NrgEdge Editor

Sharing content and articles for users
Last Updated: March 6, 2018
1 view
Business Trends
image

Overview


South Sudan gained independence from Sudan in July 2011. Although most of the oil production capacity in those two countries is in South Sudan, the country is landlocked and remains dependent on Sudan’s export pipelines and port. Civil unrest, disagreements over oil revenue sharing, and border disputes have curtailed oil production and investment in both countries.


South Sudan was officially recognized as an independent nation state in July 2011 following a referendum held in January 2011, when the South Sudanese voted overwhelmingly in favor of secession. Since the split, Sudan and South Sudan’s oil production has declined because of continued domestic political instability and conflict between the two countries.


The unified Sudan began producing oil in 1999, and as a result, the country tripled its per capita income within a decade.1 However, the secession of South Sudan significantly affected Sudan’s economy because it lost 75% of its oil production fields to South Sudan. According to an International Monetary Fund country report, Sudan’s government revenues and foreign exchange earnings fell by about one-half and two-thirds, respectively.2 Sudan and South Sudan’s oil sectors play a vital role in their economies and are closely linked; most of their producing assets are near or extend across their shared border. Although South Sudan now controls a substantial amount of the oil-producing fields, it is dependent on Sudan for transporting oil through its pipelines for processing and export. The transit and processing fees South Sudan must pay to Sudan to transport its crude oil are an important revenue stream for Sudan.3


Disruptions in oil production, disputes over oil revenue sharing, and lower oil prices have had a negative effect on both economies. In January 2012, South Sudan shut down virtually all of its oil production because of a dispute with Sudan over transit fees. The dispute was not resolved until April 2013 after protracted negotiations. In December 2013, a conflict between government forces and rebel factions led to a civil war in South Sudan. The peace agreement brokered in August 2015 provided a temporary reprieve, but fighting resumed in July 2016 and the security situation is still tenuous.4


Sudan has been more successful in weathering the downturn in oil prices in recent years by shifting to a more diversified economy. In addition, the partial lifting of U.S. sanctions on Sudan in October 2017 may provide more opportunities to attract additional foreign investment.5 Prospects for South Sudan are less optimistic, given the uncertain outcome for the ongoing peace process, its dependence on crude oil for revenue in the lower oil price environment, weak investor confidence, and a lack of functioning infrastructure.


Figure 1. Map of Sudan and South Sudan 

History


After gaining independence in 1956, the unified Sudan fought two civil wars. The second civil war ended with a Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between the Sudanese government and opposition forces in 2005, and the outcome of the 2011 referendum led to a newly created independent state: South Sudan. Border issues are a major source of tension between the two countries post-secession, and political dynamics in both countries pose significant security risks for the oil sector.


Sudan has experienced two civil wars since gaining independence in 1956. The second civil war ended with the help of international observers and led to the signing of the CPA by the Sudanese government and the rebel factions in the southern region in 2005. The CPA established guidelines for oil revenue sharing and a timeframe to hold a referendum for independence of the South. The southern region overwhelmingly voted for secession, and in July 2011, South Sudan became an independent nation-state that is separate from Sudan, with Juba and Khartoum as their respective capitals.6


Armed conflict in both countries has persisted in the post-referendum period, as unresolved issues on domestic and interstate relations still linger. Both countries still contest some areas around the demarcated border the CPA established. Disputes over the Abyei area and the Heglig oilfield in South Kordofan state have been particularly contentious, as the areas have strategic importance for the oil sector and agricultural resources that both countries rely on, adding another layer of complexity to the disputes.7 In January 2012, South Sudan announced that it would shut its oil production over a dispute about oil transit fees. The dispute later turned violent, as the South Sudanese army–the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA)–and Sudanese opposition forces took control of the oilfield for more than a week and destroyed critical infrastructure, which temporarily reduced Sudan’s oil production by more than 50%. The conflict was resolved in November 2012 with support from the international community, and both governments reached an agreement on oil transit fees and on compensation for lost production.8


The cooperation agreements and implementation matrix, which states the timeframe to carry out the obligations stipulated in the cooperation agreements, paved the way for restarting oil production in April 2013. According to a Business Monitor Intelligence (BMI) Research report, South Sudan currently pays Sudan US $24.50/barrel, which consists of a US $9.50/barrel transit fee and a US $15/barrel fee to cover the cost of debt repayment that is shared between the two countries.9 The drop of oil prices in 2014, however, has significantly lowered export revenues. Because South Sudan’s Dar blend trades at a significant discount to Brent, a drop in the price of Brent could significantly affect South Sudan’s fiscal position.10


Since the signing of the implementation matrix, the governments of Sudan and South Sudan shifted their focus from border conflicts to the mitigation of their respective domestic opposition factions. In September 2013, large-scale protests broke out around Sudan in response to cuts in fuel and basic commodities subsidies. The Sudanese security forces responded with violence, leading to hundreds of casualties.11 Divisions within the South Sudanese government eventually led to a civil war that still continues as of January 2018. The domestic political dynamics and the security situations in both countries directly affected negotiations on oil production and transportation and will continue to be a potential risk for disrupting the countries’ oil supplies and exports.


