Share This

Showing posts with label Fracking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fracking. Show all posts

Saturday, November 29, 2014

Oil enters a new era of low prices: Opec vs US shale, impacts, perils as Petronas cuts capex

Oil Enters New Era as OPEC Faces Off Against Shale; Who Blinks as Price Slides Toward $70?


OPEC’s decision to cede no ground to rival producers underscored the price war in the crude market and the challenge to U.S. shale drillers.

The 12-nation Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries kept its output target unchanged even after the steepest slump in oil prices since the global recession, prompting speculation it has abandoned its role as a swing producer. Yesterday’s decision in Vienna propelled futures to the lowest since 2010, a level that means some shale projects may lose money.

“We are entering a new era for oil prices, where the market itself will manage supply, no longer Saudi Arabia and OPEC,” said Mike Wittner, the head of oil research at Societe Generale SA in New York. “It’s huge. This is a signal that they’re throwing in the towel. The markets have changed for many years to come.”

The fracking boom has driven U.S. output to the highest in three decades, contributing to a global surplus that Venezuela yesterday estimated at 2 million barrels a day, more than the production of five OPEC members.

Demand for the group’s crude will fall every year until 2017 as U.S. supply expands, eroding its share of the global market to the lowest in more than a quarter century, according to the group’s own estimates.






Photographer: Eddie Seal/Bloomberg

Floor hands on the Orion Perseus drilling rig near Encinal in Webb County, Texas.

Benchmark Brent crude fell the most in more than three years after OPEC’s decision, sliding 6.7 percent to close at $72.58 a barrel. Futures for January settlement sank to $70.15 today, the lowest close since May 2010. Prices peaked this year at $115.71 in June.

Market Signals

“We will produce 30 million barrels a day for the next 6 months, and we will watch to see how the market behaves,” OPEC Secretary-General Abdalla El-Badri told reporters in Vienna after the meeting. “We are not sending any signals to anybody, we just try to have a fair price.”

OPEC pumped 30.56 million barrels a day in November and has exceeded its current output ceiling in all but four of the 34 months since it was implemented, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. OPEC’s own analysts estimate production was 30.25 million last month, according to a report Nov. 12. Members will abide by the 30 million barrel-a-day target, El-Badri said yesterday.

“OPEC has chosen to abdicate its role as a swing producer, leaving it to the market to decide what the oil price should be,” Harry Tchilinguirian, head of commodity markets at BNP Paribas SA in London, said yesterday by phone. “It wouldn’t be surprising if Brent starts testing $70.”

Conventional Producers

Conventional oil producers in OPEC can no longer dictate prices, United Arab Emirates Energy Minister Suhail Al-Mazrouei said in an interview in Vienna on Nov. 26. Newcomers to the market who have the highest costs and created the glut should be the ones to determine the price, he said.

“That is what OPEC is hoping for,” Carsten Fritsch, a commodity analyst at Commerzbank AG in Frankfurt, said in an e-mail. “It’s the question of who will blink first.”

OPEC may now be prepared to let prices fall to force some drillers with higher production costs to stop pumping, said Julian Lee, an oil strategist who writes for Bloomberg First Word and has worked in the industry for 25 years. That scenario would mark the start of a fourth oil-market era since the end of the 1970s, he said.

Fourth Era

Since the early 2000s, surging demand growth drove up prices allowing companies to apply new extraction techniques and develop deep-water and other costly oil. That ended an era that pervaded since the mid 1980s, which was characterized by low prices and OPEC regaining the market share that it had previously sacrificed in an attempt to preserve high prices, Lee said.

OPEC will face pressure too, with prices now below the level needed by nine member states to balance their budgets, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

“They haven’t taken collective action,” Richard Mallinson, an oil analyst at London-based Energy Aspects Ltd., said by phone. “That doesn’t mean they won’t do it in the next few months if prices stay low.”

U.S. Production

U.S. oil production has risen to 9.077 million barrels a day, the highest level in weekly data from the Energy Information Administration going back to 1983. Output will climb to 9.4 million next year, the most since 1972, it forecasts.

Middle Eastern exporters including Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq can break even on a cost basis at about $30 a barrel, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. They need more to balance their budgets. Some U.S. producers need more than $80, the consulting firm said in a report last month.

OPEC’s policy will spur a crash in the U.S. shale industry, Leonid Fedun, a vice president and board member at OAO Lukoil, Russia’s second-largest oil producer, said in an interview in London before the group’s decision.

