The present economic downturn has hit Canada too fairly badly, and jobs are evaporating by the day. The January job loss figures indicate that Ontario province suffered the most. This is understandable due to the contagion of auto industry ills crippling the big three American auto companies affected the companies to the north of the border.
But the province which till middle of last year was riding a wave of big investments is also suffering from increasing number of full time job losses – Alberta. Till last year Alberta’s economy was riding high, fuelled by big investments in oilsands projects. But suddenly a lightning bolt hit these projects in Q4 last year.
As per Canadian Energy Research Institute (CERI) its own 2008 forecast of oil sands production of 3.4 million billion per day by 2015 has been scaled back to 2.9 million billion per day, gathering pace to 3.7 million per day to 5.4 million billion per day by 2030, compared with its previous target of 5 million billion per day.
CERI further states that Canadian oil sands is going to stagnate, capital investment over the next 11 years will be cut 31% from a forecast made only 3 months ago and will need WTI prices above USD 70 per barrel to resume growth and expansion.
A number of mega oilsands projects have been put on hold, and almost all the projects are being reviewed from the point of view of CAPEX cost reduction. What is hurting the job market is the stalling of engineering work done in Calgary and Edmonton, and absence of new construction jobs related to oilsands.
But what is most curious is that the mega projects of some Canadian oil companies like Petrocanada and Suncor, CNRL have had to face major axing consequent to these companies hitting panic buttons. Their balance sheets and cash flow have suddenly come under such tremendous pressure that they have had to cancel large chunks of the projects, and mothball the remaining alive portions.
European player Shell cancelled its second upgrader expansion and put on hold their upstream expansion part. Other Europeans companies like Total and Statoil were chickening out even before the lightning struck the oilsands. These two companies had already been dithering for quite sometime.
Interestingly, on the other hand, Canadian oil companies developing their oilsands assets in collaboration with US based oil companies, like Encana (partnering with ConocoPhillips) and Husky (with BP) don’t seem to have run in to such panicky situation. Albeit, they also have had to scale back investment in some of their new projects but not in that drastic manner as Petrocan and Suncor have had to do.
But most interestingly, Imperial Oil whose majority shareholder is ExxonMobil (69.6%) didn’t have to press any panic button. Imperial is going ahead with their Kearl project, said to be a $7-8 billion Imperial Oil and ExxonMobil Canada project. Exxon are known to be notoriously conservative in their investment and economic rate of return analyses.
However, this can’t be said about another American company – ConocoPhillips – whose in-situ oilsands project in Surmont (in partnership with Total) has been put on a very slow track. It is not clear whether cash flow considerations were the only reason for slowdown or Total’s lack of enthusiasm was a contributing factor too.
At any rate, however, the above throws up a question: Why did the US based companies not have to drastically alter their oilsands project development plans? Why did they not seem to be pressing panic buttons and manifesting knee-jerk reactions? Are the US based oil companies better in their working out their investment strategies? Are their economic analyses models more stringent and powerful?
Surely, the world at large doesn’t get to know the details of project planning and investment decision making by various companies, therefore, one would not be in a position to provide conclusive answers to above questions. But then the folks losing their jobs in Alberta must be wondering why the heck the CEO’s of those companies, that went in to a paralytic limb late last year and started hacking down their oilsands projects, were paid the big bucks till recent past!!
It is the job of the top management to make sure that the investment decisions are rational, realistic and have been tried out for different scenarios. Why did some of the Canadian oil companies have to bite so much that they could not chew? If they didn’t have a US partner who could process their bitumen (if they went for bitumen only route) why did they not look for a partner before opting for the whole meal deal project implementation strategy, i.e., going all the way to upgraders in the first phase itself, or think of a safer project investment model?
One wonders what kind of intelligent thinking some of these companies did before committing such huge outlays! Do they realise that because of their unreasonable over-exuberance various engineering and construction companies in Alberta mobilised huge work forces, and now the same work force is being laid off in droves?!!
Some of those CEO’s will say in their defence that nobody in the world could predict the recession coming to US and the consequent slowdown in fastest growing economies like China and India, and hence their assumptions of oil price (we don’t know what they were) were justified. But that does not mean that they ought to have considered a high crude price and worked out their current and future revenues. Why were they not conservative in their assumptions and what prevented them to develop manageable portions of new projects – manageable with respect to revenue generation during project implementation phase?
May be there is lot to learn from the way ExxonMobil folks carry out their project development and economic analyses. It is not for nothing that this company has such a huge cash reserve that it could, if it wanted, buy any oil company in the world.
And, you know what, it is said that Exxon likes to implement new projects during economic downturns so that the project costs be kept relatively less. They can afford to do so –because of their strong cash position. So, you see – they set themselves up for making more money; because when good times return their revenues improve while their initial CAPEX had been lesser (because they set up their project during economic downturn). Makes sense, doesn’t it!