Petroleum and other liquids


Most of Sudan’s and South Sudan’s proved reserves of oil and natural gas are located in the Muglad and Melut Basins, which extend into both countries. Natural gas associated with oil production is mostly flared or reinjected into wells, and neither country currently produces nor consumes dry natural gas.


According to BP’s Statistical Review of World Energy, Sudan and South Sudan had 1.5 billion barrels and 3.5 billion barrels of proved oil reserves, as of January 1, 2017, respectively. Most of these reserves are located in the oil-rich Muglad and Melut basins, which extend into both countries. Oil and natural gas exploration in Sudan and South Sudan is limited outside of these basins because of the lack of evidence of prospective acreage and the persistent civil unrest affecting both countries.12 Sudan has made efforts in the past few years to boost oil production levels by attracting new investment and awarding exploration licenses to develop several blocks, but progress has been slow.13


Natural gas associated with oil fields is mostly flared or reinjected. Despite proved reserves of 3 trillion cubic feet, natural gas development has been limited. According to the latest data provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the World Bank’s Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership (GGFR), Sudan emitted approximately 13.8 billion cubic feet (Bcf) of flared natural gas in 2016. From 2013 to 2016, Sudan was ranked 39th in the world for flared natural gas volume and intensity.14


Oil sector management


Prolonged sanctions against the unified Sudan allowed Asian national oil companies to dominate Sudan’s and South Sudan’s oil sectors. The China National Petroleum Corporation, India’s Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, and Malaysia’s Petronas hold large stakes in the leading consortia that operate oil fields and pipelines. Sudan and South Sudan’s national oil companies, Sudapet and Nilepet, respectively, also hold small stakes in operations.


In Sudan, three main entities oversee activities in Sudan’s petroleum sector: the Ministry of Petroleum (MOP) administers and manages the Sudanese oil sector; the Sudanese Petroleum Corporation (SPC), a fully state-owned arm of MOP, is responsible for exploration, production, and distribution of crude oil and petroleum products; and Sudapet, the national oil company, holds minority stakes in each of the international consortia operating in the oil-producing blocks. 15


In South Sudan, the administrative structure largely mirrors Sudan’s. The Ministry of Petroleum and Mining is responsible for managing South Sudan’s petroleum sector. The National Petroleum and Gas Corporation (NPGC) is the main policymaking and supervisory body and reports directly to the president and national legislative assembly; it participates in all segments of the hydrocarbon sector and approves petroleum agreements on the government’s behalf. The Nile Petroleum Corporation (Nilepet) is South Sudan’s national oil company, and its activities mirror much of the responsibilities of its Sudanese counterpart. Nilepet oversees operations in the petroleum sector, and because of its limited technical expertise and financial resources, it holds minority stakes in production-sharing contracts with foreign oil companies.16 South Sudan’s Transitional Constitution, the 2012 Petroleum Act, and the 2013 Petroleum Revenue Management Act define the regulatory framework governing the hydrocarbon sector.17


Asian national oil companies (NOCs) dominate the oil sectors in both countries. The China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), India's Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC), and Malaysia’s Petronas hold large stakes in the leading consortia operating in both countries: the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company, the Dar Petroleum Operating Company, and the Sudd Petroleum Operating Company. The lifting of U.S. sanctions against Sudan in October 2017 may provide opportunities for other foreign investors to enter the industry.


Table 1: Main oil companies in Sudan and South Sudan
Consortium/subsidiaryCompanyCountry of
origin
Share %
Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company (GNPOC)CNPCChina40
PetronasMalaysia30
ONGCIndia25
Sudapet*Sudan5
Greater Pioneer Operating Company (GPOC)CNPCChina40
PetronasMalaysia30
ONGCIndia25
Nilepet*South Sudan5
Dar Petroleum Operating Company (DPOC)CNPCChina41
PetronasMalaysia40
NilepetSouth Sudan8
SinopecChina6
Tri-ocean EnergyEgypt5
Sudd Petroleum Operating Company (SPOC)PetronasMalaysis67.9
ONGCIndia24.1
NilepetSouth Sudan8.0
Petro Energy Operating Company (PEOC)CNPCChina95
SudapetSudan5
Petrolines for Crude Oil Ltd. (Petco)PetcoSudan50
SudapetSudan50
Source: Company websites, IHS Edin, IHS Markit, BMI Research


Crude oil production


Sudan and South Sudan have experienced frequent disruptions to oil production because of disputes over oil revenue sharing and armed conflict. Maturing oil fields and persistent violence, in conjunction with a lower oil price environment, have dampened investor confidence in spite of efforts to attract foreign investment.


