Indian billionaires increased their wealth by 35% during the lockdown, says Oxfam report

Jagriti Chandra
NEW DELHI, JANUARY 25, 2021 

Reliance Industries Chairman Mukesh Ambani. File photo | Photo Credit: PTI

Mukesh Ambani, who emerged as the richest man in India and Asia, earned ₹90 crore per hour during the pandemic when around 24% of the people in the country were earning under ₹3,000 per month.

Indian billionaires increased their wealth by 35% during the lockdown to $422.9 billion, ranking India sixth in the world after U.S., China, Germany, Russia and France. Out of these, the rise in fortunes for the top 100 billionaires since the lockdown in March is enough to give every one of the 138 million poorest Indian people a cheque for ₹94,045 each, according to Oxfam’s Inequality Virus Report released on the opening day of the World Economic Forum in Davos.

The wealth of just the top 11 billionaires during the pandemic can easily sustain the MGNREGS or the Health Ministry for the next 10 years, says the report which underscores the deepening inequalities due to COVID-19 where the wealthiest escaped the worst impact of the pandemic while the poor faced joblessness, starvation and death.

ALSO READ

Oxfam urges radical economic rejig for post-COVID world

Mukesh Ambani, who emerged as the richest man in India and Asia, earned ₹90 crore per hour during the pandemic when around 24% of the people in the country were earning under ₹ 3,000 per month during the lockdown. The increase in the wealth of Mr. Ambani alone could keep 40 crore informal workers out of poverty for at least five months, says the report.

It recommends re-introducing wealth tax and effecting a one-time COVID-19 cess of 4% on taxable income of over ₹10 lakh to help the economy recover from the lockdown. According to its estimate, wealth tax on the nation’s 954 richest families could raise the equivalent of 1% of India’s GDP.

PTI adds:

Calling the coronavirus pandemic the world’s worst public health crisis in a hundred years, the report said it triggered an economic crisis comparable in scale only with the Great Depression of the 1930s.

The new global survey of 295 economists from 79 countries, commissioned by Oxfam, reveals that 87% of respondents, including Jeffrey Sachs, Jayati Ghosh and Gabriel Zucman, expect an “increase” or a “major increase” in income inequality in their country as a result of the pandemic.

India introduced one of the earliest and most stringent lockdowns in the face of the pandemic and its enforcement brought the economy to a standstill, triggering unemployment, hunger, distress migration and untold hardship in its wake, the report said.

“The rich were able to escape the pandemic’s worst impact; and while the white-collar workers isolated themselves and worked from home, a majority of the not-so-fortunate Indians lost their livelihood,” it said.

The report noted that billionaires such as Gautam Adani, Shiv Nadar, Cyrus Poonawalla, Uday Kotak, Azim Premji, Sunil Mittal, Radhakrishan Damani, Kumar Manglam Birla and Laxmi Mittal working in sectors such as coal, oil, telecom, medicines, pharmaceutical, education and retail increased their wealth exponentially since March 2020 when India announced world’s biggest COVID-19 lockdown and economy came to standstill.

On the other hand, data has shown that 170,000 people lost their jobs every hour in the month of April 2020, the report said.

Noting that the informal sector had been the worst hit, the report said out of a total 12.2 crore people who lost their jobs, 75 per cent, which accounts for 9.2 crore jobs, were lost in the informal sector.

“The mass exodus on foot triggered by the sudden lockdown and the inhuman beating, disinfection and quarantine conditions the informal workers were subjected to turned a health emergency into a humanitarian crisis,” it said.

“Over 300 informal workers died due to the lockdown, with reasons ranging from starvation, suicides, exhaustion, road and rail accidents, police brutality and denial of timely medical care. The National Human Rights Commission recorded over 2,582 cases of human rights violation as early as in the month of April 2020,” the report added.

It noted that the long disruption of schooling risked doubling the rate of out of school, especially among the poor.

“Only 4% of rural households had a computer and less than 15% rural households had an internet connection,” it said.

On health inequalities, the report said only 6% of the poorest 20% has access to non-shared sources of improved sanitation, compared to 93.4% of the top 20%. It added that 59.6% of India’s population lives in a room or less.

The report said 1.7 crore women lost their job in April 2020 and unemployment for women rose by 15% from a pre-lockdown level.

Oxfam India CEO Amitabh Behar said if not addressed immediately, the crisis could worsen.

“Extreme inequality is not inevitable, but a policy choice. The fight against inequality must be at the heart of economic rescue and recovery efforts now,” Mr. Behar said.