One feels sad to see so many engineers, tradespeople getting out of their jobs in Alberta only because some folks who in their own flawed wisdom – one can certainly they their wisdom was flawed – contributed towards huge growths in engineering and construction companies in Alberta. Currently, those companies don’t have projects to assign their folks to!
Now, all eyes are on US president’s visit. Will Mr. Obama’s visit on 19 Feb bring more bad news for oilsands projects, or, will he provide some words of comfort with regard to continued cooperation with Canada in developing this resource on a long term basis? Surely, US wishes to move away from dependence on foreign oil from ‘hostile regimes’. Be that as it may, the families of the jobless are praying for some good news – are the Gods listening?
Showing posts with label Shell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Shell. Show all posts
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Sunday, January 18, 2009
THANK YOU, MR. IGNATIEFF, FOR YOUR POSITIVITY ON OIL SANDS – ALBERTANS AND CANADIANS APPRECIATE IT!!
Canada’s Federal Liberal party leader Michael Ignatieff has come out with some very sensible views on oilsands – an issue on which his predecessor (Stephane Dion) had championed a revenue-neutral carbon tax which, oilpatch observers were worried, would have inflicted disproportionate damage on Alberta's carbon-based economy, and consequently on Canadian economy.
Dion’s party fared poorly in Federal elections last year and along with him went out of the door his thought-less policy too.
In an interview to a radio station on 16th Jan, Ignatieff admitted that any policy that comes from Ottawa can't jeopardize the oilsands - which is one of the only industries propping up the Canadian economy right now. "When you're in St. John's airport and you see a guy in cowboy boots and a cowboy hat getting on the plane you know what the oilsands mean to the entire Canadian economy," Ignatieff reportedly said.
The present Liberal leader admitted his party made mistakes with energy policy in the past, including the national energy plan. He said his goal was to develop environmentally and socially sustainable policies for the oilsands.
While speaking to a newspaper last week, Ignatieff went on to insist the federal government must consider offering the oil and gas sector a stimulus package in its Jan. 27 budget, comparable to the multi billion-dollar bailout of the Ontario-based auto industry. "The West should be rightly angry if we assisted only Central Canada," Ignatieff told the newspaper. "We can't put money into the auto sector in Central Canada without considering the legitimate concerns of the B.C. forest industry and the Alberta oil industry. There has to be regional fairness in the stimulus package."
Ignatieff’s views clearly go above partisanship, beyond petty politics; they are patriotic, pro-Canada. Ignatieff’s pan-Canada outlook got further articulated when he said that while oilsands has its environmental challenges, oilsands are a lucrative tool, both financially and politically, that increases Canada's stature around the globe and allows the country to stand its ground on several policy fronts against the U. S.
The above bodes well for not only for Alberta but the whole of Canada. His views are now more or less along the lines of views held by Alberta’s Premier Ed Stelmach, and Canada’s Prime Minister Steven Harper. These statements will no doubt be providing much needed hope to the people of Canada who can now justifiably look towards political stability in Ottawa.
Canada’s federal budget will come up for voting on Jan 29, and Harper’s minority government needs support of at least one opposition party to survive the voting. Harper has indicated that he will listen to Ignatieff’s suggestions on the upcoming budget with an open mind.
If Harper can accommodate some of Liberal party’s suggestions, he can undoubtedly rest assured that Liberals won’t let his government fall. That will mean stability in Ottawa, and political stability is what encourages the potential investors, including the big oil companies, who are currently sitting on the fence in wait-and-watch mode.
It is important to note that the sudden slow down in investment in oilsands projects was not prompted by slumping oil prices alone; in fact, it is farcical to believe that any short-term drop in oil prices should have disrupted many oil companies' investment plans, as it did; oil companies which are run by people of decent dose of competence base their decisions on the WHOLE life span of the project. The life span of oilsands projects range from 20-40 years, even more.
It does not require much intelligence to grasp that given the aggressive production cutting stance taken by OPEC countries (plus drop in non-conventional oil production), and stimulus packages announced by the G-7 countries, China and India, the aggregate demand of oil will start picking up by Q3 of this year. Coupled with the impact of production cuts, by the end of 2009 price of oil is expected to be any where between 60-100 dollars per barrel, probably more likely upwards of $70. The price of oil will remain on an upward looking curve thereafter.
So, the price of oil was not so much of a concern for the likes of Shell, TOTAL or Statoil et al. It was the uncertainties on policy level of both Canada and the new US administration regarding oilsands that impelled these companies to adopt more circumspect approach. Unless these companies are sure of policies on oilsands – of both Canada and US – and sure of a stable government in Ottawa ,which has a balanced view on oilsands, the oil companies would remain on the fence.
It may be mentioned for the benefit of those not familiar with Canadian politics that leader of an opposition party, known as NDP, had gone on record to say that given the chance his party will stop all oilsands projects. Such intellectually-challenged people were willing to cut their noses to spite their faces. Their political aspirations got better of whatever amount of intelligence they have to ignore the vital importance of a resource, like, oilsands to Canada as a whole – on economic and political fronts.
