Thursday, September 03, 2020

FRACKING AFRICA
The Largest Oil Play Of The Decade? Interview With Daniel Jarvie

James Stafford
Oilprice.com September 1, 2020


As we approach the climax of a potentially enormous Permian-style discovery in the opening of Namibia’s giant, deep Kavango Basin, internationally acclaimed geochemist Daniel Jarvie explains in an exclusive interview why there’s so much cause for excitement--and why the independent explorer who single handedly owns the entire basin is becoming so well known.

In this interview, Jarvie--one of the world’s most famous geochemist ‘wildcatters’ renowned for his work worldwide, a major force behind Barnett Shale exploration since the 1980s and former chief geochemist for EOG Resources--explains:
Why Africa is the final frontier for oil and gas
Why Namibia is the onshore sweet spot
Why it’s all about the small, independent explorer, Reconnaissance Energy Africa (V: RECO, OTCMKTS:RECAF)
Why he jumped on this opportunity
Why it’s all about the source rock, and Kavango’s got it
How a non-typical style of drilling might get them there faster
How Kavango compares to the Permian Basin and the Eagle Ford
How the numbers could be so high they would be laughable


Jarvie recently released a report on Reconnaissance Energy Africa’s Kavango Basin, putting the potential at 120 billion boe (barrels of oil equivalent) which, if it all pans out, could make this one of the biggest oil finds of the last few decades.

James Stafford: Outside of offshore Guyana/Suriname, there hasn’t been any exciting discovery news in the oil patch in a long time--especially onshore. So, why should we be excited about Namibia right now, or about Africa in general?

Daniel Jarvie: Two reasons: First, Africa is the final frontier for oil discoveries because it’s so vastly under-explored and we could even be looking at the last major onshore oil discovery on Earth.

Second, you can forget about super-majors like Exxon, Chevron when it comes to unconventional exploration outside of the United States… they aren’t the ones who make these onshore discoveries work. Instead, you should be looking for locations where independents are out in force looking for the next big thing.

So, why should we be excited right now about Namibia? Precisely because there is a very strong independent junior explorer here sitting on a sedimentary basin that rivals South Texas in a massively under-explored region.



James Stafford: Can you tell us more about Recon Africa (TSX.V: RECO, OTCMKTS:RECAF) in Namibia?

Daniel Jarvie: First of all, RECO founder, Craig Steinke jumped in on this in 2012. He didn’t just jump, he attacked: Craig bought up the entire Kavango Basin, which spans Northeast Namibia and Northwest Botswana. The Namibian license covers 6.3 million acres. The Botswana license covers another 2.45 million acres. And they offer large scale plays that are both conventional and unconventional.

James Stafford: What was it that interested you in this project as a geochemist?

Daniel Jarvie: I’ve worked all over the world, including in South Africa, Uganda, Tanzania and elsewhere, and Namibia was new to me and exciting, but it’s the petroleum systems involved here that make this narrative really flow.

If you’re not a geologist or geochemist or related, as an investor you can fall into a bit of a black hole with these plays. There’s a lot of talk by promoters about “big traps” and their potential to hold a billion barrels of oil. But those “traps”--which are basically containers where hydrocarbons can get trapped -- mean absolutely nothing if there’s no source rock to charge those containers. Source rock is where hydrocarbons are created, and it's the source rock that’s responsible for a promising “petroleum system”.

I travel the world and collect source rocks.

For me, as a geological chemist, my excitement about Namibia--and Recon Africa’s Kavango Basin--was all about the source rock, which is one component of a petroleum system. A trap without a source rock charge is called a dry hole – which shows you the importance of source rock charge to the container.

James Stafford: So what specifically was it that really made you a believer in Kavango’s petroleum system then?

Daniel Jarvie: Well originally I got to see the core from the Owambo Basin that flanks Kavango. The core is a dark, rich, organic shale. That’s what prompted my interest. And since then, every test and piece of news that has come out of this basin has only made me more confident.

View photos



View photos

Survey and analysis have already confirmed the basin reaches depths of up to 30,000 feet, and as geologist Bill Cathey has already noted, he hasn’t seen a basin in the world of this depth and these geological conditions that isn’t home to a major petroleum system or multiple petroleum systems such as in the Permian basin of West Texas-New Mexico.

James Stafford: So, what’s next and what should potential investors expect with the next big news to come out of Kavango?

Daniel Jarvie: Now it’s all about targeting the drill, but the results of the next tests will be major drivers. This is where we prove up a working hydrocarbon system, so it’s a very big deal.

What we’re looking for is a section to penetrate that will give us the most information. We’re drilling a stratigraphic test, which means geologically directed drilling to obtain information that will direct our efforts toward producing petroleum.

But the three stratigraphic drills we’re doing aren’t just basic stratigraphic tests. They will be much more. They’re going to provide a lot of info on how much oil there is and what containers it has charged. That will be my job.

We need to know where the hydrocarbon system is and where it’s directed. With this bigger section in the countryside, we need to understand not only the source rock, but migration pathways with traps (containers) and seals (the lid on the container, i.e., the sweet spots).

James Stafford: From a technology standpoint, what can you tell us about the drill that would be relevant for investors who are keeping a close eye on Kavango?

Daniel Jarvie: Well one of the most important tech aspects of this is that we will also be drilling with water-based mud, which is a wonderful thing for me because it means we can identify pay zones that could otherwise be overlooked, e.g., low resistivity petroleum reservoirs such as the Middle Member of the Bakken formation.

If you aren’t an expert in drilling then you are unlikely to understand just how essential mud (drilling fluid) is when it comes to drilling. It’s what can make or break a discovery. That’s one reason so much by-passed pay is discovered, e.g., look at the Permian basin – it’s been explored for 100 years and they’re still finding pay zones that have been overlooked or bypassed during drilling. As our initial drilling is both for discovery and science, the use of water-based mud is extremely important. Once production is in place, then changes can be implemented to the drilling fluid as desired.

Frequently, drillers who aren’t using this method end up drilling through a pay-zone without even noticing. For the uninitiated, a pay-zone is a favorable location for oil and gas production. It means it’s a highly exploitable zone. And the type of mud you use determines your likelihood of missing a big pay-zone.