“Newer and creative ways of catering to the needs of the masses is possible if governments are committed to the needs of its people. It is time for the government of India to take specific and concrete actions that will build a better future, more equal and just a future for everyone,” he said.

Mukesh Ambani Is Making 90 Crores Per Hour, What Do Other Big Business People Make?

Chirali Sharma
30 September 2020·


The coronavirus pandemic has not really been beneficial to many people. With the entire country going into lockdown for a good amount of time, and even still many places choosing to keep shut due to safety reasons, the economy of several businesses has taken a big hit.

However, it seems that this has not exactly stopped some people from earning their crores regardless of whatever is happening in the country, or maybe even because of it.

As per the IIFL Wealth Hurun India Rich List 2020, Mukesh Ambani has kept his position at the top of the list because during the lockdown he has reportedly been making as much as Rs. 90 crore per hour.

Since March, Ambani has added a whopping Rs. 2,77,700 crore through the various fund-raising and strategic investments from Facebook, Google and Silver Lake.

This has allowed his personal wealth to increase to Rs. 6,58,400 crore and allowed him to be the richest person in India for the ninth consecutive year in a row.

Anas Rahman Junaid, MD and Chief Researcher, Hurun India, stated that “28 per cent of the upswing in wealth on the list has been bestowed by Mukesh Ambani, bespeaking Ambani’s meteoric success post diversifying from oil to telecom and retail. A further 21 per cent of the additional wealth has been generated by pharma, mainly on the back of the rise in healthcare spends and a realigned priority towards personal healthcare stimulated by the Covid-19.”

Read More: The Billionaire Who Fought Both Ambani And Tata And Is Still Around To Tell The Story

But one has to wonder, how much do other big business people around the world make whether in a day or an hour.

Here are some of them and how much these business people who are millionaires and billionaires on their own make:
Jeff Bezos

Jeff Bezos, one of the richest man on the planet, as per reports from 2019, is said to be making more than $4.4 million in an hour.
Tim Cook

Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO makes ₹ 3,54,90,623.05 in a day.
Satya Nadella

Satya Nadella, the CEO of Microsoft, makes ₹ 2,19,44,320.42 in a day.
Mark Zuckerberg

As per a 2019 Business Insider report, Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, makes around $1,712,328 in a single hour.

Alice Walton Walmart

Alice Walton, the American heiress to the Walmart fortune, is said to own over more than US$11 billion in Walmart shares.

In September of this year, she was ranked as the 12th richest person and the richest woman in the world, having a net worth of $68.8 billion.

As per sources, Walton makes ₹ 2,32,81,84,872.16 in one single day.

Image Credits: Google Images

Sources: Business Insider, The Indian Express, Zee Business

Find the blogger: @chirali_08

This post is tagged under: mukesh ambani 90 crore, mukesh ambani 90 crore lockdown, mukesh ambani per hour, mukesh ambani money per hour, how much millionaires make in a day, how much money billionaires make per hour

Forex | 1 crore INR to USD exchange rate Jan, 2021 - 1 ...

https://conversionai.com/forex/currency-pairs/inr-usd/q/1 crore

In finance, an 1 crore INR to USD exchange rate is the Indian Rupee to >US Dollar rate at which 1 crore Indian Rupee to US Dollar will be exchanged for another. It is also regarded as the value of 1 crore INR to USD in relation to another currency. For example, an interbank exchange rate of 114 Japanese yen to the United States dollar means that ¥114 will be exchanged for each US$1 or that US ...

Convert from Million to Crore and vice-versa | Number ...

https://everydaycalculation.com/number-converter/million-crore

On this page, you can convert numbers between million and crore. Enter the value you want to convert, and leave the target field blank. Result window. Get our all-in-one calculator app to use this number converter offline. Conversion formula. 1 crore = 10 millions ...

Oxfam produces report on M&S supply chain

Written by Simon Glover

18, January2021

LONDON - Oxfam has published a report on Marks and Spencer (M&S) after being asked by the brand to act as a 'critical friend' and conduct a gap analysis of its supply chain.

The charity's research identified a number of issues including in-work poverty, long term damage to health, inadequate sick pay, discrimination and poor worker representation, as well as examples of good practice.

A key conclusion was that there was a disconnect between the information that M&S managers received about conditions in workplaces, based largely on third party ethical audits, and workers' experiences.

