in the Subscriber's Area.

    Brent Oil Declines as Saudi-Russia Deal Falls Short of a Freeze

    This article by Mark Shenk for Bloomberg may be of interest to subscribers. Here is a section:

    "The failure of Russia and Saudi Arabia to take any steps to support the market is sending us lower," said Bob Yawger, director of the futures division at Mizuho Securities USA Inc. in New York. "The Saudi oil minister actually talked the market lower, which is going to cost his country billions." 

    Brent rose the most in three weeks on Friday after President Vladimir Putin said he’d like OPEC and Russia to agree to an output freeze, speaking before he traveled to China to meet Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Oil had rallied in August on speculation that members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and other producers would agree to cap output when they meet informally in Algiers later this month. A similar proposal was derailed in April over Saudi Arabia’s insistence that Iran participate. 

     

    This section continues in the Subscriber's Area.

    Musings from the Oil Patch August 24th 2016

    Thanks to a subscriber for this edition of Allen Brooks’ ever interesting report for PPHB which may be of interest. Here is a section:

    The Obama administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) released their Phase II fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions regulations for heavy-duty trucks. This group includes the largest pickup trucks sold as well as the traditional 18-wheelers on the highways. The standards are to be phased in between the 2021 and 2027 model years. The existing standards, which were designed for the 2014 through 2018 model years, will remain in place until the new standards take effect.

    The heavy-duty truck standards come as the government has just begun negotiations with auto manufacturers over the final fuel efficiency ratings for light-duty vehicles where the industry is lagging behind the targets in the standards. Heavy-duty trucks are the second largest and fastest growing segment of the U.S. transportation system measured by their emissions and energy use. They currently account for about 20% of carbon emissions, yet only account for about 5% of the vehicle population. 

    Carbon emissions from transportation is now the largest contributor to overall greenhouse gas emissions. Three charts showing annualized sector shares of total emissions confirm this conclusion. It should be noted that the country’s total carbon emissions peaked in January 2008 and have declined steadily since. On an absolute basis, over the past 8 1/3 years there are 1,410.1 million metric tons of less carbon emissions, or a decline of 16.2%. The transportation sector contributed about 9.1% of that decline. The significance is that transportation’s emissions dropped 6.4% over that time span while overall emissions declined 16.2%. The overall figure reflects the sharp decline from coal’s use due to the shale revolution and low natural gas prices along with static electricity consumption. At the same time, the decline and then flat trend in vehicle miles driven coupled with more fuel-efficient autos also helped reduce the transportation sector’s emissions. One can see these trends at work by looking at the sector shares in 1973, 2008 and 2016.

    The United States has done well in reducing its carbon emissions by 16.2% since the start of 2008. The weak economy and energy revolution have been primarily responsible. Going forward, the energy policies targeting the transportation sector, coupled with technological improvements in overall energy use, will become more important in driving down carbon emissions. Thus, the reason for the heavy-duty truck standards. They have support from the industry and truck manufacturers who see economic opportunities from more efficient engines. The Independent Truck Owners Association estimates the new standards will add $12,000-$14,000 to the cost of new tractors, which often cost upwards of a quarter of a million dollars, but they hope to recover those higher costs through improved fuel efficiency.

     

    Read entire article

    Gas Glut Upends Global Trade Flows as Buyers Find Leverage

    This article by Tsuyoshi Inajima for Bloomberg may be of interest to subscribers. Here is a section:

    Historically, LNG has been sold on long-term contracts that guaranteed buyers supply and helped producers finance liquefaction plants at a time when less of the product was shipped. Now, a gas glut is causing LNG importing countries to support renegotiating existing deals that can run 20 years or more while suppliers offer more flexible terms to lock up customers spoiled for choice.

    India already is encouraging importers to rework long-term accords to better align costs with spot market prices. Japan, the world’s largest LNG importer, may soon join them. That country’s Fair Trade Commission is in the process of probing resale restrictions in longer deals in an effort that could mean the renegotiation of more than $600 billion in contracts and boost the number of shorter-term agreements.

    “There will be 40 million to 50 million tons of homeless LNG by 2020, which can go anywhere or doesn’t have any fixed customers,” said Hiroki Sato, a senior executive vice president with Jera Co., a fuel buyer that plans to increase spot and short-term LNG deals. “Homeless LNG will provide a great opportunity to improve liquidity in Asian and global markets.”

     

    Read entire article

    Theresa May may become one of the most radical western leaders of the century

    Thanks to a subscriber for this article by Lawrence Solomon for the Financial Post which may be of interest to subscribers. Here is a section:

    Under May’s approach, shale gas royalties that would ordinarily go to governments and quasi-governmental agencies will instead be directed to the residents in the communities hosting the developments. The BBC estimates individual households will be receiving as much as £10,000 ($16,800) under May’s plan; other estimates arrive at higher sums – as much as £65,000 per household lucky enough to be near large shale gas deposits. May’s plan is now expected to wash away local opposition to fracking and unleash the development of Britain’s massive shale gas resources, estimated by the British Geological Survey at 1,300 trillion cubic feet of shale gas, equivalent to a 500-year supply at current gas consumption levels.