That’s been a major problem in Mexico and even in the Permian basin for example, where most of the wells are drilled with oil-based mud. Oil-based mud makes it very difficult for geochemists to identify oil in the system due to the oil in the drilling fluid. That’s because the oil-based mud is reused and mixed in with other oil--sometimes even from a different basin-- so it skews the picture and makes a pay-zone difficult to pinpoint from a geochemical perspective

So, water-based mud is ideal for me, and that’s what we’re doing at Recon Africa. We’ll be able to get outstanding data on both conventional and unconventional drill spots. And we won’t be missing any pay-zones.

James Stafford: Why isn’t drilling with water-based mud the go-to if it’s such a problem?

Daniel Jarvie: There is a difference when exploring in an unknown basin versus production drilling where the oil container has been pinpointed. In the latter case oil-based mud enhances drilling rates (i.e.,minimizes expense). On the other hand, we are trying to find oil and using water-based mud allows us to chemically see the oil. There are certainly many logging operations that allow assessment of petroleum charge, but geochemistry is the only technique that truly measures oil itself rather than inferring that it is oil.

Drillers are obsessed with drilling rates – how fast can we drill the hole to minimize drilling expense – a noble and economic cause. However, I go by the old axiom ‘our job is not to drill a hole, but to find petroleum’. As these are the first tests in the basin, we need the optimum samples to analyze for the presence of oil and source rocks.

Oil-based mud does have a number of advantages. It allows drilling more quickly because it lubricates the bit; it carries the cuttings back; it helps prevent shale from slopping into the hole etc. But from an exploration point of view, it has serious drawbacks.

One of the key characteristics of ReconAfrica is that the company owns it’s own drilling rig, so it’s much less concerned about the speed of drilling and more concerned with quality of data.

Many years ago I was working with a major in the Permian and I told them that if they drilled with water-based mud they’d find more bypass pay. The manager stood up and said “We find bypass pay every day”. Their geologist responded: “Yeah, and we bypass pay everyday.”

James Stafford: Looking at your report on Kavango and the general potential on page 2… These numbers look incredible. Have you come across numbers like this before? Are there any other plays to compare it to?

Daniel Jarvie: In the report, just released, I put total petroleum generation potential over Recon’s 8.75 million acres at 120 billion boe (Barrels of Oil Equivalent). Now, that’s only looking at 1,641 sections, which represents only 12% of Recon’s total holdings in the basin. As I’ve said, I’ve been conservative with the numbers, and even so, if the potential pans out in full, they are pretty comparable to the Permian Wolfcamp and the Eagle Ford in Texas.

View photos

And ReconAfrica owns the entire basin, subject only to a government royalty. They’ve been extremely savvy about getting land.

James Stafford: Beyond using only 12% of Recon’s Kavango holdings, how conservative are you being?

Daniel Jarvie: I really can’t stress strongly enough how conservative I’ve been here. I like to be conservative with numbers. Most analyst and industry reports stress the total organic carbon content (TOC) of source rocks, but that’s only half the story for hydrocarbon formation. The other key component is hydrogen. Good source rocks have not only good TOC values (say 2-7%) but also high hydrogen content in the organic carbon.

For my numbers on Recon, I only used a hydrogen content of 358 (mg/g), which is very conservative based on the rock I’ve seen from the Owambo basin. In other words, on a scale of 1-10, I used “3” for hydrogen content, which is quite modest. For comparison, the Eagle Ford source rock would be a 6 and the Permian Wolfcamp a 5.

Thickness is the other key part, and as we don’t know the thickness yet, we are going by what we saw in other sections, but there is 6,000 feet of Permian section in there so that’s a very good start. I anticipate a thickness of between 300 and 400 ft of net petroleum generating source rock.

James Stafford: And if its 400 feet thick, you are estimating the potential at 120 billion barrels of total petroleum generated. And you think this is conservative?

Daniel Jarvie: I do. And it’s not even an unusual number for a basin this size, and this depth. The Eagle Ford and Permian Wolfcamp petroleum potentials are even higher using comparable thickness. They could be sitting on something absolutely huge.

If you apply those numbers to the entire basin they would be off the wall.

They would be laughable because they are so high.

James Stafford: And what would be a normal recoverability rate for a basin of this size and type?

Daniel Jarvie: One of the problems is that no one seems to know how much petroleum is in place when it comes to these kind of plays. This goes back to the Barnett shale. There were early reports that there were 10-15% recovery of the shale gas. But when they got a better handle of oil and gas in place it was more like 6-8%. And for oil, it’s much harder to produce. In the Permian I imagine they are getting 6-8% but it is more of a hybrid system that is better for production. The heterogeneity in our basin is expected to be comparable and therefore provide a high recovery rate from those charged containers.

James Stafford: Well on a 150 billion barrels that’s not bad at all. But let’s swing back to thickness for a moment. I noticed that the Owambo basin slide shows that the Kavango basin is thicker?

View photos

Daniel Jarvie: Yes, while the Owambo Basin showed extremely promising core, its depth as it relates to temperature was a major issue; it had not been cooked sufficiently to generate petroleum. What we can see is that there’s a structural high before dipping down into the Kavango Basin, so we are thinking the thickness is probably close to double in this section, maybe more, and higher temperatures.

I have a feeling that it’s more based on what I’ve seen. So we believe it’s a very thick shale and it’s at the optimal depth to get oil production.

See, everyone talks about the Eagle Ford, but unless you are in a sweet spot you have a hard time producing there. The sweet spot of the Eagle Ford has a 75% Kerogen conversion window, but if you move up to the 50% or 25% wells, those wells are not economic.

James Stafford: How would you compare the Kavango to the Eagle Ford?

Daniel Jarvie: Well the Kavango actually is quite different. It’s more like the Permian Basin, and that’s a big plus.

The Eagle Ford is marine carbonate source rock, and it averages 60% carbonate plus it is only about 220-250 ft thick. Kavango is dramatically different to that. From what we know so far, it’s more akin to the Permian basin, a marine shale that generates a high quality oil, and it is thick and heterogeneous system. I expect to find stacked pay zones throughout any source rock systems. There will likely be multiple source rocks by the way.