Most crude oil in Sudan and South Sudan is produced in the Muglad and Melut basins. South Sudan’s secession in 2011 substantially reduced Sudan’s oil production capabilities, because most of the oil fields are located in South Sudan. Sudan brought online two small oil fields in Blocks 6 and 17 at the end of 2012, and the country is exploring offshore production in the Red Sea basin. However, progress in developing the Red Sea basin area has been slow.18 In addition, Sudan’s oilfields are reaching maturity and thus nearing depletion. Sudan is trying to mitigate declining output by using enhanced oil recovery (EOR) techniques, but the decline is expected to continue.19


The partial lifting of U.S. sanctions imposed on Sudan has led to a renewed push by the Sudanese government to attract foreign investment in the upstream sector. In November 2017, Sudan put up 15 blocks for direct negotiation, with a possible second round in February 2018. Discussions of potential development projects between the government and State Oil Canada Ltd. and Russia-based Lukoil have been reported.20


In South Sudan, the ongoing civil war and political instability have undermined its ability to increase output to peak production capacity. Low investor confidence and the poor security situation pose serious obstacles to the government’s ability to boost crude oil production, and they may need to rely on deals that are privately negotiated with smaller companies such as Nigeria-based Oranto, which secured a 90% stake in Block B321. According to a recent study conducted by the World Bank Group on unsolicited proposals in infrastructure projects, privately negotiated transactions can face significant risk of cost overruns, delays in implementation, or early termination. Transactions that are privately negotiated, as opposed to transactions that use a competitive bidding process for procurement, are also more vulnerable than to allegations of corruption, whether perceived or real, which could complicate the execution of the project.22


South Sudan and, to a lesser extent, Sudan have experienced frequent disruptions to production because of disagreements over oil revenue sharing over the past few years. Damaged infrastructure and shut-in fields stemming from conflict have lowered overall production levels, and efforts to repair infrastructure or re-start production have been delayed. In 2016, combined production from both countries was 257,000 barrels per day (b/d)—lower than the peak production levels of 2010 when the unified Sudan produced approximately 486,000 b/d.23 Crude oil production in Sudan and South Sudan averaged approximately 102,000 b/d and 150,000 b/d in 2017, respectively.24 It is unlikely that either country will be able to increase production without significant improvements to the security situation or an increase in foreign investment.

Table 2: Sudan and South Sudan oil fields and operators
CountryLocationMain fieldsBlendOperator

Sudan
Block 1Unity, Toma, MungaNileGNPOC
Block 2Heglig, BambooNileGNPOC, Petrolines
Block 4Diffra, NeemNileGNPOC
Block 6Fula, HadidaFulaPetro Energy
Block 17al-BarasayaNASudapet*
Block 25Rawat Central, WateeshNASudapet*
South SudanBlock 1Unity, Toma, MungaNileGNPOC
Block 2Heglig, BambooNileGNPOC
Block 4Diffra, NeemNileGNPOC
Block 3 & 7Palogue, Adar-YaleDarDPOC
Block 5Mala, Thar JathNileSPOC
Source: IHS Markit, IHS Edin, Rystad, BMI Research 
Note: Star Oil exited partnership in 2016, Sudapet now sole operator


Export oil pipelines, storage, and port


Sudan has two main export pipelines that travel north across the country to the Bashayer Marine Terminal, located about 15 miles south of Port Sudan. Most of Sudan’s storage facilities for crude oil and refined products are also located at the Bashayer Terminal. The Bashayer Marine Terminal has a storage facility with a capacity of 2.5 million b/d and an export/import facility with a handling capacity of 1.2 million b/d. The terminal is operated by the GNPOC. South Sudan currently does not have any significant storage capacity.25


South Sudan exports all of its crude oil via pipeline through Sudan. Plans for the construction of a separate pipeline have been reported that would allow South Sudan to export crude oil through neighboring Kenya or Djibouti via Ethiopia and avoid transit fees.26 However, it is unlikely that the pipeline will be built, because production in South Sudan has been affected by the natural maturation of its fields and by disruptions.