However, Liberal party’s aforementioned views on oilsands will certainly help Harper’s folks in formulating bi-partisan policy on environment, including policies relating to carbon capture. Once there is clarity on Federal environment policy, again, that will provide necessary confidence to the investors to finalize their investment decisions in regard to oilsands projects.
It is hoped that taking cue from Ignatieff, leaders of other Canadian opposition parties will set aside petty-minded politics and rally together to do what is in the best interest of the country. They will do well to remember there is much to gain, nationally and politically, in a prosperous Canada rather than in an economically and politically weak Canada.
Dion’s party fared poorly in Federal elections last year and along with him went out of the door his thought-less policy too.
In an interview to a radio station on 16th Jan, Ignatieff admitted that any policy that comes from Ottawa can't jeopardize the oilsands - which is one of the only industries propping up the Canadian economy right now. "When you're in St. John's airport and you see a guy in cowboy boots and a cowboy hat getting on the plane you know what the oilsands mean to the entire Canadian economy," Ignatieff reportedly said.
The present Liberal leader admitted his party made mistakes with energy policy in the past, including the national energy plan. He said his goal was to develop environmentally and socially sustainable policies for the oilsands.
While speaking to a newspaper last week, Ignatieff went on to insist the federal government must consider offering the oil and gas sector a stimulus package in its Jan. 27 budget, comparable to the multi billion-dollar bailout of the Ontario-based auto industry. "The West should be rightly angry if we assisted only Central Canada," Ignatieff told the newspaper. "We can't put money into the auto sector in Central Canada without considering the legitimate concerns of the B.C. forest industry and the Alberta oil industry. There has to be regional fairness in the stimulus package."
Ignatieff’s views clearly go above partisanship, beyond petty politics; they are patriotic, pro-Canada. Ignatieff’s pan-Canada outlook got further articulated when he said that while oilsands has its environmental challenges, oilsands are a lucrative tool, both financially and politically, that increases Canada's stature around the globe and allows the country to stand its ground on several policy fronts against the U. S.
The above bodes well for not only for Alberta but the whole of Canada. His views are now more or less along the lines of views held by Alberta’s Premier Ed Stelmach, and Canada’s Prime Minister Steven Harper. These statements will no doubt be providing much needed hope to the people of Canada who can now justifiably look towards political stability in Ottawa.
Canada’s federal budget will come up for voting on Jan 29, and Harper’s minority government needs support of at least one opposition party to survive the voting. Harper has indicated that he will listen to Ignatieff’s suggestions on the upcoming budget with an open mind.
If Harper can accommodate some of Liberal party’s suggestions, he can undoubtedly rest assured that Liberals won’t let his government fall. That will mean stability in Ottawa, and political stability is what encourages the potential investors, including the big oil companies, who are currently sitting on the fence in wait-and-watch mode.
It is important to note that the sudden slow down in investment in oilsands projects was not prompted by slumping oil prices alone; in fact, it is farcical to believe that any short-term drop in oil prices should have disrupted many oil companies' investment plans, as it did; oil companies which are run by people of decent dose of competence base their decisions on the WHOLE life span of the project. The life span of oilsands projects range from 20-40 years, even more.
It does not require much intelligence to grasp that given the aggressive production cutting stance taken by OPEC countries (plus drop in non-conventional oil production), and stimulus packages announced by the G-7 countries, China and India, the aggregate demand of oil will start picking up by Q3 of this year. Coupled with the impact of production cuts, by the end of 2009 price of oil is expected to be any where between 60-100 dollars per barrel, probably more likely upwards of $70. The price of oil will remain on an upward looking curve thereafter.
So, the price of oil was not so much of a concern for the likes of Shell, TOTAL or Statoil et al. It was the uncertainties on policy level of both Canada and the new US administration regarding oilsands that impelled these companies to adopt more circumspect approach. Unless these companies are sure of policies on oilsands – of both Canada and US – and sure of a stable government in Ottawa ,which has a balanced view on oilsands, the oil companies would remain on the fence.
It may be mentioned for the benefit of those not familiar with Canadian politics that leader of an opposition party, known as NDP, had gone on record to say that given the chance his party will stop all oilsands projects. Such intellectually-challenged people were willing to cut their noses to spite their faces. Their political aspirations got better of whatever amount of intelligence they have to ignore the vital importance of a resource, like, oilsands to Canada as a whole – on economic and political fronts.
However, Liberal party’s aforementioned views on oilsands will certainly help Harper’s folks in formulating bi-partisan policy on environment, including policies relating to carbon capture. Once there is clarity on Federal environment policy, again, that will provide necessary confidence to the investors to finalize their investment decisions in regard to oilsands projects.
It is hoped that taking cue from Ignatieff, leaders of other Canadian opposition parties will set aside petty-minded politics and rally together to do what is in the best interest of the country. They will do well to remember there is much to gain, nationally and politically, in a prosperous Canada rather than in an economically and politically weak Canada.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)