“In 2016, when OPEC completes this objective of cleaning up the American marginal market, the oil price will start growing again,” said Fedun. “The shale boom is on a par with the dot-com boom. The strong players will remain, the weak ones will vanish.”

The share prices of U.S. oil producers including Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp. fell by at least 4 percent in New York trading today.

No Cut

Igor Sechin, the chief executive officer of OAO Rosneft, Russia’s largest oil producer, said after a meeting with Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and Mexico that his nation wouldn’t need to cut output even if prices fell below $60.

“The question is, what price level will be low enough to slow U.S. production growth?” Torbjoern Kjus, an analyst at DNB ASA, Norway’s biggest bank, said by phone. “What price will get U.S. growth to slow to 500,000 barrels a day from this year’s rate of 1.4 million barrels?”

Only about 4 percent of U.S. shale production needs $80 or more to be profitable, according to the Paris-based International Energy Agency. Most production in the Bakken formation, one of the main drivers of shale oil output, remains profitable at or below $42 a barrel, the IEA estimates. The agency expects U.S. supply to rise by almost 1 million barrels a day next year, with increasing flows to international markets.

OPEC has gone “cold turkey” on balancing the oil market, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. said in a report yesterday. Prices may have further to fall until there is evidence of U.S. production slowing, according to the bank. It said last month that oil markets were entering a “new oil order,” with OPEC retreating from its role as a swing producer.

“OPEC’s decision means it is over to you America,” Miswin Mahesh, a London-based commodities analyst at Barclays Plc, said in an e-mail. “This opens the window for the U.S. to be the new swing producer.”

Source: Bloomberg


The perils of cheaper oil

COME Dec 1, Malaysia will enter a new era long desired by the advocates of free market.

The pump price of petrol and diesel at the kiosk will be based on a managed float system depending on global oil prices. This will replace the current system where the Government fixes the price at the pump, a process that involves a huge amount of subsidy.

For years, the Government adopted the fixed price mechanism because it brought about an element of stability.

Unlike most other countries where the price at the pump varies from day to day, Malaysians are used to planning their expenditure based on a fixed price.

Right from a typical consumer to large companies, they all depend on oil or some form of energy to carry out their daily lives or operations. The fixed price has helped in their planning.

But the biggest disadvantage of having a fixed price for oil is that it involves a huge amount of subsidy, especially in an environment where oil prices go beyond what is anticipated by the Government.

Malaysia’s tale of subsidy woes is a subject matter that is often spoken about.

The subsidy bill is estimated at about 14% of the Government’s total operating expenditure of RM271.94bil for next year. The bulk of the RM38bil that has been set aside for next year is to ensure that the fuel cost remains stable.

There is a sales tax of 58 sen per litre on petrol sold at the pump. But the mechanism to collect the tax has not kicked in because the subsidy per litre is much higher than the sales tax.

Beginning July this year, the oil and gas dynamics changed with the United States becoming a large producer, thanks to the shale oil and gas.

The implications of the shale oil and gas on the global economy are huge. It has gone beyond the oil and gas industry. Oil-dependent nations such as Iran, Iraq and Venezuela are in trouble because a low oil price means less revenue and less money to fund their development programmes and, more importantly, to pay off their debts.

Venezuela is high on the list of countries that could seek some reprieve from bondholders because it needs oil price to be more than US$160 per barrel to balance its budget.

The Russian rouble has depreciated by more than 45% against the dollar and state-owned Rosneft has seen its profit almost collapse due to the depreciating currency.

Russia’s problems have exacerbated the slowdown in Germany, the strongest economy in Europe and this has in turn affected the entire eurozone recovery.

As for Asia, the best thing that the low oil prices have brought about is an era of low inflation and allowed some governments to carry out their reforms of energy policies. It has allowed governments to dismantle the subsidy system that has for long artificially kept the cost of production low.

Indonesia removed subsidies last week, a move that was cheered by foreign investors, because the system apparently only benefited a handful of powerful businessmen.

For Malaysia, when global oil prices are less than US$80 per barrel, which is the case now, there is no more subsidy for petrol and diesel sold at the pump. What kicks in is the sales tax of 58 sen per litre.

Come April 1 next year, the sales tax will be replaced with a goods and services tax of 6%. What this means is prices at the pump will be substantially lower than what they are today – provided global oil prices remain at less than US$80 per barrel.