If you want to get a lot of oil out the system you love the heterogeneity. That’s one of the reasons the Permian works so well. It’s also another reason to be excited about Kavango.

James Stafford: If you prove this system up, what comes next?

Daniel Jarvie: Then it becomes phenomenally more interesting.

We will probably have some oil production shows and indications of where it is. We will be able to tell the thermal maturity and can expand it across the basin so we can high grade different prospects by their depth and burial history.

Right now we don’t have a good handle on that. The formation got laid down hundreds of millions of years ago but we don’t know what has happened to it since. And that’s what the first well will help with. And that will point us in the right direction.

James Stafford: How does it do that?

Daniel Jarvie: Think of it as a container that has a “pipeline” running to it from the source rock (a migration pathway). If we drill through the so-called pipeline we can identify oil that has travelled through it toward a big conventional container. Does it go to that trap? So it points to the direction the oil is going if it has gone through the system. It will pinpoint which trap should be best.

In fact the pipeline itself may be a reservoir such as the Middle Member of the Bakken formation.

James Stafford: How does RECO’s Kavango stand up to your long-time wildcatting experience?

Daniel Jarvie: Given the nature of the basin and the tremendous thickness, this is pretty much a no brainer...It will be productive and I’m expecting high-quality oil.”

This was the issue when I worked in Uganda, for instance. We could see there was a system but knew there would be waxy oil. But Kavango is different: The system is marine and terrestrial so it should give us high-quality oil and allow it to move and be produced. You need to be able to flow the oil for optimum recovery.

The bottom line is this: The Kavango Basin has all the characteristics necessary for conventional and unconventional petroleum systems. Although I’m known for my unconventional work, I’m actually hopeful that the conventional exceeds the unconventional. Why? Because conventional reservoirs are inherently more productive.

James Stafford: And for our readers who don’t know, what do you mean when you say rank wildcat?

Daniel Jarvie: It means there’s not a single well on the property. It’s like discovering a new continent.

There is nothing to go by except the aero-mag and the seismic. It doesn’t mean it’s different. Just that it hasn’t been explored and wasn’t known about before.

James Stafford: How has a system this large and promising not been discovered before?

Daniel Jarvie: Well, when it comes to discovery, it’s often up to the independents to find the play. The majors then have the resources to come in and produce the system once it's been discovered. Look at the discovery and development of unconventional plays – it’s the independents who led the way starting with Mitchell Energy. In these unexplored oil frontiers, opportunities like this have just been overlooked.

James Stafford: Ok, and what does the seismic data you have so far tell you about the property exactly?

Daniel Jarvie: Well, the seismic data is very important because that shows where these traps or ‘containers’ likely are.

The geologists and geophysicists working on Kavango have done a fantastic job mapping it out.

If you see a cross section, what you see on the seismic is where the faults and potential traps are. That’s what you’re looking for. Where are the structures (containers) that have the potential to hold oil?

And then I come in and try to prove that the source rock has generated the oil they need to fill that trap.

James Stafford: Wow. But it just seems so unlikely that no one has stumbled across this play before now.

Daniel Jarvie: Yes, but, like I said, this is Africa. Look at East Africa: they are only just coming into production. So it’s unusual to come across an overlooked basin, but given the location and position in the world, it’s not overly surprising. The more surprising element is that the government actually had the aero-mag but didn’t have the expertise to realize what it was showing them. But ReconAfrica did, and jumped in and scooped it up before anyone had time to blink.

Which leads to a final point: The Namibian government is great to work with, making way for viable exploration and production efforts. An oil friendly regime is vital for any oil project going forward.

Other companies looking towards new oil frontiers for big returns:

Exxon (NYSE:XOM) is another company looking to cash in on Namibia’s oil boom. It recently acquired additional 7 million net acres from the Namibian government for a block extending from the shoreline to about 135 miles offshore in water depths up to 13,000 feet, with exploration activities to begin by the end of this year.

What Exxon’s banking on is that Namibia, which once fit together with Brazil, shares the same geology as Brazil’s pre-salt bonanza basins, Santos and Campos, which have already proved enormously resource-rich, according to Deloitte. When oil demand returns to normal, this will put Exxon in a great position to take an edge over its biggest competitors.

Chevron (NYSE:CVX) is another oil major with significant presence in Africa, particularly in Nigeria and Angola. In fact, the supermajor ranks among the top oil producers in the two African nations. Other areas on the continent where the company holds interests include Benin, Ghana, the Republic of Congo and Togo. Chevron also holds a 36.7 percent interest in the West African Gas Pipeline Company Limited, which supplies Nigerian natural gas to customers in the region.

While its interests are spread out among the continent, it’s all strategic. With bets on both oil and natural gas, Chevron is looking to take advantage of both of the fossil fuels. Though prices are still depressed at the moment, as fuel demand returns to normal, Chevron could be a big winner in as prices climb back up to pre-pandemic levels.

Royal Dutch Shell (NYSE:RDS.A) is no stranger to the oil and gas game in Africa. In fact, the Dutch oil giant began drilling in the region in the 1950s, and now has assets in over 20 countries across the continent. Though it has sold off a number of assets in the region in recent years, it continues to maintain a strong presence in South Africa, in particular.

Shell’s South African assets are key because the government has been significantly more stable than some of the other big bets on the continent. Moreover, it’s been very supportive of Shell in its endeavors in the country. Its operations in South Africa include retail and commercial fuel, lubricant, chemical and manufacturing. It’s also heavily invested in upstream exploration. It even holds the exploration rights to the Orange Basin Deep Water area, off the country’s west coast and has applications for shale gas exploration rights in the Karoo, in central South Africa.

Total (NYSE:TOT) is another major betting big on Africa’s potential. It has been present in the region for over 90 years, and it is showing no sign of reducing its footprint anytime soon. In fact, just recently, the company announced a major oil discovery offshore Suriname.

