Join NrgEdge to View Member's Profile. It's Free
Fill up your particulars with:
Fill up your particulars with:
After proving to be a thorn in the side of the planned merger between Japanese refiners Idemitsu and Showa Shell Sekiyu since 2016, the family of Idemitsu’s founder Sazo Idemitsu has now acquiesced to the wishes of Idemitsu’s board and dropped its opposition to the merger. This paves the way for the latest merger in the Japanese refining business, as the industry – once a global titan – prepares for a future of shrinking domestic demand.
The merger was first announced in 2016, the first planned merger in Japanese refining since an initial wave of consolidation in the 2000s. But opposition from the Idemitsu founding family – which hold a considerable stake in the company – meant that the merger remains uncompleted, while the Nippon Oil and Mitsubishi Oil and the JX Holdings and TonenGeneral mergers sped ahead, even though they were announced later. The completion of the Idemitsu-Showa Shell Sekiyu merger will slash the number of Japanese refiners from six to three, a trend backed by the Japanese government, which sees consolidation as the only way forward to optimise the industry. Although Idemitsu – Japan’s second-largest refiner – claims that no refineries will be closed post-merger, it seems inevitable; Japanese fuel demand peaked in the late 2000s and its decline is accelerating. From a peak of 4.6 mmb/d in refining capacity, consolidation means that Japanese capacity could halve to 2.3 mmb/d by 2030 – mainly by shuttering the country’s aging simple refineries. While this will increase Japan’s fuel product import bill, the Japanese government seems fine with this, given that the downstream companies will merely be swapping crude imports for product imports.
But back to the Idemitsu-Showa Shell Sekiyu merger. There were legitimate concerns from the Idemitsu family regarding the logic of the merger. They argued that cultural differences between the management of both companies and geopolitical factors – Idemitsu is a major importer of Iranian crude, while Saudi Aramco owns part of Showa Shell – were insurmountable. With the US now re-imposing sanctions on Iran crude, the latter has once again come into prominence. But even when Iranian crude returned to the world market in 2016, the Idemitsu family went as far as to increase its stake in the firm – in response to a strategic share dilution designed to reduce their veto power – to derail the merger. But the show went on despite their opposition – Idemitsu bought a 33% stake in Showa Shell in 2016, and since 2017 deepened ties through an exchange of directors and combining operations. A merger was always inevitable, and now even the Idemitsu clan has seen that. Even the family’s most strident voice, Shosuke Idemitsu, has fallen, agreeing on the condition that the new company ‘respect the values and principles that have guided Idemitsu since 1917.’ Two seats for the family on the board of the combined company have also been demanded.
The new merged company could be formed as early as the end of 2018. Since both firms are operating on a level just short of a full-merger, it seems almost a formality. But it is necessary. The JX-TonenGeneral merger was completed last April, now the country’s dominant player. Idemitsu-Showa Shell may form 30% of the domestic fuels market, but that is 30% of a shrinking market. As its rivals speed ahead, Idemitsu-Showa Shell can now begin to catch up.
Something interesting to share?
Join NrgEdge and create your own NrgBuzz today
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Annual Electric Generator Inventory
Based on the U.S. Energy Information Administration's (EIA) annual survey of electric generators, natural gas-fired generators accounted for 43% of operating U.S. electricity generating capacity in 2019. These natural gas-fired generators provided 39% of electricity generation in 2019, more than any other source. Most of the natural gas-fired capacity added in recent decades uses combined-cycle technology, which surpassed coal-fired generators in 2018 to become the technology with the most electricity generating capacity in the United States.
Technological improvements have led to improved efficiency of natural gas generators since the mid-1980s, when combined-cycle plants began replacing older, less efficient steam turbines. For steam turbines, boilers combust fuel to generate steam that drives a turbine to generate electricity. Combustion turbines use a fuel-air mixture to spin a gas turbine. Combined-cycle units, as their name implies, combine these technologies: a fuel-air mixture spins gas turbines to generate electricity, and the excess heat from the gas turbine is used to generate steam for a steam turbine that generates additional electricity.
Combined-cycle generators generally operate for extended periods; combustion turbines and steam turbines are typically only used at times of peak load. Relatively few steam turbines have been installed since the late 1970s, and many steam turbines have been retired in recent years.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Annual Electric Generator Inventory
Not only are combined-cycle systems more efficient than steam or combustion turbines alone, the combined-cycle systems installed more recently are more efficient than the combined-cycle units installed more than a decade ago. These changes in efficiency have reduced the amount of natural gas needed to produce the same amount of electricity. Combined-cycle generators consume 80% of the natural gas used to generate electric power but provide 85% of total natural gas-fired electricity.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Annual Electric Generator Inventory
Every U.S. state, except Vermont and Hawaii, has at least one utility-scale natural gas electric power plant. Texas, Florida, and California—the three states with the most electricity consumption in 2019—each have more than 35 gigawatts of natural gas-fired capacity. In many states, the majority of this capacity is combined-cycle technology, but 44% of New York’s natural gas capacity is steam turbines and 67% of Illinois’s natural gas capacity is combustion turbines.