Sudan and South Sudan produce three crude oil blends: Dar, Nile, and Fula. The Dar blend (25.0° API gravity, 0.11% sulfur) is a heavy paraffinic type of crude oil that has a high acid content and must be heated during transport to avoid congealing in ship tanks.27 The Dar blend is produced at Blocks 3 and 7 in the Melut Basin, which is controlled by South Sudan.28The Nile blend (33.9° API gravity, 0.06% sulfur) is produced in the Muglad Basin at Blocks 1, 2, 4, and 5A; it is a medium, low-sulfur waxy crude oil and is a more attractive blend to refiners because of its high fuel and gasoil yields.29 The Fula blend is a highly acidic crude oil that is produced in the Muglad Basin at Block 6 and is transported via pipeline to the Khartoum refinery, where it is processed for domestic use rather than for export.30


The Petrodar (PDOC) pipeline transports crude oil from Palogue and Adar Yale oil fields (Blocks 3E and 7E) in the Melut Basin to the Bashayer Marine Terminal in Port Sudan. The pipeline is approximately 850 miles long with a design capacity of 500,000 b/d, and it has several heating units to facilitate the movement of the Dar blend crude oil along the pipeline.31


The Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company (GNPOC) pipeline transports Nile blend crude oil from the Heglig oil fields (Blocks 2 and 4) in Sudan and the Thar Jath and Mala oil fields (Block 1 and 5A) in South Sudan to the Bashayer Marine Terminal in Port Sudan for export, and to two refineries in El-Obeid and Khartoum for refining and distribution to the domestic market. South Sudan’s Thar Jath-Heglig section of the pipeline is approximately 100 miles and has a capacity of 200,000 b/d; the Heglig-Port Sudan section is approximately 930 miles long with a design capacity of 450,000 b/d.32 In September 2014, ownership of the pipeline and facilities was fully transferred to a local Sudanese pipeline operator, Petrolines for Crude Oil Ltd. (PETCO).33

Table 3: Crude oil pipelines in Sudan and South Sudan
OperatorStart of pipelineDestinationCrude oil blend
type
Aprox. length (miles)Design capacity
('000 bbl/d)
Main crude oil pipelines
DPOCBlock 3 and 7Bashayer Terminal 2, Port SudanDar850500
GNPOCHeglig facilitiesBashayer Terminal 1, Port SudanNile1000450
SPOCBlock 5AConnects to Heglig facilitiesNile60200
CNPCBlock 6Khartoum RefineryFula450200
Proposed crude oil pipelines
--South SudanLamu (Kenya)----450
--South SudanDjibouti via Ethiopia------
Source: Company websites, IHS Markit, BMI Research, IHS Edin

Figure 2. Crude oil production in Sudan and South Sudan

Crude oil exports


China is the leading export destination for crude oil from Sudan and South Sudan. In 2016, China accounted for 94% and 100% of Sudan’s and South Sudan’s crude oil exports, respectively.


Sudan and South Sudan export the Nile and Dar blends to Asian markets. All crude oil produced in South Sudan is exported via pipeline to Sudan for refining or export, because South Sudan has no refining capacity, and Sudan is the only country in the region with the refining infrastructure capable of processing these particular blends.34 Crude oil is exported from Port Sudan to Asia via the Bab el-Mandeb Strait. Given the lack of alternative transit routes, Bab el-Mandeb is a strategically important chokepoint that if blocked or closed could lead to significant increases in shipping time and costs.35


According to the United Nations international trade statistics database (UN Comtrade), Sudan and South Sudan exported a total of approximately 127,000 b/d of crude oil in 2016. Although this level is higher than the 65,000 b/d exported in 2012 during the production shutdown, it is lower than the 182,000 b/d exported in 2014. China is by far the largest export destination for Sudan’s and South Sudan’s crude oil, receiving almost 99% of total exports. India and Japan also import relatively small volumes of Sudan and South Sudan’s crude oil.Figure 3. Sudan and South Sudan crude oil exports
Figure 4. Sudan and South Sudan total exports in 2016

Oil refineries


Sudan has two oil refineries and three topping plants (smaller, less complex refineries) with a total capacity of 143,700 b/d. However, the only active refineries are the Khartoum (al-Jaili) refinery and the El-Obeid topping plant.36 The al-Jaili refinery, located approximately 45 miles north of Khartoum, is the country’s largest, with a capacity of 100,000 b/d. The other full-conversion refinery is the Port Sudan refinery (21,700 b/d), and the three topping plants are El-Obeid (10,000 b/d), Shajirah (10,000 b/d), and Abu Gabra (2,000 b/d).37


