In 2005, the tiny Persian Gulf nation of Qatar declared a moratorium on production at its North Field. Natural gas from this giant field, part of a larger reservoir that straddles Qatari and Iranian borders, had helped Qatar ramp up production, eight years after it exported its first cargo of LNG to Spain in 1997. The halt came as a bit of a surprise back then, seen as limiting, but in hindsight was a great move. Existing projects with partners ExxonMobil, Shell and Total were more than enough to vault Qatar to become the largest LNG exporter in the world, and there were technically challenging projects like the Pearl and Oryx Gas-to-Liquids (GTL) refineries that demanded attention.
The logic, then, was to prevent overexploitation of the precious North Field, particularly since it was shared with Iran, where it is known as South Pars. Detailed studies on the structure of the field have estimated that, at current production rates, Qatar still has about 135 years of gas reserves underground. With most of the giant Qatari projects now complete, the country can afford to exploit a little more. So 12 years later, the moratorium has been lifted.
Qatar Petroleum (QP), the state oil firm, intends new development to be confined to the southernmost part of the North Field, running almost onshore, contributing a 10% increase – or 2 bcf/d or 400,000 barrels of oil equivalent in national production. It comes after QP merged its two gas subsidiaries – RasGas and Qatargas – into a single entity called Qatargas in December 2016, streamlining the business structure of its gas operations. Together with partners ExxonMobil, Total, Shell and ConocoPhillips, the new Qatargas will operate all Qatari LNG production, while the newly-established Ocean LNG will manage the international marketing of all Qatari LNG.
Put all of those announcements together and the picture is clear; Qatar is moving aggressively to retain its crown as the world’s top LNG exporter, fending off Australia, the USA and Russia as they ramp up their respective output. The flurry of LNG production has resulted in global installed LNG capacity of over 300 million tonnes a year, while only around 268 million tonnes of LNG were traded in 2016, Thomson Reuters data shows. That has helped pull down Asian spot LNG prices LNG-AS by more than 70 percent from their 2014 peaks to $5.65 per million British thermal units (mmBtu).
With LNG prices already waning due to the existing and growing glut, what good will it do for Qatar to add more to the mix?
Qatar's decision to lift the moratorium is indicative that the country will not just do nothing while other large producers pick-up more customers in a growing market. For one thing, Qatari costs are low. Qatari LNG is already one of the cheapest to produce in the world, and any new North Field output can be tapped back into infrastructure already in place – allowing Qatar to better weather low LNG prices than say Australia, where Chevron has had to deal with massive ramp-ups in costs for the Gorgon and Wheatstone.
Secondly, the QP announcement pointedly did not mention whether the new gas will become LNG. Which means Qatargas is looking at other options. More GTL and Gas-to-Petrochemical projects, perhaps? Or perhaps feeding the natural gas demand of its Gulf neighbours? The UAE, Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are short on natural gas, so a trans-Arabian Peninsula pipeline might be just what is needed. QP Chief Executive Saad al-Kaabi told reporters at Qatar Petroleum's headquarters in Doha, "What we are doing today is something completely new and we will in future of course share information on this with them (Iran)."
The lifting of the North Field moratorium also comes just in time since Qatar’s domestic oil and gas production is plateauing, kicking off the next phase of Qatari growth. And when that next phase begins to end, well, Qatar still has a whole lot more of the North Field to tap into. Saad al-Kaabi continued to say that "For oil there are people who see peak demand in 2030, others in 2042, but for gas, demand is always growing."
Something interesting to share?
Join NrgEdge and create your own NrgBuzz today
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, based on Bloomberg L.P. data
Note: All prices except West Texas Intermediate (Cushing) are spot prices.
The New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) front-month futures contract for West Texas Intermediate (WTI), the most heavily used crude oil price benchmark in North America, saw its largest and swiftest decline ever on April 20, 2020, dropping as low as -$40.32 per barrel (b) during intraday trading before closing at -$37.63/b. Prices have since recovered, and even though the market event proved short-lived, the incident is useful for highlighting the interconnectedness of the wider North American crude oil market.
Changes in the NYMEX WTI price can affect other price markers across North America because of physical market linkages such as pipelines—as with the WTI Midland price—or because a specific price is based on a formula—as with the Maya crude oil price. This interconnectedness led other North American crude oil spot price markers to also fall below zero on April 20, including WTI Midland, Mars, West Texas Sour (WTS), and Bakken Clearbrook. However, the usefulness of the NYMEX WTI to crude oil market participants as a reference price is limited by several factors.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration
First, NYMEX WTI is geographically specific because it is physically redeemed (or settled) at storage facilities located in Cushing, Oklahoma, and so it is influenced by events that may not reflect the wider market. The April 20 WTI price decline was driven in part by a local deficit of uncommitted crude oil storage capacity in Cushing. Similarly, while the price of the Bakken Guernsey marker declined to -$38.63/b, the price of Louisiana Light Sweet—a chemically comparable crude oil—decreased to $13.37/b.
Second, NYMEX WTI is chemically specific, meaning to be graded as WTI by NYMEX, a crude oil must fall within the acceptable ranges of 12 different physical characteristics such as density, sulfur content, acidity, and purity. NYMEX WTI can therefore be unsuitable as a price for crude oils with characteristics outside these specific ranges.