But Total also maintains a ‘big picture’ outlook across all of its endeavors. It is not only aware of the needs that are not being met by a significant portion of the world’s growing population, it is also hyper-aware of the looming climate crisis if changes are not made. In its push to create a better world for all, it has committed to contributing to each of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. This is good news for investors who often worry about how local entities are impacted when global energy giants move into their countries.


Suncor Energy (NYSE:SU; TSX:SU): As one of the biggest names in energy, Suncor has adopted a number of high-tech solutions for finding, pumping, storing, and delivering its resources. Not only is it big in the oil sector, however, it is a leader in renewable energy. Recently, the company invested $300 million in a wind farm located in Alberta.

While its primarily based out of North America, its assets in Africa and the Middle East should not be ignored. Though the oil downturn has weighed on the company’s share price this year, many analysts are pointing to a turnaround, from which Suncor is likely to benefit.
When the rebound in crude prices finally materializes, giants like Suncor are sure to do well out of it. While many of the oil majors have given up on oil sands production – those who focus on technological advancements in the area have a great long-term outlook. And that upside is further amplified by the fact that it is currently looking particularly under-valued compared to
Tourmaline Oil Corp (TSX:TOU) is another Canadian resource producer focusing on exploration, production, development and acquisition within Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin. The company is in possession of an extensive undeveloped land position with long-term growth opportunities and a large multi-year drilling inventory. Tourmaline’s strong leadership make the company a promising pick for investors looking to take advantage of the tremendous Canadian oil opportunities which are due for a strong rebound as oil prices inch higher.
Husky Energy Inc (TSX:HSE): This integrated oil and gas company out of Western Canada lives up to its name, fierce and driven for success. It’s already got a presence in some of the most well-known oil regions on the planet, but it hasn’t stopped there. It’s even positioned itself in Europe, Africa and as remote as the South China Sea.
Imperial Oil (TSX:IMO) still has some of the lowest cost producing oil sands in Canada and that is going to pay off as oil prices continue to rise and new tech breakthroughs bring breakeven prices even lower. The management is well known for being conservative, but that certainly shouldn’t put investors off in a time when recovery is the buzzword of the day and consistency is sure to be rewarded.
Gibson Energy (TSX:GEI): has a long history in Canada’s oil and gas game. Established in 1953, Gibson knows the industry inside and out. The company has a diverse portfolio which includes transportation, storage, processing, marketing and distribution of oil, condensates, oilfield waste, refined products and natural gas. With Gibson’s huge array of assets and its multi-platform sales strategies, investors look to Gibson with confidence.

By James Stafford

**IMPORTANT! BY READING OUR CONTENT YOU EXPLICITLY AGREE TO THE FOLLOWING. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY**

Forward-Looking Statements. Statements contained in this document that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements that involve various risks and uncertainty affecting the business of Recon. All estimates and statements with respect to Recon’s operations, its plans and projections, size of potential oil reserves, comparisons to other oil producing fields, oil prices, recoverable oil, production targets, production and other operating costs and likelihood of oil recoverability are forward-looking statements under applicable securities laws and necessarily involve risks and uncertainties including, without limitation: risks associated with oil and gas exploration, timing of reports, development, exploitation and production, geological risks, heterogeneity rates, marketing and transportation, availability of adequate funding, volatility of commodity prices, imprecision of reserve and resource estimates, environmental risks, competition from other producers, government regulation, dates of commencement of production and changes in the regulatory and taxation environment. Actual results may vary materially from the information provided in this document, and there is no representation that the actual results realized in the future will be the same in whole or in part as those presented herein. Other factors that could cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements are also set forth in filings that Recon and its technical analysts have made, We undertake no obligation, except as otherwise required by law, to update these forward-looking statements except as required by law.

Exploration for hydrocarbons is a speculative venture necessarily involving substantial risk. Recon's future success will depend on its ability to develop its current properties and on its ability to discover resources that are capable of commercial production. However, there is no assurance that Recon's future exploration and development efforts will result in the discovery or development of commercial accumulations of oil and natural gas. In addition, even if hydrocarbons are discovered, the costs of extracting and delivering the hydrocarbons to market and variations in the market price may render uneconomic any discovered deposit. Geological conditions are variable and unpredictable. Even if production is commenced from a well, the quantity of hydrocarbons produced inevitably will decline over time, and production may be adversely affected or may have to be terminated altogether if Recon encounters unforeseen geological conditions. Adverse climatic conditions at such properties may also hinder Recon's ability to carry on exploration or production activities continuously throughout any given year.

DISCLAIMERS

ADVERTISEMENT. This communication is not a recommendation to buy or sell securities. Oilprice.com, Advanced Media Solutions Ltd, and their owners, managers, employees, and assigns (collectively “the Company”) may in the future be paid by Recon to disseminate future communications if this communication proves effective. In this case the Company has not been paid for this article. But the potential for future compensation and the Company’s large share position is a major conflict with our ability to be unbiased, more specifically:

This communication is for entertainment purposes only. Never invest purely based on our communication. We have not been compensated but may in the future be compensated to conduct investor awareness advertising and marketing for TSXV:RECO. Therefore, this communication should be viewed as a commercial advertisement only. We have not investigated the background of the company. Frequently companies profiled in our articles experience a large increase in volume and share price during the course of investor awareness marketing, which often end as soon as the investor awareness marketing ceases. The information in our communications and on our website has not been independently verified and is not guaranteed to be correct.

SHARE OWNERSHIP. The owner of Oilprice.com owns a large number of shares of this featured company and therefore has an additional incentive to see the featured company’s stock perform well. The owner of Oilprice.com will not notify the market when it decides to buy more or sell shares of this issuer in the market. The owner of Oilprice.com will be buying and selling shares of this issuer for its own profit. This is why we stress that you conduct extensive due diligence as well as seek the advice of your financial advisor or a registered broker-dealer before investing in any securities.

NOT AN INVESTMENT ADVISOR. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. ALWAYS DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH and consult with a licensed investment professional before making an investment. This communication should not be used as a basis for making any investment.

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. Investing is inherently risky. Don't trade with money you can't afford to lose. This is neither a solicitation nor an offer to Buy/Sell securities. No representation is being made that any account will or is likely to achieve profits similar to those discussed.