The al-Jaili refinery initially came online in 2000 with a capacity of 50,000 b/d and was a 50/50 joint venture between the Ministry of Energy and Mining (MEM) and CNPC. It was later expanded in 2006, increasing total capacity to 100,000 b/d and creating two production lines that would allow the refining of both Nile and Fula blend crude oils. The expansion was notable for using the world’s first delayed-coking unit, a unit required to process Fula crude oil because of its high acid and calcium content. Discussions between Sudanese and Chinese officials on a proposed second expansion that could double the refinery’s capacity have been reported, but no significant progress has been made.38 Petronas signed a contract with MEM to expand the currently inactive Port Sudan refinery through a 50/50 joint venture and to add 100,000 b/d to its capacity, but development has been postponed as a result of rising costs.39


In South Sudan, two refineries were under construction: a 3,000 b/d refinery at Bentiu in the Unity State and a 10,000 b/d refinery at Thiangrial in the Upper Nile region. Plans to expand the Bentiu refinery to increase its capacity to 5,000 b/d have been reported. However, security issues have delayed the completion of the refineries, and it is unclear when or if the refineries will be operational.40

Table 4: Oil refineries in Sudan and South Sudan
CountryRefineryCapacity
(000 bbl/d)
StatusOperator
SudanKhartoum (al-Jaili)100OperationalCNPC/Sudapet
Port Sudan21.7Not operatingSudapet
El Obeid10OperationalSudapet
Shajirah10Not operatingConcorp
Abu Gabra2Not operatingSudapet
Total Capacity 143.7  
Planned refineriesOperator and/or builder 
South SudanUnity State (Bentiu)5Under constructionSafinat (Russia)/Nilepet
Upper Nile (Tangrial)10SuspendedGovernment of South Sudan
Proposed refineries
SudanPort Sudan100-- 
Khartoum (expansion)100-- 
Source: BMI Research, IHS Markit, PFC Energy, African Development Bank 
Note: The initial plan for construction at the Bentiu refinery in South Sudan was to build facilities with a capacity to process 3,000 b/d. Plans for expansion to increase capacity to 5,000 b/d have been discussed, but no progress has been made.


Liquids consumption


Oil consumption in Sudan and South Sudan peaked at 125,000 b/d in 2009 and has slightly declined to about 105,000 b/d in 2017.41 Domestic consumption of petroleum products grew rapidly with increased industrialization, car ownership, and access to electricity in the 2000s; however, the persistent instability in both states has dampened consumption.


Petroleum consumption in Sudan has been met by domestically refined crude oil, although lower production levels over the past few years have led to an increase of imported petroleum products to meet shortfalls in domestic demand. According to the latest data from the International Energy Agency (IEA), diesel and fuel oil for electricity generation, followed by gasoline for transportation, make up a significant portion of Sudan’s oil consumption, constituting 40% and 17% of total consumption in 2015, respectively. Diesel/fuel oil and gasoline make up an ever larger share of South Sudan’s oil consumption at 73% and 10% in 2015, respectively, although in absolute terms, its oil consumption has been declining.42

Figure 5. Petroleum and other liquids consumption in Sudan and South Sudan

Electricity


Sudan


Total electricity generation in Sudan was 12.7 billion kilowatthours (kWh) in 2015, of which 66% was generated by hydropower.43 Although power generation has continued to grow in the post-independence era, only 45% of the population had access to electricity in 2014, according to latest estimates from the World Bank.44 Approximately 40% of the population had access to electricity in 2013, with urban populations benefitting from a substantially higher level of access than rural populations, according to the most recent estimates made by African Development Bank (AfDB). Those not connected to a grid rely on biomass or diesel-fired generators for electricity.45 Sudan has two interconnected grids, the Blue Nile and Western grids, that cover a small portion of the country. An additional fourteen centers receive service from thermal generators and local distribution networks.46


Hydroelectricity is generated from seven dams: Roseires, Sinnar, Jebel Aulia, Khashm el-Girba, Merowe, Rumela, and Burdana. The Rumela and Burdana dams, located on the Upper Atbara and Setit rivers in eastern Sudan, were brought online in 2017 and are the most recent additions in hydropower generation. According to BMI Research reports, the two dams added 320 megawatts (MW) and 15 MW to total generation capacity, respectively.47 Development of the Kajbar dam, located further north in the Nile Valley, has stalled. The dam was strongly opposed by local communities because of its potentially significant environmental impact, and no evidence of progress regarding its construction is evident. The Kajbar dam, along with two other proposed hydropower projects, the Dal and El-Shireig dams, are heavily financed by the Saudi government.48


Regarding nonhydropower generation, the 500 MW Kosti Thermal Power Plant that came online in 2016 is an oil-fired plant jointly sponsored by the Sudanese and Indian government that was constructed by India-based Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.49 The Sudanese government is attempting to diversify its power generation mix by focusing on developing conventional thermal plants to meet domestic energy demand. However, the proposed projects are still at an early stage and rely heavily on Saudi financing. With the significant cuts in the Saudi budget as a result of lower oil prices, the future of these plants remains in doubt. Without diversification of its power generation mix, Sudan must rely heavily on hydropower to meet domestic demand, and will be especially vulnerable to weather patterns such as a severe or sustained drought.