Theoretically, this should translate into Malaysia having a lower cost of production due to cheaper energy prices. When oil prices went up over the past years, wages and all other costs followed suit. When the reverse happens, shouldn’t the cost of production come down?

Unfortunately that is not the case. The US is benefiting from the low energy cost era, at the expense of Asia. In fact, Asia as a whole may be losing out as a result of the steep fall in global energy prices.

Since the 1980s, Asian countries have been the destination for foreign manufacturers from the Europe and the US to relocate their operations because of the cheap cost of labour.

But manufacturers increasingly are paying more attention to destinations with low energy cost. Cheaper cost of energy is seen as an adequate substitute for low wages.

European manufacturers have turned to the US, where the cost of natural gas is one-third that of South-East Asia, to relocate their operations.

BASF, the large German chemical company, is planning to build a US$1.4bil plant in the Gulf Coast, apart from increasing its annual capital expenditure of US$20bil into that country.

An Austrian steel company, Voestalpine, is building a US$500mil facility in Texas to export iron for its steel plants. It will use natural gas to blast the furnace instead of coking coal in Europe.

Previously, these companies would make Asia their destination because of its low cost of production.

The flow of new manufacturing investments to the US is also assisted by the low rise in wages there compared with Asia. According to a report, between 2006 and 2011, Asian wages rose by 5.7% compared with only 0.4% in developed countries.

For decades the big gap in the wage rate increases between Europe, the US and countries such as Malaysia determined the flow of foreign investments. But now that is no longer the case.

Malaysia has to raise productivity or it will lose out on attracting new investments. Low wages alone will not do, especially now when prices of oil and gas resources are in a tailspin.

By M.SHANMUGAM The Star/Asia News Network

Petronas cuts capex

PETROLIAM Nasional Bhd’s (Petronas) announcement of its third-quarter results comes at a delicate time, considering that it is being watched by all and sundry.

Petronas president and CEO Tan Sri Shamsul Azhar Abbas

Amidst a scenario of a free-fall of oil prices and the politically-charged Umno General Assembly, it comes as no surprise that Tan Sri Shamsul Azhar Abbas (pic), the oil major’s president and chief executive, says he has to be “politically correct” in delivering his key message.

At a press conference yesterday, Shamsul also explained that Petronas had waited for the all-important Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec) meeting to conclude before addressing the media in Kuala Lumpur.

And rightly so

The 12-member Opec decided on Thursday not to lower its output target, leading to oil prices plunging by a further 8% on Friday, cumulating in an almost 40% dip since mid-June.

The Brent crude oil price is now at US$72.84 per barrel and some forecasters are predicting that oil prices could hit US$60 per barrel.

Petronas itself is now predicting that oil prices could settle at US$70-US$75 next year.

This is a far cry from the US$108 per barrel that Petronas had averaged last year and the US$106 per barrel, which is the average price of the Brent crude for the first nine months of this year.

Shamsul lays out the bare truth on what the falling oil prices would mean for Petronas, the oil and gas (O&G) services industry and the federal government’s coffers:

  • Capital expenditure (capex) on the O&G industry will be cut by between 15% and 20%
  • Petronas’ contribution to Government coffers in the form of dividends, taxes and oil royalty for next year will dive by 37% to RM43bil, assuming the Brent crude settles at US$75 per barrel;
  • Petronas will not proceed with contracts to award new marginal oil fields unless oil settles at levels above US$80 per barrel
  • Projects in Pengerang that have yet to receive the final investment decision (FID) will be affected by the cut-backs. Projects worth US$27bil that have received FID will not be affected, but Petronas does not have 100% equity in all the projects approved.

The capex crunch is expected to send chills down the spine of the already fragile O&G sector, with the stock prices of listed players already haemorrhaging in light of the free-fall of oil prices.


Apart from the 40-odd listed O&G companies, there are close to 4,000 other smaller companies that depend on Petronas for O&G service jobs.

“Nearly all depend on Petronas for jobs,” says an official in the O&G industry.

The capex cut by the national oil company is likely to have a negative impact on these companies and runs contrary to what research houses have been projecting.

Global slide

Several research houses have been stating that the Malaysian O&G industry is sheltered from the global slide in crude because Petronas will keep up with its spending of about RM60bil per year.

Taking a jibe at the forecasters, Shamsul says he has been warning of a shake-up in the industry in all his quarterly briefings.

“But nobody wants to listen to me. The worst part is, some of them have been listening to these so-called desk-top analysts who say this cannot happen because Petronas is always there to help them out … dream on.”