READ ON SUB WALL

Oxfam produces report on M&S supply chain | Fashion & Retail News | News (ecotextile.com)

CLOSING THE GAP

Global wealth inequality is ‘founded on sexism,’ says Oxfam International

Published Sun, Jan 19 2020
Catherine Clifford@CATCLIFFORD

Bangladeshi female workers work at a garment factory in Savar

 outskirts of Dhaka on January 14, 2020.
Mehedi Hasan | NurPhoto | Getty Images


Wealth inequality is also a story of gender inequality.

Or more precisely, wealth inequality is in part because of gender inequality, according to Oxfam International’s latest report on global inequality, released Sunday.

There were 2,153 billionaires in 2019, and together they have the same amount of wealth as of the poorest 4.6 billion people in the world, according to Oxfam, the non-profit aimed at alleviating global poverty.

In addition to the wealth gap, the Oxfam report focused on the financial gap between genders.

“Our economic system was built by rich and powerful men, who continue to make the rules and reap the lion’s share of the benefit. Worldwide men own 50% more wealth than women,” the report says.

Looking at a list of the richest people in the world reinforces this point: It’s overwhelmingly dominated by men.

Taken together, the wealth of the richest 22 men in the world equal all of the wealth of the women in Africa, the report says.

The imbalance of wealth between men and women is at least partially due to the unpaid care work (taking care of children, elders and the ill) and domestic work (cooking cleaning washing, mending, fetching water and firewood) that women are often responsible for.

The total value to the economy of women’s unpaid care work is at least $10.8 trillion per year, Oxfam reports, which is three times larger than the value of the global tech industry, Oxfam says.

“This figure, while huge, is an underestimate” Oxfam writes. For instance, it does not take into account “the broader value to society of care work and how our economy would grind to a halt without this support.

“What is clear is that this unpaid work is fueling a sexist economic system that takes from the many and puts money in the pockets of the few,” Oxfam writes.

#WAGES4HOUSEWORK

In the United States, women spend 37% more time doing unpaid care work than men, Oxfam reports in an accompanying report also released Sunday, which focuses on the U.S.

That equals 2.1 extra hours per day of unpaid care work for women. Over a year, that means women are working more than 95 extra 8-hour-days for no pay, the report says.

This time spent doing care work limit’s women’s career choices, income and personal development, according to Oxfam’s U.S. report.

#UBI

#LIVINGWAGE



Globally, the economic imbalance between men and women ought to be addressed with what Oxfam’s report calls “the transformative ‘4Rs’ framework”: Recognize unpaid and poorly paid care work, which is primarily done by women; reduce the amount of time spent on unpaid care via technology and supportive services; redistribute unpaid care work within the household and within society to the government and private sector; and represent the most marginalized caregivers in the design and delivery of policies and services that will affect them.

See also:

Billionaire candidate Tom Steyer: America’s income inequality is ‘unbearable, unjust’

Billionaire Marc Benioff: Capitalism has ‘led to horrifying inequality’ and must be fixed

This free cash plan would pay you $1,320 per month and wouldn’t cost the government a cent

How the pandemic impacted unpaid care work and violence against women

The effects of the pandemic on both unpaid care work and domestic violence have negatively impacted women, thereby debunking the idea of homes as a safe space.

VARIETY | 25-01-2021

MAYURAKSHI DUTTA @mayurakshi_2


The home and the family as a contested space with unequal power dynamics was reinforced during the lockdown in two distinct ways—unpaid care work and the exponential rise of domestic violence.

The immediate cause was the restrictions on movement which had bound everyone to the four walls of the home. Consequently, the incidences of domestic violence rose drastically. Moreover, the closure of educational institutions, daycare centres and other care services shifted the responsibility of providing those services to the household, leading to a rise in unpaid care work.

Women were also the first among the vulnerable to lose their source of income. The financial conundrum triggered due to loss of livelihood and reduced income heightened the stress of the uncertain times. Loss of income, high burden of unpaid care work, and the rise in domestic violence led to the disempowerment of women on multiple levels.

Unpaid care work

In the pre-pandemic times, according to the latest NSSO Time-Use Survey, women in India disproportionately spent 276 minutes/day in urban areas and 317 minutes/day in rural areas on unpaid care work whereas men spent only 39 minutes and 80 minutes in urban and rural areas respectively on unpaid care work. A distinct gender gap exists in the time spent on domestic chores and allied activities, with women spending twice the time in domestic and care work.

Most of the cases of violence reported were from women suffering from physical and sexual violence. (Representational image: Reuters)

This number will likely rise with the rise in unpaid care work during the pandemic. A survey by the Institute of Social Studies Trust found that 66 per cent and 36 per cent of those surveyed during the pandemic indicated an increase in domestic chores at home and reported an increase in child and elderly care work respectively during this period.

