Posts tagged “OPEC”
Risks, Rewards, and Soft Power
In oil markets, the year 2014 already looks to repeat 2013 with some important differences. Unpredictability in the commodities’ extraction and delivery, political risk, and policy risk may play a bigger role in 2014. The potential lifting of the crude oil export ban, which the industry and some lawmakers desire, may also stir up the market.
On the policy front, safety and methods of transporting oil and water disposal issues arose in 2013, and will likely again in 2014. The second rail disaster from transporting oil from North Dakota’s Bakken Shale, the Lac-Mégantic, Quebec incident with loss of life and the December 30th Casselton derailment, renewed the debate between pipelines versus rail transportation. The director of the North Dakota Department of Mineral Resources “predicted that as much as 90 percent of crude produced in the Bakken this year will move by rail” a recent article noted. In Parker County, Texas, the Texas Railroad Commission listened to residents’ complaints about earthquakes, which they attribute to disposal wells. The US Geological Survey sees a link between the earthquakes and wastewater disposal; a similar renewal in earthquake activity is reported in Oklahoma as well. CONTINUE»
More Supply, Competition and Friction Possible
News of Iran’s potential slow ramp up of oil supply resounded with a downward small ping in prices in late November, later to bounce back based on supply realities and economic growth. Iraqi oil supply keeps increasing, averaging about 3 million barrels per day, a new high in the last 20 years. Iraq plans to keep pumping — growing production 500,000 – 750,000 barrels more per day in 2014. Iraq’s output relative to OPEC production hovers near 10%, from around 7.5% in 2008. Iran’s contribution to OPEC production was around 12% in 2008, dropping in 2013 to 8.6%, according to a recent Wall Street Journal article.
“Al Arab Yantafiq lam yantafique,” said Mr. Charles Kestenbaum, a top Middle East expert and former U.S. Trade Specialist, in a November 25th interview, immediately following the news of Iran’s nuclear deal. This Arabic expression is translated as: ”Arabs can only agree to disagree.” In late November, the Dallas Committee on Foreign Relations hosted Charles Kestenbaum, a veteran of Middle East affairs since the mid-1970s. In his quote, a common expression, lies the challenges ahead in the Middle East.
Forty Years After
In October 1973 the United States and other Western countries experienced a new phenomenon: an embargo on oil deliveries from a group of the world’s largest oil exporters, imposed in response to our military support for Israel during the Yom Kippur War then underway. Last week I attended a session in Washington hosted by the US Energy Security Council commemorating these events. It included a fascinating conversation between Ted Koppel and Dr. James Schlesinger, US Secretary of Defense at the time of the embargo and later the first US Energy Secretary.
The other, related purpose of the meeting was a presentation and discussion proposing that fuel competition provides a surer means of achieving energy security than our pursuit of energy independence for the next four decades following the Arab Oil Embargo. This idea warrants serious consideration, since energy independence, at least in the sense of no net imports from outside North America, is beginning to appear achievable.
Impacting Economics, Geopolitics and Markets
The U.S. is expected to spend about 8.5% of its GDP on energy in 2013. In 2008, when oil prices peaked, it was closing in on 10%. U.S. oil production provides a buffer to supply shocks — which happens frequently in the Middle East and North Africa, two key crude supply regions. In July 2013, disruptions to crude oil and liquids production were nearly 2.7 million barrels per day. Of the supply disruptions, 800,000 barrels were from non-OPEC nations and the other 1.9 million from OPEC, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). August is estimated at a 2.8 million shortfall.
The OPEC-related outages, which include Iran, Iraq, Libya and Nigeria, are considered to be the highest since early 2009. This has contributed to rising prices, from the year’s low of $97 in April to a high nearing $117 August 27th, after Syrian chemical weapons attacks followed on the heels of Egypt’s political turmoil. The causes of the outages in Libya were from labor disputes, while Iraq’s shortfalls originated from pipeline disruptions from violence; Iran’s woes stem partly from sanctions, and Nigerian oil challenges related generally to oil theft and infrastructure sabotage and degradation.