Shamsul says it is also reviewing the feasibility of some of its projects and could shelve projects that are no longer viable and for which Petronas has yet to make its FID.

“For the last nine months, we have been telling you guys about the likelihood that oil prices will drop. So the declining oil price is no surprise to us,” says Shamsul.

“But like every international oil company (IOC) out there, declining oil prices will impact us, and as such, we have to review our capex plans for next year onwards, which is also what the IOCs are doing. We have to assess the feasibility of projects,” Shamsul says.

He adds that at current oil price levels, marginal oil fields are no longer feasible for Petronas to get involved in, and warns that companies seeking to get involved in this business are “dreaming”.

When asked what was his message to the service providers seeking to do more work for Petronas, Shamsul said: “I’ve been singing this song for the last nine months, to watch out because things are not going to be that rosy.



“But not many seem to want to listen to me. So, I’ve stopped singing that song. But when they (service providers) get hurt, they will know,” he said.

Clearly, Shamsul is referring to how the sluggish oil price will force it to become more cost-effective in its projects, cancelling some, shelving others and negotiating down the terms of others.

Impact to federal government coffers

Meanwhile, Shamsul also explains that based on the assumption that oil prices average US$75 per barrel for 2015, the state oil firm would be paying the Government about RM43bil in dividends, royalty and taxes.

This would be 37% less than the RM68bil it plans to pay the Government this year.

“The lower dividend and other payout contributions is to ensure Petronas has enough money to replenish the reserves. If we are to maintain the payouts, it will have a significant impact on our growth plans,” says Shamsul.

As such, he says the Government should relook and rebalance its budget planning to adjust to the new level of oil prices.

He also reiterates that Petronas still needs to keep investing in new technology, in overseas projects and increasing its oil reserves in order to maintain its growth, considering that current production levels decline by some 10% every year, naturally.

At present, Petronas produces some two million barrels of oil equivalent per day.

“In five years, if we don’t replenish our production, our production will be down to half of what we have today,” he asserts.

By RISEN JAYASEELAN, NG BEI SHAN The Sunday Starbizweek Nov 29 2014  

Related stories:

Petronas Q3 net profit 12% down due to lower oil prices
The biggest adjustment

 Invest in oil, Saddam's lost oil, others gain - Crisis and opportunity 危机与机遇:
The entire story is covered right here...

Related posts: 

Malaysia's iconic Twin Towers are seen in the background of the Malaysian oil and gas company Petronas logo at a petrol station in Ku..

13 Nov 2012
Oil derricks like this one outside of Williston, North Dakota, are part of a shale oil boom that has helped put the United States on track to overtake Saudi Arabia as the world's leading oil producer. Photograph by Gregory Bull, ...

02 Dec 2012
The US has benefited from large domestic production gains, particularly in shale oil. This has been made possible by technological innovation in oil drilling such as 'hydraulic fracturing' (or 'fracking') as well as the opening of ...
16 Feb 2013
But the US shale bonanza has been more than three decades in the making, and draws on the experience and infrastructure of a well-established oil and gas industry. North America has thousands of kilometres of gas ...

Saturday, February 16, 2013

China has ways to tap shale gas riches



CHINA'S aspiration for a US-style gas bonanza that will reduce its dependence on imported energy must confront three key scarcities -- water, shale gas expertise and pipelines -- before it can become a reality. 
 
As well, Chinese authorities must manage the social and environmental frictions likely to arise when drilling companies seek access to farm land and use hydraulic fracturing, or fracking -- the technique that is an integral part of shale gas exploitation.



Fracking involves injecting a mix of sand, water and chemicals into rocks deep beneath the surface to crack them open and get access to the shale.

In the US, large-scale shale gas extraction in the past five years has revolutionised its energy, transport and manufacturing landscape to the point where the US is likely to become an exporter of liquefied national gas by 2015.

Last year, for example, the US produced 220 billion cubic metres of shale gas, or more than a third of total natural gas output. Over the next two decades, shale's share is likely to rise to 50 per cent. The US Energy Information Administration estimates the country's recoverable shale gas reserves at about 14 trillion cubic metres.

Now China, with potential shale gas reserves of 25 trillion cubic metres in areas such as Sichuan province and the Tarim Basin in Xinjiang, wants to emulate the US experience, setting a goal in its latest State Council energy white paper of extracting 6.5 billion cubic metres of gas a year by 2015, and as much as 100 billion cubic metres a year by 2020.