HURRICANE LAURA IMPACT 
Total’s (NYSE: TOT) Port Arthur refinery is awaiting the restoration of electricity in order to restart operations following Hurricane Laura. Citgo and Phillips 66 (NYSE: PXD) said that assessments of the damage at their facilities in Lake Charles could take days.
-    Chesapeake Energy (NYSE: CHK) hoped to cancel a $300 million contract with Energy Transfer (NYSE: ET), but a court ruled in Energy Transfer’s favor.

-    Enbridge (NYSE: ENB) said that an offshore natural gas pipeline that services four offshore platforms in the Gulf of Mexico remained out of commission due to the hurricane.

Tuesday, September 1, 2020

Oil prices rose on Tuesday on new manufacturing data from both the U.S. and China, which surprised on the upside. The dollar also weakened, adding some support to crude. Nevertheless, crude is showing few signs of being able to break out from its current range.

Distressed shale assets from the last boom. Many of the M&A deals in U.S. shale following the 2014-2016 oil market downturn are now “unworkable,” according to Reuters. Of the 50 largest acreage purchases between 2016 and 2019, 31 of them only add value if Brent trades above $50 per barrel. For instance, Diamondback Energy (NASDAQ: FANG) paid roughly $54,977 per acre when it purchased Energen in 2018, a deal that would now breakeven if Brent averaged $77 per barrel.

Gulf of Mexico output remains down. As of Monday, about 53 percent of oil production in the Gulf of Mexico was still shut-in, following the devastation from Hurricane Laura. About 41 percent of natural gas production is shut-in. Personnel remain evacuated from 117 production platforms or 18 percent of the total. 


View photos



View photos

View photos

Related: Supermajors Still Struggling Despite Oil Price Recovery

EVs still costly to produce. EVs will remain more costly to manufacture than traditional gasoline and diesel-fueled vehicles for the rest of the decade, according to new research. EV manufacturing costs could average 16,000 euros by 2030, or 9 percent higher than conventional cars.
Exxon’s Imperial Shuts Oil-Sands Mine After Pipeline Spill

Robert Tuttle Bloomberg September 2, 2020



(Bloomberg) -- Exxon Mobil Corp.’s Imperial Oil shut down its oil-sands mine after a spill from a pipeline that supplies diluent to the operation, adding to the woes of Canada’s beleaguered energy industry.

Imperial announced the ramp-down of its Kearl mine in northern Alberta on Wednesday, following a leak Saturday that led Inter Pipeline Ltd. to shut the west segment of its 240,000-barrel-a-day Polaris system. The diluent Polaris supplies to sites operated by Imperial and Husky Energy Inc. is mixed with the sticky bitumen they produce, so that it can be shipped by pipeline.
The disruption is just the latest blow to Canadian crude producers that had been struggling with a lack of pipeline infrastructure and competition from shale before the Covid-19 pandemic slashed demand from the U.S. refineries they supply.


The Western Canadian Select crude benchmark for October delivery strengthened relative to West Texas Intermediate. Its discount to the U.S. benchmark has narrowed by $1.40 a barrel over the past two days to $9.40. Before Tuesday, the gap hadn’t fallen below $10 since Aug. 17, NE2 Group data show.

Imperial said the Kearl mine is ready to ramp up to full production rates once diluent supply is restored, and it’s pursuing steps to try to mitigate the impact of the outage.

The area where the break in the pipeline is believed to have occurred has been identified, and the company is working to remove “product” from the shut-in section, Shawn Roth, an Alberta Energy Regulator spokesman, said Wednesday. The AER hasn’t received a request to resume service on the line.
There was no estimate for a restart of the impacted segment of the Polaris system, Inter Pipeline said Tuesday. The east segment of the pipeline, which supplies some other oil-sands sites, is fully operational.

What Bloomberg Intelligence Says:
The leak in the Polaris diluent pipeline forced oil sands production to halt at a time producers are already struggling with weak margins and stretched balance sheets. Imperial Oil, 70% owned by Exxon Mobil, was forced to close its Kearl mining project in northeast Alberta Province that produces over 270,000 barrels a day. Husky, BP and Cenovus could also see effects on production and costs.
-- Fernando Valle and Talon Custer, BI analysts

Husky, operator of the Sunrise oil-sands site, has been affected by the pipeline shutdown, “however, we have other options to help mitigate the effects,” spokeswoman Dawn Delaney said Tuesday.

(Updates with regulator comment in sixth paragraph)

©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

THE REAL ECONOMY USA VS WALL ST


Furloughs becoming permanent and pay bumps getting rolled back.

The crucial August jobs report is just one day away.
And ahead of this data, two readings on the labor market released Wednesday pointed to an employment slowdown in the first month since support from the CARES Act expired.
And should serve as a troubling backdrop for lawmakers who are still far apart on passing a new aid package for workers and businesses operating at levels well below those that prevailed before the pandemic.
Private payroll data from ADP published Wednesday morning showed that 428,000 jobs were added to private sector payrolls in August. This was more than the 212,000 added last month, but fewer than the 1 million jobs Wall Street expected were added last month.
Ahu Yildirmaz, vice president and co-head of the ADP Research Institute, said Wednesday that, “The August job postings demonstrate a slow recovery. Job gains are minimal, and businesses across all sizes and sectors have yet to come close to their pre-COVID-19 employment levels.”