South Sudan

South Sudan has one of the lowest electrification rates in the world, with only 5% of its population having access to electricity in 2014, according to the latest estimates from the World Bank. Total electricity generation was 310 million kWh in 2015.50 Those connected to the power network experience frequent blackouts or forced load shedding, making citizens rely on standby generators to meet energy needs.51 In April 2017, the AfDB approved a supplemental loan of US $14.57 million for a project approved in 2013 that supported the state-owned utility, the South Sudan Electricity Corporation, to strengthen and expand the country’s electricity distribution networks.52 AfDB project documents state that the additional financing was needed because the original grant underestimated project costs.53


According to BMI Research, five hydropower projects have been identified as potential opportunities for development: Fula Rapids (42 MW), Grand Fula (890 MW), Shukkoli (230 MW), Lakki (410 MW), and Bedden (570 MW). However, construction has been delayed because of low investor confidence and a lack of funding.54

3
2 0

Something interesting to share?
Join NrgEdge and create your own NrgBuzz today

Latest NrgBuzz

Bioethanol Market to reach 68.95 Billion USD by 2022, Growing at a CAGR of 5.3%

The global bioethanol market is estimated at USD 53.19 Billion in 2017 and is projected to reach USD 68.95 Billion by 2022, at a CAGR of 5.3% from 2017 to 2022. The market is driven by the increased demand for bioethanol from various end-use industry segments, such as transportation, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, alcoholic beverages, and others. The transportation end-use industry segment led the global bioethanol market, in terms of volume, in 2016. 

Download PDF Brochure @ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/pdfdownloadNew.asp?id=131222570

Major Growth Drivers: 
  • Government policies and mandates
    • Agricultural policies
    • Blending mandates
    • Subsidies and support
    • Tariffs & tax incentives
  • Volatile petroleum prices
  • Increase in awareness of climate change and green-house gas emission
  • Higher octane rating at a lower price than unleaded/pure gasoline

Starch-based feedstock is estimated to be the largest feedstock type in the global bioethanol market.

The starch-based segment is estimated to be the largest feedstock segment of the global bioethanol market. This feedstock type uses corn, barley, wheat, and other starch raw materials as feedstocks to produce bioethanol. Corn has the highest percentage of starch, about 70-72%. The growth in this segment is attributed to the rising demand from Asia Pacific and South America and the wide variety of feedstocks that can be used to produce starch-based bioethanol. The feedstocks used are available in almost all over the world.

bioethanol-market-131222570

Alcoholic beverages segment is estimated to be the fastest growing end-use industry segment of the global bioethanol market.

Among end-use industries, the alcoholic beverages segment is estimated to be the fastest growing end-use segment of the global bioethanol market. The growth of this segment is attributed to the increasing purchasing power in developing countries and the growing acceptance of drinking alcoholic beverages in some cultures.

North America contributes as the largest market of bioethanol

In 2016, North America accounted for largest share of the bioethanol market. Currently, the US is the largest market for bioethanol in North America, and is expected to continue to be the largest market till 2022. In the US, the demand for bioethanol is expected to increase due to the increasing government and environment regulations in the country. Regulations such as the Federal Reformulated Gasoline (RFG) and E15 regulations contribute to the growing use of bioethanol in fuels. The other driving factor for the bioethanol market is the low price of corn, which is a prime feedstock used in the production of bioethanol in the country. Many bioethanol manufacturers are based in this region.

Key companies profiled in the global bioethanol market research report include Archer Daniels Midland Company (US), POET LLC (US), Green Plains (US), Valero Energy Corporation (US), Flint Hills Resource (US), Abengoa Bioenergy SA (Spain), Royal Dutch Shell plc (Netherlands), Pacific Ethanol, Inc. (US), Petrobras (Brazil), and The Andersons (US).

Speak to Analyst @ https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/speaktoanalystNew.asp?id=131222570

About MarketsandMarkets™

MarketsandMarkets™ provides quantified B2B research on 30,000 high growth niche opportunities/threats which will impact 70% to 80% of worldwide companies’ revenues. Currently servicing 5000 customers worldwide including 80% of global Fortune 1000 companies as clients. Almost 75,000 top officers across eight industries worldwide approach MarketsandMarkets™ for their painpoints around revenues decisions.