But the US shale bonanza has been more than three decades in the making, and draws on the experience and infrastructure of a well-established oil and gas industry.

North America has thousands of kilometres of gas pipelines and receiving points, its geological survey records are extensive, its exploration companies have pioneered the key techniques of horizontal drilling and fracking, its rig crews are the best in the business and have good access to water for fracking, and there is a strong service sector covering finance, distribution, processing and marketing to support the industry. Even so, the industry has had to contend with vigorous opposition from environmental and farming groups concerned over water and land usage.

For China to achieve anything like the US success over the next decade, it will have to address these key issues. Much of its northern half is water-stressed already, while in the south, shale exploration will have to compete for water now used to grow food.

Certainly, China has the scale to be a big shale player, and state-controlled entities such as CNPC (whose listed arm is PetroChina), CNOOC, China Petrochemical Corporation (Sinopec) and Sinochem are keen to deploy domestically the shale skills that they hope to pick up from recent investments in North American shale plays and in joint ventures with oil majors ExxonMobil, Shell, ConocoPhillips, BP and Total within China.

While these technological skills are crucial, each shale gas field is unique, meaning there is no "one size fits all". That is why many of the North American fields were developed initially by smaller, independent oil and gas companies such as Devon Energy, Anadarko Petroleum and Chesapeake Energy.

When China held its first round of bidding for shale gas blocks in 2010, only six state-owned energy companies were invited to take part, and the blocks were limited to southern China, where water is more easily available than in the arid north and northwest of the country.

The second round of bidding on October 25 last year drew a much bigger field and was open to non-state players. A total of 152 bids from 83 companies were received for the 20 blocks, covering about 20,000sq km in Chongqing municipality and the provinces of Guizhou, Hubei, Hunan, Jiangxi, Zhejiang, Ahui and Henan.

Sinopec, one of the first-round invitees, began drilling China's first shale gas production wells in Sichuan province near Chongqing in June last year. Sichuan is one of China's biggest grain growing areas, and some farmers there are wary of the impact shale exploration will have on their land and water.

China is already the world's biggest energy consumer and uses a prodigious amount of domestic and imported coal and oil to run many of its power stations. It also has massive capabilities in wind, solar, hydro and nuclear power.

But it is natural gas that offers the potential to really change China's energy equation, particularly in the form of its domestic shale resources, coal-seam gas and coal-to-gas conversion. For now, much of China's gas is imported via pipeline from Central Asia or as LNG from the Middle East, Southeast Asia and Australia.

In its latest World Energy Outlook released last month, the International Energy Agency says it expects unconventional gas -- which covers shale and CSG -- to account for nearly half of the increase in global gas production out to 2035, with most of the increase coming from China, the US and Australia.

But the IEA also warns that the unconventional gas business is "still in its formative years" and that there is uncertainty in many countries about the extent and quality of the resource base, and about the environmental impact of producing this gas.

The IEA's outlook supports the view of British industry analyst Wood Mackenzie that China's shale gas development, while potentially substantial, will be a long-term story. At the World Gas Conference in Kuala Lumpur, Wood Mackenzie's head of Asia-Pacific gas research, Gavin Thompson, said the focus should be on China's gas import options to meet rapidly increasing demand. This, he said, presented opportunities for pipe suppliers in Central Asia and Russia, along with LNG suppliers.

"We remain positive that China's domestic shale gas will be a major boost to supply growth, producing approximately 150 billion cubic metres (bcm) per annum by 2030, largely accounted for by the Sichuan and Tarim basin production.

"However, shale gas growth will only accelerate after 2020, staying under 30bcm before then. Meanwhile, China's gas demand will increase from just over 150bcm to more than 600bcm from now to 2030."

Wood Mackenzie believed that both coal-to-gas projects and coal-bed methane (CBM) would each deliver more output to the Chinese gas market than shale right up to 2024.

"By 2020, we see CTG and CBM producing 27bcm and 17bcm respectively against only approximately 11bcm of shale production. These sectors are therefore far more significant through the medium-term, but are not receiving the appropriate level of attention outside of China."

Thompson said there was a need for a much deeper geological understanding of China's shale potential and the know-how to exploit it. As well, land access issues, environmental challenges, a lack of supply chain services and infrastructure, and decisions on the best allocation of capital all cloud China shale gas outlook.