    This torrent of energy will benefit more than the local residents who until now saw only drawbacks to shale gas development in their community. The abundant supply of gas will lower energy costs throughout the country, relieving residential and business consumers alike and convincing British industries – which have been leaving Britain due to its high energy costs – to not only stay but also to expand their operations in the U.K.

    The May approach isn’t limited to shale –  it will apply to developments of all kinds, whether other resource developments, industrial complexes or airport expansions. Through what she calls her blueprint for development projects, May will be converting the development delayer known worldwide as NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) into PIMBY (Please In My Back Yard), a development accelerator. Residents will effectively become pro-development lobbyists whenever they determine a development personally benefits more than discomforts them.

     

    Read entire article

    Musings from the Oil Patch August 9th 2016

    Thanks to a subscriber for this edition of Allen Brooks’ ever interesting report for PPHB. Here is a section on the nuclear sector:

    Many of the nuclear power plants that were built in the 1960s and 1970s are now approaching the end of their commercial lives. The challenge is that nuclear power plants have the potential for very long operating lives, often on the order of 80 years, meaning that those older plants might have an additional 20 or 30 years of operating life remaining. The issue is that over their very long lives, these nuclear plants require extensive and costly periodic upgrades and repairs. In order to finance these modifications, the plants must generate significant profits during their operating lives. Low coal and now low natural gas prices have undercut the price of nuclear power, often making these plants the highest cost fossil fuel plants in utility company portfolios. These economic challenges ignore the fact that nuclear power plants have the highest operating ratios of all power plants, meaning that they produce power when people need it and that the power output is carbon-free. 

    And

    Low natural gas prices have seriously undercut the power prices for the nuclear power plants upstate, to the point that the owners – Exelon (EXC-NYSE) and Entergy – have threatened to shut down the plants. If that were to happen, New York State’s plan to have half its power coming from clean energy sources by 2030 would be doomed. In fact, the state has determined that if the nuclear power plants were shut, local utilities would have to rely on power from power plants fueled by dirty gas and coal. That would detract from the governor’s clean energy goal. That goal is why Gov. Cuomo has fought the use of hydraulic fracturing in the state to tap greater supplies of locally produced natural gas. Natural gas, although cheaper than the governor’s favored three sources of clean energy, would have released more greenhouse gases, but it is likely that the cost to consumers would have been less than what will happen in the future. Gov. Cuomo has championed a plan that was embraced by New York’s Public Service Commission and will force utility customers in the state to pay nearly $500 million a year in subsidies designed to keep the three upstate nuclear power plants operating. The Indian Point plant will not receive any subsidy funds because downstate power prices are sufficiently high that the plant can earn a profit.

    According to the Public Service Commission, starting in 2017, the subsidies will cost utility ratepayers in New York State $962 million over two years. However, the overall cost of the clean energy program to utility customers would be less than $2 a month, according to the Public Service Commission. The chairman of the commission said that state officials had calculated the social and economic benefits of the program, including the reduction of carbon emissions, lower prices for electricity and more jobs in the electricity generation business, and that these benefits would be greater than the cost of the subsidies. Environmental groups are fighting back, claiming that while they supported the governor’s plan to mandate the purchase of renewable energy by utilities, they viewed the magnitude of the subsidies that could amount to several billion dollars over the 12 years to 2030 as a mistake. Exelon, the owner of two of the three up-state nuclear power plants applauded the Public Service Commission announcement and pledged to invest $200 million in the plants next year if the plan is approved.

    Environmentalists who are serious about clean energy should pay attention to the comments of Michael Shellenberger, the president of nonprofit research and policy organization Environmental Progress. He said that nuclear power plants produce so much more energy than other forms that they can be more environmentally friendly than even renewables when all the mining, development and land disturbances are taken into account. As Mr. Shellenberger put it, “from the whole life-cycle analysis, it’s just better.” Of course, on the other side of the issue is someone such as Abraham Scarr, director of the Illinois Public Interest Research Group, a consumer advocate group, who said, “We should be building the 21st century energy system and not continuing to subsidize the energy system of the past.”

    Read entire article

    Saudi Arabia Cuts Oil Price to Asia as Iran Battle Heats Up

    This article by Sam Wilkin for Bloomberg may be of interest to subscribers. Here is a section:

    Iran has boosted crude production 25 percent this year and aims to reach an eight-year high for daily output of 4 million barrels by the end of the year. Customers in Asia account for the largest share of Iran’s new sales, according to shipping data. The nation dropped to fourth-biggest OPEC producer after international sanctions that restricted its supplies in 2012. It has since returned to third place after the sanctions were eased in January. Saudi Arabia has responded by boosting its crude and refined products exports.

    “The market share battle between them and Iran is back on in a big way,” John Kilduff, partner at Again Capital LLC in New York, said by phone on Sunday. “This is a throwdown challenge that I’m sure the Iranians will match.”

    Asian demand for crude is stalling as refineries from Singapore to China and South Korea are cutting operating rates amid a slump in margins and rising supply from state-owned giants, which can draw on large crude inventories that have built up over the past two years of low prices.

     

    Read entire article