Our 850 fulltime analyst and SMEs at MarketsandMarkets™ are tracking global high growth markets following the "Growth Engagement Model – GEM". The GEM aims at proactive collaboration with the clients to identify new opportunities, identify most important customers, write "Attack, avoid and defend" strategies, identify sources of incremental revenues for both the company and its competitors. MarketsandMarkets™ now coming up with 1,500 MicroQuadrants (Positioning top players across leaders, emerging companies, innovators, strategic players) annually in high growth emerging segments. MarketsandMarkets™ is determined to benefit more than 10,000 companies this year for their revenue planning and help them take their innovations/disruptions early to the market by providing them research ahead of the curve.

MarketsandMarkets’s flagship competitive intelligence and market research platform, "RT" connects over 200,000 markets and entire value chains for deeper understanding of the unmet insights along with market sizing and forecasts of niche markets.

Contact:
Mr. Shelly Singh
MarketsandMarkets™
701 Pike Street,
Suite 2175, Seattle,
WA 98101, United States
1-888-600-6441
Email: [email protected]

December, 11 2019
SHORT-TERM ENERGY OUTLOOK
Forecast HighlightsGlobal liquid fuels
  • Brent crude oil spot prices averaged $63 per barrel (b) in November, up $3/b from October. EIA forecasts Brent spot prices will average $61/b in 2020, down from a 2019 average of $64/b. EIA forecasts that West Texas Intermediate (WTI) prices will average $5.50/b less than Brent prices in 2020. EIA expects crude oil prices will be lower on average in 2020 than in 2019 because of forecast rising global oil inventories, particularly in the first half of next year.
  • On December 6, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and a group of other oil producers announced they were deepening production cuts originally announced in December 2018. The group is now targeting production that is 1.7 million barrels per day (b/d) lower than in October 2018, compared with the former target reduction of 1.2 million b/d. OPEC announced that the cuts would be in effect through the end of March 2020. However, EIA assumes that OPEC will limit production through all of 2020, amid a forecast of rising oil inventories. EIA forecasts OPEC crude oil production will average 29.3 million b/d in 2020, down by 0.5 million b/d from 2019.
  • Beginning on January 1, 2020, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) is set to enact Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL Convention), which lowers the maximum sulfur content of marine fuel oil used in ocean-going vessels from 3.5% of weight to 0.5%. EIA expects that starting in the fourth quarter of 2019, this regulation will encourage global refiners to increase refinery runs and maximize upgrading of high-sulfur heavy fuel oil into low-sulfur distillate fuel to create compliant bunker fuels. EIA forecasts that U.S. refinery runs will rise by 3% from 2019 to a record level of 17.5 million b/d in 2020, resulting in refinery utilization rates that average 93% in 2020. EIA expects one of the most significant effects of the regulation to be on diesel wholesale margins, which rise from an average of 45 cents per gallon (gal) in 2019 to a forecasted peak of 61 cents/gal in the first quarter of 2020 and an average of 57 cents/gal in 2020.
  • EIA data show that the United States exported 90,000 b/d more total crude oil and petroleum products in September than it imported. This is the first month recorded in U.S. data that the United States exported more crude oil and petroleum products than it imported. U.S. imports and exports records of crude oil and petroleum products started on an annual basis in 1949 and on a monthly basis in 1973. EIA expects total crude oil and petroleum net exports to average 570,000 b/d in 2020 compared with average net imports of 490,000 b/d in 2019.
  • EIA expects U.S. crude oil production to average 13.2 million b/d in 2020, an increase of 0.9 million b/d from the 2019 level. Expected 2020 growth is slower than 2018 growth of 1.6 million b/d and 2019 growth of 1.3 million b/d. Slowing crude oil production growth results from a decline in drilling rigs over the past year that EIA expects to continue into 2020. Despite the decline in rigs, EIA forecasts production will continue to grow as rig efficiency and well-level productivity rises, offsetting the decline in the number of rigs.
  • EIA estimates that propane inventories in the Midwest—Petroleum Administration for Defense District (PADD) 2—were 22.0 million barrels at the end of November, 17% lower than the five-year (2014–18) average for the end of November. Colder-than-normal temperatures and strong grain drying demand in November contributed to large draws on Midwest propane inventories. Also, Western Canadian rail shipments of propane to the Midwest have declined since the opening of a new propane export terminal in Western Canada in May. EIA forecasts Midwest inventories at the end of March will be 32% lower than the five-year (2015–19) average and the lowest for that time of year since 2014.