China's energy white paper says the government will "actively promote" the development and use of unconventional oil and gas resources by speeding up the exploration of coal-bed gas and selecting favourable exploration target areas for shale.

By Geoff Hiscock is the author of Earth Wars: The Battle for Global Resources, published by John Wiley & Sons

Related posts:

Sunday, December 2, 2012

A strategic game-changer, the Crude dynamics a new economic 'golden age' for USA likely?

A SEISMIC shift is under way in global affairs. At its most potent, this dynamic could conceivably upset the accepted wisdom of where the ‘centre of gravity’ of the world economy will lie two decades from now.


A recent report from the Paris-based International Energy Agency (IEA) predicts that by as early as 2020, the US could surpass Saudi Arabia as the world’s largest oil producer — and achieve complete energy independence by 2030.

The IEA forecasts that the US will increase its production to 23 million barrels a day (MMbd) in 10 years from total available supplies of around 10.3 MMbd currently. Oil and natural gas production in the US is increasing at its fastest pace in 50 years.

The IEA’s outlook on world energy has underscored what recent data have been pointing to: a perceptible decline in the dependence on energy imports for the US.

The US, currently the world’s largest oil consumer using 18.8 MMbd (roughly 22 per cent of global production), imported about 45 per cent of its petroleum (crude as well as products) in 2011. After peaking in 2005, the share of imports in US energy consumption has declined a full 10 percentage points (from over 55 to 45 per cent currently).

Contrary to popular perception, 52 per cent of these imports were sourced from the western hemisphere, with Canada, Venezuela and Mexico supplying 29 per cent, 11 per cent and eight per cent of the US petroleum needs.

Saudi Arabia, the second-largest supplier of oil to the US after Canada, accounted for 14 per cent of US petroleum imports in 2011. The wider Middle East/Persian Gulf accounted for 22 per cent of US petroleum imports in 2011, down by around 25 per cent since 2005.


The US has benefited from large domestic production gains, particularly in shale oil.

This has been made possible by technological innovation in oil drilling such as ‘hydraulic fracturing’ (or ‘fracking’) as well as the opening of hitherto off-limit geologically rich production areas such as Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico (drilling activity in the latter was temporarily halted by President Obama following the oil spill caused from BP’s rig).

What will this trend mean for the global economy? The virtual elimination of the US’s dependence on imported energy in the next one or two decades is being dubbed as a “strategic game-changer”. (The Wall Street Journal carried a piece with the headline ‘Saudi America’ in its Nov 12, 2012 Asian edition.)

According to influential commentators like Niall Ferguson, the celebrated financial historian and Harvard University professor, the abundant availability of indigenous energy could spark a new economic “golden age” for the US.

Uninterrupted supplies of relatively cheaper, and less price-volatile, fossil fuel could galvanise the US manufacturing sector into creating millions of new jobs.

With its productivity advantages, coupled with a gradual convergence of manufacturing wages between developed and fast-growing developing economies, the US could also start becoming attractive once again as a global manufacturing hub, according to Mr Ferguson.

Hence, rather than write off the US economy as a spent force, commentators such as Mr Ferguson believe quite the opposite: that the US will continue to economically rival, and possibly dominate, competitors such as China and India well into the supposedly ‘Asian’ century.

The replacement of imported fuel and the infusion of domestic energy in the US economy will have implications for the US dollar as well, according to this line of reasoning.

According to forecasts by Deutsche Bank, reduced energy dependence would cause the US current account deficit to fall 30 per cent by 2016.

By virtue of these developments, the value of the greenback will appreciate, which will provide an added impetus to declining world oil prices.

The possible reduction of geopolitical risk in global energy markets as a result of America’s energy ‘independence’ resulting in a weaning away from the volatile Middle East, could trigger a sharp reversal in the international oil price. (This scenario assumes, however, that Saudi oil production has not ‘peaked’ between now and then).

By some expert reckoning, the geopolitical risk in current oil prices ranges anywhere from $20 to $30 a barrel.

Such a large reduction in the oil price, should it occur, will exact a heavy toll on the budgets and economies of Middle Eastern oil producers.

Given their demographics, most of these countries will need to continue ‘pump-priming’ their economies for the next decade at least to create jobs and provide social safety nets.

The potential loss of oil income could be a devastating blow to their economies — and for millions of migrant workers who send billions of dollars in remittances to their respective countries.

The other major implication of these potential developments in global energy markets would be on food prices. If world oil prices do indeed trend down for the long run, it will remove the economic incentive for the push into bio-fuels.