Women in paid work across the economic spectrum bear a double burden of work, leading to time poverty. Before the pandemic, urban women spent 333 minutes and rural women spent 373 minutes per day in paid and unpaid activities on an average, combined. Women have been working longer hours and simultaneously managing the needs of the family. In urban middle-class households, the 'work from home' culture has blurred the lines between working hours and personal downtime.

However, there is also a possible silver lining. Ashwini Deshpande’s work on unpaid care work during the pandemic found that the gender gap in average hours spent on domestic work decreased in the first month of the lockdown. Women were still doing most of the work but male hours on domestic work increased resulting in the decreased gender gap. However, by August, male hours dropped but didn’t reach pre-pandemic levels. If the involvement of male members in care work continues, the pandemic would have triggered a positive shift in one of the defining characteristics of a patriarchal society, that of the gendered division of household work and care.

Domestic Violence

The need for families to live together round the clock has trapped women with abusive partners. Uncertainty, economic hardships and growing anxiety during emergencies often fuel violent and abusive behaviour directed towards women and the pandemic has been no exception. As per statistics, between March 25 and May 31, 2020, the National Commission for Women (NCW) received 1,477 complaints of domestic violence from women in India — a 10-year high than the complaints received between March and May in previous years. The highest number of cases were registered in July at 660 but have remained at least above 450 each month since June 2020.

The already erratic women helplines, shelter homes and support services were completely halted during the lockdown. 181, the women helpline number was not functional. On March 25, 2020, the Ministry of Women and Child Development issued a circular for all state-run ‘One Stop Centres’ and helplines to be made operational despite the lockdown and to take cognisance of the spike in cases of domestic violence. Oxfam India found this move necessary but inadequate. It recommended that all services to address domestic violence such as One Stop Centres, women helplines, shelter homes, Special Cells for women and children, Mahila desks in police stations, etc., are deemed as essential services and publicised and facilitated.

In a series of interviews that Oxfam India conducted with counsellers of domestic violence, it was evident that despite the government notification, services to support victims of violence were either erratic or non-existent. Among the services that were available, the police usually showed apathy and the shelter homes didn’t take in new cases.

The counsellers reported financial hardship as the major cause for the spike in violence in their communities. Most of the cases were from women suffering from physical and sexual violence with a few instances of child sexual and physical abuse.

The effects of the pandemic on both unpaid care work and domestic violence have negatively impacted women, thereby debunking the idea of homes as a safe space.

Unprecedented times have the potential to stimulate socially transformative initiatives. The key is to identify possible silver linings and find tangible ways of acting on it. As seen, male members of the household, though temporarily, took part in household chores. This has the potential to change longstanding social norms that have relegated the care work to women.

Kamla Bhasin had famously said, “Ghar ka kaam, sab ka kaam.” Political and social initiatives around gender equality should understand and address gendered social norms to lessen the burden of unpaid care work on women. On the other hand, the rise in domestic violence exposed the weaknesses of social and political systems in safeguarding women from violence. It is possible to take it as an epiphany and build strong support systems that allow women to report violence and survive an unsafe environment.

Also Read: What India must to do to save women from domestic violence under lockdown

#UBI

#LIVINGWAGE

#WAGESFORHOUSEWORK

Oxfam 

The Inequality Virus: Bringing together a world torn apart by coronavirus through a fair, just and sustainable economy

 Posted 25 Jan 2021 Originally published 25 Jan 2021

Attachment

Download document(PDF | 8 MB)

The world’s ten richest men have seen their combined wealth increase by $540 billion (£400 billion) during the pandemic, while the crisis threatens a lost decade in the fight against poverty, Oxfam revealed today in a report published on the opening day of the World Economic Forum’s Davos Agenda.

The increase in the wealth of the ten richest is more than enough to both pay for a Covid-19 vaccine for everyone on the planet and reverse the rise in poverty caused by the pandemic. However, while the wealth of the richest increases, support for the poorest is being squeezed with the UK and other donors cutting aid to the world’s poorest.

Oxfam’s report* The Inequality Virus *found that Covid-19 has the potential to increase economic inequality in almost every country at once, the first time this has happened since records began over a century ago. It sets out how a rigged economy is enabling a super-rich elite to amass wealth in the middle of the worst recession since the Great Depression, while billions of people are struggling amid the worst job crisis in over 90 years. Unless rising inequality is tackled, half a billion more people could be living in poverty on less than $5.50 (£4.00) a day in 2030, than at the start of the pandemic.