West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil price

Natural gas
  • EIA estimates that the U.S. total working gas inventories were 3,616 billion cubic feet (Bcf) at the end of November. This level was about equal to the five-year (2014–18) average and 19% higher than a year ago. EIA expects storage withdrawals to total 1.9 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) from the end of October to the end of March, which is less than the five-year average winter withdrawal. A withdrawal of this amount would leave the end-of-March inventories at almost 1.9 Tcf, which would be 8% higher than the five-year (2015–19) average.
  • The U.S. benchmark Henry Hub natural gas spot price averaged $2.64 per million British thermal units (MMBtu) in November, up 31 cents/MMBtu from October. Prices increased as a result of November temperatures that were colder than the 10-year (2009–18) average. EIA forecasts the Henry Hub spot price to average $2.45/MMBtu in 2020, down 14 cents/MMBtu from the 2019 average.
  • EIA forecasts that annual U.S. dry natural gas production will average 92.1 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) in 2019, up 10% from 2018. EIA expects that natural gas production will grow much less in 2020 because of the lag between changes in price and changes in future drilling activity. Low prices in the third quarter of 2019 will reduce natural gas-directed drilling in the first half of 2020. EIA forecasts natural gas production in 2020 will average 95.1 Bcf/d.

World liquid fuels production and consumption balance

Electricity, coal, renewables, and emissions
  • EIA expects the share of U.S. total utility-scale electricity generation from natural gas-fired power plants will rise from 34% in 2018 to 37% in 2019 and to 39% in 2020. EIA forecasts the share of U.S. electric generation from coal to average 25% in 2019 and 22% in 2020, down from 28% in 2018. EIA’s forecast nuclear share of U.S. generation remains at about 20% in 2019 and in 2020. Hydropower averages a 7% share of total U.S. generation in the forecast for 2019 and 2020, similar to 2018. Wind, solar, and other nonhydropower renewables provided 9% of U.S. total utility-scale generation in 2018. EIA expects they will provide 10% in 2019 and 12% in 2020.
  • EIA expects U.S. coal production in 2019 to total 697 million short tons (MMst), which would be an 8% decline from the 2018 level. In 2020, EIA expects a further decrease in total U.S. coal production of 14%, to an annual total of 601 MMst, reflecting continued idling and closures of mines as a result of declining domestic demand.
  • EIA expects U.S. coal exports to total 93 MMst in 2019, and then decline by 8 MMst to 85 MMst in 2020. U.S. coking coal currently faces challenges from a global oversupply of steel, particularly in the fourth quarter of 2019. Steam coal exports have been dampened by high stockpiles in Europe and India, a top destination for U.S. shipments.
  • EIA expects U.S. electric power sector generation from renewables other than hydropower—principally wind and solar—to grow from 411 billion kilowatthours (kWh) in 2019 to 471 billion kWh in 2020. In EIA’s forecast, Texas accounts for 20% of the U.S. nonhydropower renewables generation in 2019 and 22% in 2020. California’s forecast share of nonhydropower renewables generation falls from 15% in 2019 to 14% in 2020. EIA expects that the Midwest and Central power regions will see shares in the 16% to 18% range for 2019 and 2020.
  • EIA forecasts that, after rising by 2.9% in 2018, U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions will decline by 1.4% in 2019 and by 2.2% in 2020, partly as a result of lower forecast energy consumption. For 2019, EIA estimates there was less demand for space cooling because of cooler summer months, with an estimated 5% decline in U.S. cooling degree days from 2018, when temperatures were significantly higher than the previous 10-year (2008–17) average. In addition, EIA also expects U.S. CO2 emissions in 2019 to decline because the forecast share of electricity generated from natural gas and renewables will increase, and the share generated from coal, which is a more carbon-intensive energy source, will decrease.

U.S. natural gas prices

U.S. residential electricity price

December, 11 2019
INDONESIA’S DECOMMISSIONING CHALLENGE REPORT

A report by Nicholas Newman

Many of Indonesia’s oil and gas fields, both on and offshore, are coming to the end of their commercially viable operational lifespan. More than 60% of Indonesia’s oil and more than 30% of gas production comes from late-life-cycle resources spread across the world's largest island country. Despite investment and use of enhanced oil field recovery measures, as well as increasing automation to extend the economic lifespan of these assets, decommissioning will soon become necessary.

However Indonesia, like many countries new to the prospect of decommissioning energy infrastructure, face many key technological, fiscal, environmental, regulatory and industrial capacity issues, which need to be addressed by both government and industry decision makers.

This report, commissioned by the consulting and advisory arm of London and Aberdeen based Precision Media & Communications, aims to take a look at many of the issues Indonesia and other South East Asian oil producing nations are likely to face with the prospect of decommissioning the region's oil and gas aging energy infrastructure both onshore and offshore... To find out more Click here

December, 09 2019