This in turn will be welcome news for the world’s poor, as both the stopping of food diversion for bio-fuels combined with lower transport costs will make a significant dent in food prices.

However, if the US economy does not decline into irrelevance by 2030, and is in fact rejuvenated, the global competition for resources will be even more intense — pressuring not only the environment but also prices for non-oil, non-food commodities.

A fascinating global energy landscape is unfolding. Whatever final shape it takes, our continued dependence on energy from fossil fuels will ensure that oil will continue to play a major role in our lives for the foreseeable future.- Dawn/Asia News Network

 By Sakib Sherani
The writer is a former economic adviser to government, and currently heads a macroeconomic consultancy based in Islamabad.

Related posts:
U.S. to Overtake Saudi Arabia, Russia as World's Top Energy Producer.
South-East Asia in the frontline of US containing China rise?

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

U.S. to Overtake Saudi Arabia, Russia as World's Top Energy Producer

Oil derricks like this one outside of Williston, North Dakota, are part of a shale oil boom that has helped put the United States on track to overtake Saudi Arabia as the world's leading oil producer.
Photograph by Gregory Bull, AP

In an indication how “fracking” is reshaping the global energy picture, the International Energy Agency today projected that the United States will overtake Saudi Arabia as the world’s largest oil producer by 2017.

And within just three years, the United States will unseat Russia as the largest producer of natural gas.

Both results would have been unthinkable even few short years ago, but the future geography of supply has shifted dramatically due to what IEA calls America’s “energy renaissance.” To credit are the sometimes controversial technologies like hydraulic fracturing of shale and deepwater production that have enabled the industry to tap into abundant, unconventional sources of oil and gas. New energy frontiers have opened in North Dakota and Pennsylvania. (Related: “ Natural Gas Stirs Hope and Fear in Pennsylvania”)

The bottom line for the United States is fulfillment of a goal that eluded seven presidents over nearly four decades: energy independence. The U.S., which imports 20 percent of its total energy now, will be come largely self-sufficient by 2035, concluded the IEA’s annual World Energy Outlook, often viewed as the Bible of the industry. Add in Canada, which has its own unconventional production boom in Alberta’s oil sands, and the continent is set to be a net oil exporter by 2030.

“North America is at the forefront of a sweeping transformation in oil and gas production that will affect all regions of the world,” said Maria van der Hoeven, executive director of the IEA, a Paris-based organization charged with maintaining global energy security.  (Related Interactive: Breaking Fuel From Rock)

Catching Saudi Arabia

U.S. imports of oil are on track to fall from 10 million to 4 million barrels per day, Fatih Birol, IEA’s chief economist and the main author of the report, told a London news conference. However, he added, increased domestic production, including biofuel, only accounts for 55 percent of huge reduction in imported oil. The other 45 percent is due to the ramping up of improving federal fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks.

According to IEA, by 2020, America’s oil production will reach 11.1 million barrels per day, up from 8.1 million in 2011. Saudi Arabia’s production, meanwhile, will decline from 11.1 million to 10.6 million barrels per day. The renewed U.S. reign at the top of world oil producers may be short-lived. By 2025, IEA projects, U.S. production will slip back to 10.9 million barrels per day, but Saudi Arabia’s will have increased only to 10.8 million barrels per day.

The picture on natural gas is even more dramatic. By 2015, the U.S. should be producing 679 billion cubic meters (bcm) of natural gas, up from 604 bcm in 2010. That will be enough to edge out Russia, where production will be increasing too, but projected only to reach 675 bcm in three years. By 2020, the spread between the two nations will widen, with U.S. production of 747 bcm, well ahead of Russia’s forecast 704 bcm. The U.S. should become a net gas exporter by 2020, the report adds.

No Country an Island

“The global energy landscape is changing rapidly, recasting the roles of countries and fuels,” van der Hoeven said. What is happening in North America will certainly affect other countries worldwide, she added. “No country is an energy island.” For example, as America’s need for imported oil declines, Asia is rapidly taking up the slack. The report estimates that by 2035, fully 90 percent of Middle East oil exports will head for Asia. That’s a shift that will require Asian countries to put more resources toward keeping strategic shipping routes of oil secure. “There is a major new trade axis building between the Middle East and Asia,” Birol said.