Geopolitical Risk Continues, Part Two
Turmoil in Egypt continues to roil oil markets and confound Middle East regional stability. Goldman Sachs said Monday, August 19th, five days after the violence escalated, it expected tighter oil markets to propel Brent to $115 “in the very near term.” More interesting though are the shifts occurring in the geopolitical landscape of the broader Middle East.
Saudi King Abdullah publicly gave his approval and support for the military-backed government of Egypt. He pledged a $12 billion aid package along with the UAE and Kuwait, four times as much as the military and economic grants from the U.S. and the European Union combined ($1.5bn and $1.3bn respectively). The threat of political Islam vis-a-vis the Muslim Brotherhood is seen as potentially up-ending stability in the Kingdom. This high-stakes game of regional poker has just gotten more complicated. The outcome, which may occur in waves of violence and instability, could take many years to be realized.
While U.S. benchmark (WTI) crude-oil futures were up 4.6% since the start of 2013, the futures prices of the global benchmark Brent was down. Analysts suggest that the investment demand for exposure to oil prices was supporting these numbers, not physical demand growth. So what information content is behind oil prices, and how do we parse reality from the hype?
Dealing With the Total Picture
Last week, Governor Romney released his plan for “Energy Independence” that promises to “increase domestic energy production and increase partnership with Mexico and Canada to gain energy independence by 2020.” Briefly, the plan proposes to increase domestic fossil fuel production by opening new areas to exploration and by reducing regulatory barriers to the building of new power plants.
My concern is that this is simply a one-sided energy policy – it focuses solely on increasing the supply of energy (and almost exclusively on fossil fuels, especially oil). A true energy plan would realize that no matter how much oil your country produces, it can never escape the world market price. In a world with a globalized market for oil, OPEC will always be the most important price-setter, and the price of oil will not be set at home. The price will track with demand from economic growth in India and China and will follow supply shocks from the most recent unrest in oil-producing regions, whether Iran, Sudan, or the South China Sea.
A Changing U.S. Energy Picture
This weekend, Thomas Friedman posed a question in his Sunday New York Times column: “Should the US join OPEC?” I generally don’t like to get into Friedman’s columns, as his name-dropping and taxicab reporting will drive you crazy. However, he probably has the widest readership of anyone in this field, and he does a good job of simplifying complicated issues.
Friedman says the “debate we’re again having over who is responsible for higher oil prices fundamentally misses huge changes that have taken place in America’s energy output, making us again a major oil and gas producer — and potential exporter — with an interest in reasonably high but stable oil prices.”
I hate to say it, but he’s right – although we’re nowhere near being a petroleum exporter today (a clear requirement for membership in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries), I believe that fundamental changes in America’s supply and demand over the next 20-30 years mean that we’re moving towards a world where the U.S. has a real interest in exports – probably not of unrefined crude oil, but of all energy products.
While Robert continues his trip to Europe and across the Continental U.S., a significant piece of news has been dominating the headlines. Although we’ve been closely monitoring the release of 60 million barrels of crude on our Energy Ticker page, we also wanted to generate some discussion on the topic, here, on the R-Squared Energy Blog. Robert has, in the past, covered the topic of using the Strategic Petroleum Reserve as a weapon to control prices. In one article, he argued against politicians who were calling for a release, titling the essay: “Speculator’s Political Reserve?“. Robert also observed the Jekyll & Hyde phenomenon in “Contradicting Goals: Cheap Gas and Lower Carbon Emissions“. The topic was also covered in his “Debunking… Continue»
The following guest post is from OilPrice.com. Normally I don’t add any of my own commentary to these guest essays, but in this case I would say that the idea that oil prices are manipulated by speculators is by no means limited to “left-wing blogs.” I would also add that I predicted several times before the last presidential election that whichever party won would have a hard time getting reelected, because I thought the U.S. was in for several difficult years no matter which party won. The recent elections demonstrate that the country isn’t happy, but I think it would have been the same result had John McCain won. As an aside, right after Obama was elected I wrote “I… Continue»