Countries that are not members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Asia, including China and India, and in Africa are home to more than two-thirds of the world population. These regions accounted for 44% of primary energy consumed by the electric sector in 2019, and the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projected they will reach 56% by 2050 in the Reference case in the International Energy Outlook 2019 (IEO2019). Changes in these economies significantly affect global energy markets.
Today, EIA is releasing its International Energy Outlook 2020 (IEO2020), which analyzes generating technology, fuel price, and infrastructure uncertainty in the electricity markets of Africa, Asia, and India. A related webcast presentation will begin this morning at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time from the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2020 (IEO2020)
IEO2020 focuses on the electricity sector, which consumes a growing share of the world’s primary energy. The makeup of the electricity sector is changing rapidly. The use of cost-efficient wind and solar technologies is increasing, and, in many regions of the world, use of lower-cost liquefied natural gas is also increasing. In IEO2019, EIA projected renewables to rise from about 20% of total energy consumed for electricity generation in 2010 to the largest single energy source by 2050.
The following are some key findings of IEO2020:
IEO2020 builds on the Reference case presented in IEO2019. The models, economic assumptions, and input oil prices from the IEO2019 Reference case largely remained unchanged, but EIA adjusted specific elements or assumptions to explore areas of uncertainty such as the rapid growth of renewable energy.
Because IEO2020 is based on the IEO2019 modeling platform and because it focuses on long-term electricity market dynamics, it does not include the impacts of COVID-19 and related mitigation efforts. The Annual Energy Outlook 2021 (AEO2021) and IEO2021 will both feature analyses of the impact of COVID-19 mitigation efforts on energy markets.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2020 (IEO2020)
Note: Click to enlarge.
With the IEO2020 release, EIA is publishing new Plain Language documentation of EIA’s World Energy Projection System (WEPS), the modeling system that EIA uses to produce IEO projections. EIA’s new Handbook of Energy Modeling Methods includes sections on most WEPS components, and EIA will release more sections in the coming months.
Disruptions to crude oil and condensate production from members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and non-OPEC countries have risen considerably since last year. These outages have contributed to reduced liquid fuel supply and, along with crude oil production declines agreed to among OPEC and partner countries (OPEC+), have contributed to global liquid fuels inventory draws since June.
So far in 2020, monthly oil supply disruptions have averaged 4.6 million barrels per day (b/d) and reached 5.2 million b/d in June, the highest monthly levels since at least 2011, when the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) began tracking monthly liquids production outages. Global oil supply disruptions averaged 3.1 million b/d in 2019, and rising outages in Iran have been the main drivers of the year-on-year increase. EIA does not include field closures for economic reasons or oil demand declines in its accounting of supply disruptions.
Libya, Venezuela, and Iran (the OPEC countries exempt from the latest OPEC+ agreement) were the main contributors to these outages. Domestic political instability in Libya has removed about 1.2 million b/d from oil production since February 2020. The Libyan National Army, the warring faction in eastern Libya, blockaded five of the country’s oil export terminals and shut in oil production from major fields in the southwestern region in January 2020, causing Libya’s production to fall to less than 100,000 b/d by April.
U.S. sanctions have led to production outages in Venezuela and Iran. U.S. sanctions placed on oil-trading companies and shipping companies that facilitated exports of Venezuela’s crude oil in the first half of 2020 removed 500,000 b/d of crude oil production from global markets by August. Ongoing U.S. sanctions on Iran’s crude oil and condensate exports have kept Iran’s disruption levels elevated through 2020, and disruptions there have increased by another 100,000 b/d since January.
Non-OPEC oil supply disruptions, mostly from the United States and Canada, rose to nearly 800,000 b/d in August. Disruptions in Canada occurred when operators ordered nonessential staff to stop work because of coronavirus outbreaks at production sites. In the United States, hurricane-related disruptions and unplanned maintenance affected oil production this summer. Other non-OPEC countries experienced temporary field closures for various reasons such as coronavirus outbreaks among workers, logistical issues moving workers or equipment during the pandemic, fires at field operations in Canada, or other natural disasters.
EIA publishes historical unplanned production outage estimates in its Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO). In its estimates of outages, EIA differentiates among declines in production resulting from unplanned production outages, permanent losses of production capacity, and voluntary production cutbacks. EIA’s estimates of unplanned production outages are calculated as the difference between estimated effective production capacity (the level of supply that could be available within one year) and estimated production.