Indeed, Iraq alone will see its exports to Asia jump from 50 percent of output to 80 percent. (Related: “Iraq Poised to Lead World Oil Supply Growth, but Obstacles Loom”) The IEA reiterated its forecast last month that Iraq’s production of oil would jump from 3 million to 8 million barrels per day by 2035, helping the war-torn country leapfrog over Russia to become the world’s second largest exporter of oil, after Saudi Arabia.

Another effect of the altered energy landscape are large variances in natural gas prices. A few years ago, global prices of natural gas changed little from region to region. But natural gas prices in Europe are now five times higher than in the U.S., and Asia’s are eight times greater. However, van der Hoeven said, as more gas becomes available globally for exports, that should push prices down outside the United States, too.

Demand Still Growing

The overall demand for energy worldwide should grow by a third between now and 2035, the report said, from 12,380 million tons of oil equivalent (Mtoe) in 2010 to 16,730 Mtoe in 2035, an increase driven by the rise in living standards in China, India and the Middle East. The share of demand for energy in the developing world will jump from 55 percent in 2010 to 65 percent in 2035, powered by China, which will see its demand for energy increase by 60percent over that period. (Related: “Pictures: A Rare Look Inside China’s Energy Machine”)

Demand for energy in the mostly wealthy developed countries that make up the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) will essentially be flat, IEA projects. Use of coal and oil to meet that demand should drop to just 42 percent from 57 percent today.

The IEA chided world governments for failing to do enough to improve energy efficiency, saying that two-third of the economic potential to improve efficiency is not being realized. If those efficiencies were tapped, it said, total energy demand between now and 2035 could be halved, without any decline in living standards.

Globally, demand for fossil fuels will continue to grow in absolute terms through 2035, but together their total share of the energy mix should drop from 81 percent to 75 percent. Worldwide demand for oil is forecast to grow to 99.7 million barrels per day in 2035, up from 87.4 million last year, with China alone accounting for half that amount.

By 2035, the IEA said, the price of oil is expected to be $125 per barrel in inflation-adjusted terms, though the nominal price is enough to induce sticker shock in 2012: $215.

Global natural gas demand should increase by 50 percent to 5 trillion cubic meters (tcm) in 2035. Within OECD countries, gas is overtaking coal as the fuel of choice for generating electricity. In the U.S., for instance, the amount of electricity generated by coal has fallen from 50 percent to 32 percent in just a few years. Although use of coal will continue to fall in the U.S., Europe and Japan, overall demand for coal should still grow by 21 percent through 2035, because of increasing use in China and India.

particularly Germany and Japan, are cutting back on nuclear power in the wake of the 2011 accident at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, nuclear power is still expected to account for 12 percent of global electricity generation by 2035, thanks to increased use of nuclear power in China, Korea and Russia.

Electric generation from renewables should grow from 20 percent in 2010 to 31 percent by 2035, IEA projects. Within OECD countries, most of that growth comes from increased wind energy production, while in non-OECD countries, hydro power is the main source of clean energy. Growth in demand for renewables, including biofuels, are still largely driven by government subsidies, the report said. Last year, those subsidies totaled $88 billion, a 24 percent increase from 2010.

Overall demand for electricity will skyrocket by more than 70 percent by 2035, reaching 32,000 Terrawatt hours (TWh), with almost all that increase coming from non-OECD countries, with China and India alone accounting for half of it. Prices for electricity overall should increase 15 percent by 2035, but some regions will pay much more than others. In the U.S., for instance, average household electricity prices in 2035 should be around 14 cents per kilowatt hours (kWh), while Europe’s will average closer to 25 cents per kWh. That big difference in the cost of electricity will likely give American industry a competitive advantage over European rivals, Birol said.

Amid its forecast for rising energy demand and production, the report, unsurprisingly, does not paint an optimistic picture of efforts to contain greenhouse gas emissions. IEA projects that energy-related carbon dioxide emissions will rise from an estimated 31.2 gigatonnes (Gt) last year to 37 Gt in 2035, which could cause a long-term average temperature increase of 3.6 degrees Celsius. In a nonbinding accord signed in 2009 in Copenhagen, nations agreed that the scientific view was that the temperature rise should be limited to 2 degrees Celsius, but efforts to forge a global agreement to cut fossil fuel emissions have been unsuccessful. (Related: “IEA Outlook: Time Running Out on Climate Change

This story is part of a
special series that explores energy issues. For more, visit The Great Energy Challenge.

Sources: Thomas K. Grose in London  For National Geographic News

Related post:
South-East Asia in the frontline of US containing China rise?