And on Wednesday afternoon, the Federal Reserve’s latest Beige Book report showed the labor market remains mixed across the Fed’s 12 districts. The Beige Book is closely watched by investors as it forms the basis of the economic discussion that Fed officials will have during their next two-day policy meeting, set for September 15-16.
“Employment increased overall among Districts, with gains in manufacturing cited most often,” the Beige Book said. This positive commentary on manufacturing employment that jives with data received out of that sector earlier this week highlighted in the Morning Brief on Wednesday.
“However,” the report continued, “some Districts also reported slowing job growth and increased hiring volatility, particularly in service industries, with rising instances of furloughed workers being laid off permanently as demand remained soft.
“Firms continued to experience difficulty finding necessary labor, a matter compounded by day care availability, as well as uncertainty over the coming school year and jobless benefits. Wages were flat to slightly higher in most Districts, with greater pressure cited among lower-paying positions. Some firms also rescinded previous pay cuts. Others, however, have looked to roll back hazard pay for high-exposure jobs, though some have chosen not to do so for staff morale and recruitment purposes.” (Emphasis added.)
So, some positive indicators — wage pressures emerging lower-paying roles with pay cuts rescinded — and negative indicators with furloughs becoming permanent and hazard pay getting rolled back.
But with the post-lockdown recovery still in its early stages and overall employment in the U.S. economy down by more than 12 million since February, flat-to-mixed outlooks for the labor market are not what policymakers ought to be shooting for.
“Continued uncertainty and volatility related to the pandemic, and its negative effect on consumer and business activity, was a theme echoed across the country,” the Beige Book said.
So while stocks on Wednesday continued to rally and earnings suggest better days are ahead in Corporate America, the current on-the-ground reality for many workers and consumers is an economic recovery leveling off at depressed levels.
By Myles Udland, reporter and co-anchor of The Final Round. Follow him at @MylesUdland

Essential and vulnerable: COVID-19 takes hard toll on California's migrant farm workers

PAY THEM ESSENTIAL WAGES
Nadia Lopez, Report for America, USA TODAY Opinion•September 3, 2020

WINTON, Calif. — The 31-mile road that connects Modesto and Merced, cut between almond, apricot and plum orchards, leads to California’s agricultural heartland.

Many migrant agricultural workers such as Hugo Garcia call this small town, a few miles north of Merced, home. Garcia has worked at an almond processing plant in the region for more than 16 years, but he saw his life upended this year when he and his entire family contracted COVID-19.

Garcia, sitting in the home he shared with his 85-year-old mother, said he worked shoulder-to-shoulder with more than two dozen workers in an area that was shut down after nearly everyone tested positive for COVID-19. He tested positive June 16 and quickly spread the virus to his mother and other family members.

Garcia’s symptoms were mild and he recovered, but his mother, Sinforosa, died after more than three weeks in the hospital. He had to make the agonizing decision to take her off life support when doctors said she wouldn’t recover.- ADVERTISEMENT -


“She had a 1% chance of living; she wasn’t going to make it,” he said in Spanish. “She was only suffering at that point.”

Against the advice of health officials, county leaders abandoned contact tracing, saying the spread of the virus was “too wide” for it to be effective. So, despite a confirmed diagnosis, no one from Merced County asked Garcia about who he came in contact with.
Farm workers and their families wait for donated food and supplies, including surgical masks, on May 9 near Rolinda, Calif.

Garcia’s situation is far from unique. Farms and processing plants across the region have reported alarming COVID-19 outbreaks, leading to a disproportionate rate of cases among the Latino and migrant community.

Categorized as a high-risk group for COVID-19, Latinos make up 39% of the state population, but they represent 57% of coronavirus cases in California and 46% of deaths. About 90% of the state’s agricultural laborers are Latino.

Farm workers, who endure extreme heat and pesticide exposure daily, continue to work grueling hours standing shoulder-to-shoulder in processing centers across the state, often shuffling to and from the fields in clusters, then going back home to close quarters.

As cases surged, California focused efforts to combat the spread among Latinos and migrant farm workers in the Central Valley by allocating an additional $52 million in federal funding to the region and deploying three teams of health and safety workers.

In addition to the state’s $75 million in disaster relief for workers, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced a $50 million philanthropic effort to support the state’s roughly 2 million undocumented people.

But those dollars are running out, and experts say there’s enough to provide aid for only 150,000 people. Latino leaders in the Valley are calling for more state action.

Kings County Supervisor Richard Valle, who grew up in a farm worker community, helped draft a letter to state leaders asking for more financial assistance as well as protective equipment, mobile testing sites and translation services for workers. He said farm workers need the same protection and support as public safety and medical workers.

“The farm workers are catching COVID at high rates, and it’s spreading out in the communities," Valle said. "It’s driving up the numbers in the communities, and it puts our food chain at risk."

South of Merced County, in the secluded Kings County town of Avenal, Rosa Barajas, a line worker at an onion processing plant, worried about getting sick. But earning only $12 an hour, she couldn’t afford to take days off.

She said she worked more than eight hours a day standing next to a dozen co-workers without masks or gloves and in cramped quarters. Coworkers began to get sick, and Barajas, a mother of two, started to feel unbearably tired.

In a few days, she suffered from congestion and bone-chilling aches. Then a coworker died, terrifying Barajas, who is diabetic and has hypertension.

“Everything started feeling worse and I couldn’t even breathe,” she said. “I thought I was getting better, then it would start all over again. I prayed to God to take me because I felt like I couldn’t go through with it anymore.”

California’s $50 billion agricultural industry depends on workers like Garcia and Barajas, about 60% of whom are unauthorized to legally work in the U.S., according to a recent study.

Considered essential workers by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, their undocumented status disqualifies them from unemployment, access to health care services and safety net programs put in place to help residents during the pandemic. They also don’t receive family sick leave if exposed to the virus.

Valle, the Kings County supervisor, knows how hard migrant laborers work to put food on the table for Americans and for their families. His grandparents used to take their five children, including his mother, to the fields where they picked grapes during the hundred-degree summers in Selma, Calif. They worked long hours while the kids played, then drove home, made dinner, put the children to bed and woke up at 4:30 a.m. the next day to do it all over again.

“I feel obligated because I wouldn't be here if it wasn't for my (grandparents) working in those fields,” he said. “So we owe it. I can't sit here knowing that farm workers are not getting protection while in the middle of a pandemic.”

Nadia Lopez covers Latino Communities for The Fresno Bee. This dispatch is part of a series called “On the Ground” with Report for America, an initiative of The GroundTruth Project. Follow her on Twitter: @n_llopez.

