In Vienna yesterday, OPEC announced that it would be rolling over the landmark supply freeze that began in January 2017 by another nine months. Joining them will be the key non-OPEC members – principally Russia, but other major Central Asian producers – extending the 1.8 mmb/d cuts (1.2 mmb/d for OPEC and 600 kb/d for non-OPEC) through to March 2018. Ordinarily this would be cause for cheer. But instead, the markets reacted in dismay. Brent and WTI plunged by almost 5%, erasing all gains from the last week.
It is an overreaction, certainly, but also evident that the market was expecting a more drastic cut from OPEC to help bolster prices. The extension of the freeze is good, but had already been telegraphed weeks ago by rumblings out of Russia and Saudi Arabia. So that has already been factored into the price – one of the reasons why crude rose over the past week – and traders were looking for a little bit more good news, deeper cuts. When that did not materialise, the sell-off happened.
What’s going on? It took no rocket scientist to predict back in January that the OPEC freeze effect would be blunted by rising production elsewhere. Despite record compliance within the OPEC block – even Iran and Iraq toed the line – once the supply cuts took place, crude from elsewhere rushed to take its place. We saw crude from Alaska shipped to China for the first time, while Japan and South Korea offset Saudi Arabia’s cuts to their supply with crude from West Africa. Buoyed by price signals, American production from onshore shale deposits surged. Two weeks, the American oil rig count blasted past 700 active rigs, the highest in almost two years and is now marching towards 800. This rise in American production is estimated to have offset at least two-thirds of the lost OPEC output. And at current trends, it is estimated that some additional 900 kb/d of oil from the US will be added to global production. Nelson Martinez, Venezuela's oil minister said "In terms of the threat, we still don't know how much (U.S. shale) will be producing in the near future” after the recent OPEC talks. The Energy Minister if UAE, Suhail bin Mohammed al-Mazroui commented that he personally did not believe U.S. oil production would rise by 1 million bpd by next year. Representatives from US Shale who attended the Vienna meeting did not provide any specific guidance or projections either, keeping plans close to their chest.
So analysts were hoping that OPEC would match that with another cut. But getting OPEC to agree on additional cuts is like herding cats. The original November 2016 was landmark, and the high compliance another rare occurrence. But despite this, global inventories and supplies remain high. Part of this is artificial; in the six weeks between announcement and implementation, OPEC members pumped record volumes of crude, stockpiling them to sell during the freeze period. This is evident when you look at OPEC export statistics; they have fallen, but not nearly by as much as production. Extending the freeze may do the trick, to account for this lag. Saudi Arabia certainly seems to agree, pointing out that US crude supplies may have risen over the early period of the freeze, but had fallen for the past seven weeks, which helped convince some OPEC members of the delayed impact. The second half of the year is also a more strategic time to see the impact of the cuts, when the Middle East nations hoard crude to burn for summer power requirements and American/European drivers go out for summer, driving gasoline demand.
But still, there are issues. Libya and Nigeria were exempt for the original OPEC freeze. Their production has been rising following quelling of insurgent activity, while OPEC welcomed its 14th members, Equatorial Guinea, which replaces Indonesia that left last year. The wording of the OPEC announcement suggest that all three will not be expected to produce within the existing quotas, potentially blunting the impact further. Gone are the days when an OPEC freeze was a standalone solution.
Now is this merely a band-aid, kicking the ball further down the road to March 2018 where OPEC will once again have to ask themselves or do we need more cuts earlier? OPEC meets again in November to reconsider output its policy. Reuters reports that “while most in the group now appear to believe that shale has to be accommodated, there are still those in OPEC who think another fight is around the corner". Nigerian Oil Minister Emmanuel Kachikwu commented that “If we get to a point where we feel frustrated by a deliberate action of shale producers to just sabotage the market, OPEC will sit down again and look at what process it is we need to do”.
Something interesting to share?
Join NrgEdge and create your own NrgBuzz today
Headline crude prices for the week beginning 12 August 2019 – Brent: US$58/b; WTI: US$54/b
Headlines of the week
The momentum for crude prices abated in the second quarter of 2019, providing less cushion for the financial results of the world’s oil companies. But while still profitable, the less-than-ideal crude prices led to mixed results across the boards – exposing gaps and pressure points for individual firms masked by stronger prices in Q119.
In a preview of general performance in the industry, Total – traditionally the first of the supermajors to release its earnings – announced results that fell short of expectations. Net profits for the French firm fell to US$2.89 billion from US$3.55 billion, below analyst predictions. This was despite a 9% increase in oil and gas production – in particularly increases in LNG sales – and a softer 2.5% drop in revenue. Total also announced that it would be selling off US$5 billion in assets through 2020 to keep a lid on debt after agreeing to purchase Anadarko Petroleum’s African assets for US$8.8 billion through Occidental.
As with Total, weaker crude prices were the common factor in Q219 results in the industry, though the exact extent differed. Russia’s Gazprom posted higher revenue and higher net profits, while Norway’s Equinor reported falls in both revenue and net profits – leading it to slash investment plans for the year. American producer ConocoPhillips’ quarterly profits and revenue were flat year-on-year, while Italy’s Eni – which has seen major success in Africa – reported flat revenue but lower profits.