Finally, NYMEX WTI is time specific. As a futures contract, the price of a NYMEX WTI contract is the price to deliver 1,000 barrels of crude oil within a specific month in the future (typically at least 10 days). The last day of trading for the May 2020 contract, for instance, was April 21, with physical delivery occurring between May 1 and May 31. Some market participants, however, may prefer more immediate delivery than a NYMEX WTI futures contract provides. Consequently, these market participants will instead turn to shorter-term spot price alternatives.
Taken together, these attributes help to explain the variety of prices used in the North American crude oil market. These markers price most of the crude oils commonly used by U.S. buyers and cover a wide geographic area.
Principal contributor: Jesse Barnett
A month ago, the world witnessed something never thought possible – negative oil prices. A perfect storm of events – the Covid-19 lockdowns, the resulting effect on demand, an ongoing oil supply glut, a worrying shortage of storage space and (crucially) the expiry of the NYMEX WTI benchmark contract for May, resulted in US crude oil prices falling as low as -US$37/b. Dragging other North American crude markers like Louisiana Light and Western Canadian Select along with it, the unique situation meant that crude sellers were paying buyers to take the crude off their hands before the May contract expired, or risk being stuck with crude and nowhere to store it. This was seen as an emblem of the dire circumstances the oil industry was in, and although prices did recover to a more normal US$10-15/b level after the benchmark contract switched over to June, there was immense worry that the situation would repeat itself.
Thankfully, it has not.
On May 19, trade in the NYMEX WTI contract for June delivery was retired and ticked over into a new benchmark for July delivery. Instead of a repeat of the meltdown, the WTI contract rose by US$1.53 to reach US$33.49/b, closing the gap with Brent that traded at US$35.75b. In the space of a month, US crude prices essentially swung up by US$70/b. What happened?
The first reason is that the market has learnt its lesson. The meltdown in April came because of an overleveraged market tempted by low crude oil prices in hope of selling those cargoes on later at a profit. That sort of strategic trading works fine in a normal situation, but against an abnormal situation of rapidly-shrinking storage space saw contract holders hold out until the last minute then frantically dumping their contracts to avoid having to take physical delivery. Bruised by this – and probably embarrassed as well – it seems the market has taken precautions to avoid a recurrence. Settling contracts early was one mechanism. Funds and institutions have also reduced their positions, diminishing the amount of contracts that need to be settled. The structural bottleneck that precipitated the crash was largely eliminated.
The second is that the US oil complex has adjusted itself quickly. Some 2 mmb/d of crude production has been (temporarily) idled, reducing supply. The gradual removal of lockdowns in some US states, despite medical advisories, has also recovered some demand. This week, crude draws in Cushing, Oklahoma rose for the second consecutive week, reaching a record figure of 5.6 million barrels. That increase in demand and the parallel easing of constrained storage space meant that last month’s panic was not repeated. The situation is also similar worldwide. With China now almost at full capacity again and lockdowns gradually removed in other parts of the world, the global crude marker Brent also rose to a 2-month high. The new OPEC+ supply deal seems to be working, especially with Saudi Arabia making an additional voluntary cut of 1 mmb/d. The oil world is now moving rapidly towards a new normal.
How long will this last? Assuming that the Covid-19 pandemic is contained by Q3 2020, then oil prices could conceivably return to their previous support level of US$50/b. That is a big assumption, however. The Covid-19 situation is still fragile, with major risks of additional waves. In China and South Korea, where the pandemic had largely been contained, recent detection of isolated new clusters prompted strict localised lockdowns. There is also worry that the US is jumping the gun in easing restrictions. In Russia and Brazil – countries where the advice to enforce strict lockdowns was ignored as early warning signs crept in – the number of cases and deaths is still rising rapidly. Brazil is a particular worry, as President Jair Bolosnaro is a Covid-19 skeptic and is still encouraging normal behaviour in spite of the accelerating health crisis there. On the flip side, crude output may not respond to the increase in demand as easily, as many clusters of Covid-19 outbreaks have been detected in key crude producing facilities worldwide. Despite this, some US shale producers have already restarted their rigs, spurred on by a need to service their high levels of debt. US pipeline giant Energy Transfer LP has already reported that many drillers in the Permian have resumed production, citing prices in the high-US$20/b level as sufficient to cover its costs.
The recovery is ongoing. But what is likely to happen is an erratic recovery, with intermittent bouts of mini-booms and mini-busts. Consultancy IHS Markit Energy Advisory envisions a choppy recovery with ‘stop-and-go rallies’ over 2020 – particularly in the winter flu season – heading towards a normalisation only in 2021. It predicts that the market will only recover to pre-Covid 19 levels in the second half of 2021, and a smooth path towards that only after a vaccine is developed and made available, which will be late 2020 at the earliest. The oil market has moved from certain doom to cautious optimism in the space of a month. But it will take far longer for the entire industry to regain its verve without any caveats.
In this time of COVID-19, we have had to relook at the way we approach workplace learning. We understand that businesses can’t afford to push the pause button on capability building, as employee safety comes in first and mistakes can be very costly. That’s why we have put together a series of Virtual Instructor Led Training or VILT to ensure that there is no disruption to your workplace learning and progression.
Find courses available for Virtual Instructor Led Training through latest video conferencing technology.