You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page, on Twitter @usatodayopinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter. To respond to a column, submit a comment to letters@usatoday.com.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: COVID-19 hits California's migrant farm workers hard

Donald Trump Would Like to Momentarily Pause This Campaign to Tell You How Good His Brain Is


HISTORIC DEFEAT FOR US IMPERIALISM
 Iran nuclear deal members resolved to preserve agreement

DAVID RISING,Associated Press•September 1, 2020

 In this Wednesday, Aug. 26, 2020 file photo, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, Rafael Mariano Grossi from Argentina, speaks to the media after returning from Iran at the Vienna International Airport. Representatives of Iran and the world powers working to save the nuclear deal with Tehran agreed Tuesday, Sept. 1, 2020, in Vienna to do everything possible to preserve the landmark 2015 agreement in their first meeting since the United States announced a bid to restore United Nations sanctions against the Islamic Republic. (AP Photo/Ronald Zak, File)



BERLIN (AP) — Representatives of Iran and the world powers working to save the nuclear deal with Tehran agreed Tuesday in Vienna to do everything possible to preserve the landmark 2015 agreement in their first meeting since the United States announced a bid to restore United Nations sanctions against the Islamic Republic.

Helga Schmid, the European Union representative who chaired the meeting, said afterwards on Twitter that the “participants are united in resolve to preserve the #IranDeal and find a way to ensure full implementation of the agreement despite current challenges.”

Iranian representative Abbas Araghchi did not comment after the day of talks, but ahead of the meeting said the U.S. move would “definitely be an important discussion” topic with delegates from France, Germany, Britain, Russia and China.

President Donald Trump pulled the U.S. out of the so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action unilaterally in 2018, saying that it was a bad deal and needed to be renegotiated.


The deal promises Iran economic incentives in exchange for curbs on its nuclear program, but with the reinstatement of American sanctions, the other nations have been struggling to provide Iran the assistance it seeks.

Complicating the matter, the U.S. announced recently it was triggering a 30-day process to restore virtually all U.N. sanctions on Iran, invoking a “snapback” mechanism that is part of the JCPOA agreement. Washington's argument is that as an original participant it still has that right, even though it left the deal.

Other signatories to the JCPOA agreement have rejected that argument, setting the stage for a potential crisis in the Security Council later this month, with the U.S. claiming to have re-imposed sanctions and most of the rest of the world saying the Trump administration's action is illegal and ignoring it.

After U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo traveled to the U.N. to invoke snapback on Aug. 20, Indonesia’s U.N. Ambassador Dian Triansyah Djani, whose country held the rotating council presidency, said there was overwhelming opposition in the 15-member body to the U.S. position. He said it was unlikely there would be any action on Washington’s demand.

Niger’s U.N. Ambassador Abdou Abarry, who took over the rotating council presidency on Tuesday, said: “Up until there would be maybe new facts, and I haven’t seen any yet, we are staying at the level of the Security Council aligned with this position as expressed by the president, ambasador Djani.”

Chinese representative Fu Cong told reporters after the Vienna meeting that the member countries all agreed that the U.S. no longer has "the legal ground or legal standing to trigger snapback" and that in China’s view Washington was using it to “try to sabotage or even kill the JCPOA.”

He suggested the other countries were also not prepared to “just wait and see” whether Trump is reelected in November.

“The U.S., even though it is a superpower, is just one country,” Fu said. “So other countries are moving on.”

The Russian delegate to the JCPOA, Mikhail Ulyanov, took a swipe at the U.S. ahead of the meeting, tweeting that Tuesday's talks involved “participation of all (not self-proclaimed) participants of the nuclear deal.”

Afterward, he tweeted that the meeting “demonstrated that its participants are fully committed to the nuclear deal and are determined to do their best to preserve it.”

The ultimate goal of the deal is to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb, something Iran insists it does not want to do.

However, since the U.S. withdrawal, Iran has been steadily violating its restrictions on the amount of uranium it can enrich, the amount of heavy water it can possess, and the purity to which it enriches its uranium. That's all to put pressure on the other nations involved to come ahead with more economic incentives.

It now has enough enriched uranium to make a bomb, but nowhere near the amount — or the purity — it had before the nuclear deal was signed.

Those working to save the deal also note that despite the violations, Iran continues to allow inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency to access all sites in the country.

Last week, Iran held out an olive branch to end one issue of contention, agreeing to allow IAEA inspectors into two sites where the country is suspected of having stored or used undeclared nuclear material in the early 2000s.

Iran had insisted the agency had no right to inspect the sites, since they dated to well before the JCPOA came into effect.

_____

Iran nuclear deal parties stand by troubled accord amid US pressure


Julia ZAPPEI, AFP•September 1, 2020





Iran nuclear deal parties stand by troubled accord amid US pressure

Iran has agreed to allow International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors to visit two sites suspected of hosting undeclared activity in the early 2000s
The signatories to the Iran nuclear deal said Tuesday that they stood by the faltering accord and China slammed US efforts to restore international sanctions on the Islamic republic and extend an arms embargo.

Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia are struggling to save the landmark 2015 accord with Iran, which has been progressively stepping up its nuclear activities since the United States pulled out of the deal in 2018.

Tehran insists it is entitled to do so under the terms of the accord -- which swapped sanctions relief for Iran's agreement to scale back its nuclear programme -- following Washington's withdrawal and reimposition of sanctions.

EU senior official Helga Schmid, who chaired the talks in Vienna on Tuesday, wrote on Twitter that the meeting's participants were "united in resolve to preserve the #IranDeal and find a way to ensure full implementation of the agreement despite current challenges".- ADVERTISEMENT -


Representatives from Britain, China, France, Germany, Iran and Russia all attended the talks -- part of a regular series of gatherings to discuss the accord, which have been increasingly tense since the US pullout began unravelling the agreement.


- 'Mockery' -


China's representative, senior Foreign Ministry official Fu Cong, told reporters after the meeting that Iran needed to come back to full compliance, but at the same time "the economic benefit that is due to Iran needs to be provided".

He slammed the US for "making a mockery of international law" in its "attempt to sabotage and to kill the JCPOA", referring to the abbreviation of the deal's formal name, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

"The US is stopping at nothing in trying to sabotage other countries' efforts to provide economic benefits to Iran," he added.

The United Nations last week blocked the US bid to reimpose international sanctions on Iran, while Washington also failed to rally enough support to extend an arms embargo that was scheduled to start being rolled back from October.