After several quarters of disappointing analysts, ExxonMobil managed to beat expectations in Q219 – recording better-than-expected net profits of US$3.1 billion. In comparison, Shell – which has outperformed ExxonMobil over the past few reporting periods – disappointed the market with net profits halving to US$3 billion from US$6 billion in Q218. The weak performance was attributed (once again) to lower crude prices, as well as lower refining margins. BP, however, managed to beat expectations with net profits of US$2.8 billion, on par with its performance in Q218. But the supermajor king of the quarter was Chevron, with net profits of US$4.3 billion from gains in Permian production, as well as the termination fee from Anadarko after the latter walked away from a buyout deal in favour of Occidental.
And then, there was a surprise. In a rare move, Saudi Aramco – long reputed to be the world’s largest and most profitable energy firm – published its earnings report for 1H19, which is its first ever. The results confirmed what the industry had long accepted as fact: net profit was US$46.9 billion. If split evenly, Aramco’s net profits would be more than the five supermajors combined in Q219. Interestingly, Aramco also divulged that it had paid out US$46.4 billion in dividends, or 99% of its net profit. US$20 billion of that dividend was paid to its principle shareholder – the government of Saudi Arabia – up from US$6 billion in 1H18, which makes for interesting reading to potential investors as Aramco makes a second push for an IPO. With Saudi Aramco CFO Khalid al-Dabbagh announcing that the company was ‘ready for the IPO’ during its first ever earnings call, this reporting paves the way to the behemoth opening up its shares to the public. But all the deep reservoirs in the world did not shield Aramco from market forces. As it led the way in adhering to the OPEC+ club’s current supply restrictions, weaker crude prices saw net profit fall by 11.5% from US$53 billion a year earlier.
So, it’s been a mixed bunch of results this quarter – which perhaps showcases the differences in operational strategies of the world’s oil and gas companies. There is no danger of financials heading into the red any time soon, but without a rising tide of crude prices, Q219 simply shows that though the challenges facing the industry are the same, their approaches to the solutions still differ.
Supermajor Financials: Q2 2019
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, CEDIGAZ, Global Trade Tracker
Australia is on track to surpass Qatar as the world’s largest liquefied natural gas (LNG) exporter, according to Australia’s Department of Industry, Innovation, and Science (DIIS). Australia already surpasses Qatar in LNG export capacity and exported more LNG than Qatar in November 2018 and April 2019. Within the next year, as Australia’s newly commissioned projects ramp up and operate at full capacity, EIA expects Australia to consistently export more LNG than Qatar.
Australia’s LNG export capacity increased from 2.6 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) in 2011 to more than 11.4 Bcf/d in 2019. Australia’s DIIS forecasts that Australian LNG exports will grow to 10.8 Bcf/d by 2020–21 once the recently commissioned Wheatstone, Ichthys, and Prelude floating LNG (FLNG) projects ramp up to full production. Prelude FLNG, a barge located offshore in northwestern Australia, was the last of the eight new LNG export projects that came online in Australia in 2012 through 2018 as part of a major LNG capacity buildout.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, based on International Group of Liquefied Natural Gas Importers (GIIGNL), trade press
Note: Project’s online date reflects shipment of the first LNG cargo. North West Shelf Trains 1–2 have been in operation since 1989, Train 3 since 1992, Train 4 since 2004, and Train 5 since 2008.
Starting in 2012, five LNG export projects were developed in northwestern Australia: onshore projects Pluto, Gorgon, Wheatstone, and Ichthys, and the offshore Prelude FLNG. The total LNG export capacity in northwestern Australia is now 8.1 Bcf/d. In eastern Australia, three LNG export projects were completed in 2015 and 2016 on Curtis Island in Queensland—Queensland Curtis, Gladstone, and Australia Pacific—with a combined nameplate capacity of 3.4 Bcf/d. All three projects in eastern Australia use natural gas from coalbed methane as a feedstock to produce LNG.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration
Most of Australia’s LNG is exported under long-term contracts to three countries: Japan, China, and South Korea. An increasing share of Australia’s LNG exports in recent years has been sent to China to serve its growing natural gas demand. The remaining volumes were almost entirely exported to other countries in Asia, with occasional small volumes exported to destinations outside of Asia.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, based on International Group of Liquefied Natural Gas Importers (GIIGNL)
For several years, Australia’s natural gas markets in eastern states have been experiencing natural gas shortages and increasing prices because coal-bed methane production at some LNG export facilities in Queensland has not been meeting LNG export commitments. During these shortfalls, project developers have been supplementing their own production with natural gas purchased from the domestic market. The Australian government implemented several initiatives to address domestic natural gas production shortages in eastern states.
Several private companies proposed to develop LNG import terminals in southeastern Australia. Of the five proposed LNG import projects, Port Kembla LNG (proposed import capacity of 0.3 Bcf/d) is in the most advanced stage, having secured the necessary siting permits and an offtake contract with Australian customers. If built, the Port Kembla project will use the floating storage and regasification unit (FSRU) Höegh Galleon starting in January 2021.