In a boost to Tuesday's talks, the Iranian atomic energy agency last week also agreed to allow inspectors of the UN nuclear watchdog to visit two sites suspected of having hosted undeclared activity in the early 2000s.

International Atomic Energy Agency head Rafael Grossi had travelled to Iran on his first trip since taking up the top post last year and after months of calling for access.


- US 'isolated' -


Mark Fitzpatrick, an associate fellow of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), said last week's agreement on access kept "Iran generally in line with the rest of the world, against an isolated United States".

But Fitzpatrick pointed out that "Iran's nuclear activities remain of deep concern to those states that are dedicated to non-proliferation".

Iran reportedly recently transferred advanced centrifuges used to enrich uranium from a pilot facility into a new hall at its main Natanz nuclear fuel plant, which was hit by sabotage in July.

An IAEA assessment published in June said Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium was almost eight times the limit fixed in the accord.

The level of enrichment is still far below what would be needed for a nuclear weapon, but parties to the deal have urged Iran's full compliance.

Iran has insisted it can reverse the steps it has taken since last year -- if it can again benefit economically again under the deal.

The IAEA, which regular updates its members on Iran's nuclear activities, is expected to issue a fresh report ahead of a meeting of member states to discuss the dossier later this month.

Trump-Nominated Postal Service Board Member Pushed Black Lives Matter Conspiracy Theories

Sam Brodey,The Daily Beast•September 2, 2020
Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast/Getty

A U.S. Postal Service board member, who reportedly played a key role in the selection of Louis DeJoy to lead the agency, called the Black Lives Matter movement violent and floated a conspiracy theory that it may be financially backed by foreign entities.

In June, John M. Barger, who serves on the Postal Service’s six-member Board of Governors, engaged in a back-and-forth on LinkedIn with a contact in Hong Kong. The exchange is publicly accessible on Barger’s profile on the platform. It began with that contact posting a photo of the strict public health measures in effect in Hong Kong due to the COVID-19 pandemic. When Barger’s contact offhandedly mentioned Black Lives Matter in the course of explaining the Chinese government’s aggressive posture toward Hong Kong, Barger teed off.

“Ummmm… BLM is a movement that is neither state sanctioned, nor about race these days,” responded Barger. “Further, its divisive violent core may be receiving ‘foreign funding.’”

Facebook’s Internal Black Lives Matter Debate Got So Bad Zuckerberg Had to Step In-

There is no evidence that the Black Lives Matter movement, which includes an official foundation of the same name but also many decentralized, unofficial groups nationwide, is benefiting from any kind of organized funding effort orchestrated from abroad. In his post, Barger cited nothing specific. The Black Lives Matter Foundation, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, bills itself as a “global movement,” but accepts donations through the online fundraising platform ActBlue, which prohibits non-Americans from making contributions.

Barger did not respond to requests for comment from The Daily Beast. But his comments could spark additional criticism that the USPS’ board of governors—already under scrutiny for DeJoy’s handling of postal reforms—is stacked with overtly partisan conservative figures.

Barger’s theory about Black Lives Matter echoes some writings from conservative media, which hold that the movement is the beneficiary of shady foreign interests. Pro-Trump corners of the Internet are rife with theories that BLM is a front for a left-wing coup or revolution. More established Republicans have raised broader questions about who is funding the movement. This week, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) called for a federal investigation into that very question.

A recently deleted Twitter account, accessed by The Daily Beast via web cache, that appears to have belonged to Barger contains endorsements of Black Lives Matter criticism. On June 30, the account shared a post from the right-wing personality Ian Miles Cheong, which purports to show a BLM supporter assaulting a Black man who was removing BLM signs. “Outrageous,” was Barger’s apparent comment in retweeting the post.

Rep. Katie Porter Grills Postmaster General Louis DeJoy on Basic Facts About the Post Office

Barger, a Los Angeles-based financier, was nominated by President Donald Trump to serve on the USPS Board of Governors and was confirmed by the U.S. Senate in August 2019. He is an active GOP donor, having given over $70,000 to Republican candidates for office since 1989, according to federal campaign finance records. Barger has continued making campaign contributions since joining the USPS board, cutting a $10,000 check to the Republican National Committee in December.

An August 2020 investigation from House Democrats into the tenure of Postmaster General DeJoy, who took over the post in June, claimed Barger played a significant role in getting DeJoy in that post.

Barger was the USPS board member tasked with leading the search for a replacement for Megan Brennan, who held the Postmaster General position until October 2019. DeJoy, a fellow GOP mega-donor with no USPS experience, was not on an initial list of potential candidates provided to the board by an independent agency, Russell Reynolds Associates.

The Democratic probe found evidence that Barger got DeJoy’s resume in the mix. An Aug. 20 letter to Barger from Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) and Katie Porter (D-CA) cited “individuals familiar with the process” in saying “DeJoy was never recommended by this firm but was rather introduced by you to the selection committee. It would have been irregular for a member of the USPS Board of Governors, such as yourself, to recommend Mr. DeJoy without the consultation, research, or support of the contracted hiring firm Russell Reynolds Associates.”

A former member of the USPS Board of Governors who briefed House Democrats on the selection process, David C. Williams, said he raised concerns about DeJoy to Barger. When Williams resigned in April, he cited concerns over the process in his letter.

Barger claimed to the New York Times that Williams had never expressed concern over the Board’s consideration of DeJoy, and that if he had heard Williams’ concerns, he would have taken them seriously. He also told the Los Angeles Times that it was the Board’s chairman, Robert M. Duncan, who had brought DeJoy to the selection committee’s attention.

Duncan, who appeared alongside DeJoy on August 24 in heated testimony before the House Oversight Committee, has himself come under fire for partisan ties. On August 31, Duncan, a former chairman and general counsel for the Republican National Committee, was listed on official filings as the director of the Senate Leadership Fund, the main super PAC that works to elect Republicans to the Senate. The native Kentuckian has a long history with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who reportedly recommended Duncan to Trump as a USPS board member before he was nominated in 2017.

Read more at The Daily Beast.