Although the stock market collapsed at the start of the crisis, the financial pain for the richest was short-lived. The wealth of 1,000 of the world’s billionaires - who are mostly white males – returned to the record highs seen before the pandemic within less than nine months as stock markets rebounded, despite continued recession in the real economy.

Danny Sriskandarajah, Oxfam GB Chief Executive said "The virus hit an already profoundly unequal world and without urgent action to make our economies work for everyone, things are set to get much, much worse.

“Billions of people were living on the edge when the pandemic began and had no resources or support to weather this fierce storm. In countries across the world we see people struggling to feed their families and keep a roof over their heads, while paid employment becomes harder to come by. At the same time, a tiny number of individuals have pocketed more money in nine months than they could spend in a lifetime.

“These facts are shameful. Governments cannot continue to look the other way, they must act. Fair taxation on the very richest could help with the global recovery, raise more money to fight poverty and help shape more equal societies.”

Rising inequality means it could take at least 14 times longer for the number of people living in poverty to return to pre-pandemic levels. The total wealth of billionaires hit $11.95 trillion (£8.8 trillion) in December 2020, equivalent to G20 governments’ total Covid-19 recovery spending.

Oxfam also commissioned a global survey of 295 economists from 79 countries. Almost nine out of ten (87 per cent) of respondents - including Jeffrey Sachs, Jayati Ghosh and Gabriel Zucman – said they expected an increase in income inequality in their country as a result of the pandemic. Over half thought gender inequality would likely or very likely increase and more than two thirds thought the same for racial inequality.

Oxfam’s report reveals how the pandemic is deepening long-standing economic, racial and gender divides:

Women are hardest hit, yet again. The economic effects of the pandemic are edging women out of the workplace and reversing decades of progress for participation in the labour force.

Women’s over representation in low-paid, precarious jobs that have been hardest hit by the crisis means that an extra 112 million women are at risk of losing their jobs or income overall. At the same time, women make up the majority of the global health and social care workforce - jobs that are essential but poorly paid, undervalued and also puts them at greater risk from Covid-19.

Inequality is costing lives. In a number of countries, the pandemic has highlighted gross inequality in health outcomes based on race, ethnicity and income. Evidence suggests that Black people, Afro-descendants and Indigenous peoples are among those more likely to contract Covid-19, and to suffer the worst consequences. For example, Afro-descendants in Brazil are 40 per cent more likely to die of Covid-19 than white people. Records show that Covid-19 mortality rates in England’s poorest regions are double that of the richest areas, while both infection and mortality rates are higher in poorer areas of countries including France, India and Spain.

Levels of Official Development Assistance (ODA) are likely to drop significantly over the next few years. In 2018, this represented a quarter of external finance for least developed countries and if ODA falls in line with countries’ gross national income, it could decrease by between $11-14 billion (£8-10 billion). The UK has already moved to cut its ODA from 0.7 to 0.5 per cent this year, if the legislation passes it will be a further blow to many of the world’s poorest people.

Rather than cut the lifeline offered by aid, donors should look at alternative ways of raising funds from those who have profited during the pandemic. A temporary tax on excess profits made by the 32 global corporations that have gained the most could have raised $104 billion (£76 billion) in 2020. This would be enough to provide unemployment benefits for all workers and financial support for all children and elderly people in low- and middle-income countries.

Such taxes are practical as well as necessary. In December 2020, Argentina passed a one-time levy on the super-rich to help pay for Covid-19 measures, including the purchase of medical supplies and aid for struggling small and medium-sized businesses.

Sriskandarajah continued: “Cutting aid when poverty is rising so sharply while allowing billionaires to pile up ever greater wealth is appalling. Rather than removing help from those who most need it, we should be asking those who can afford it to pay their fair share.

“We are at a pivotal point in human history. We cannot accept that the virus will deepen inequality that was already running out of control. We have to build back better and the fight against inequality must be at the heart of economic rescue and recovery efforts.”

Ends

For more information and interviews, please contact Lisa Rutherford on 07917 791 836 / lrutherford@oxfam.org.uk

Notes to editor

Spokespeople are available for interviews in English, Arabic, French, Portuguese, Spanish and several other languages.

The full report, executive summary and a methodology document outlining how Oxfam calculated the statistics can be found here. The calculations for the Covid-19 vaccine and reversal in poverty caused by the pandemic are on page seven.

Photos and story of health worker Heba Shalan, a mother and nurse from the Jabalia Refugee Camp in northern Gaza Strip can be downloaded here Heba is putting her life on the line caring for patients with Covid-19 without adequate personal protective equipment and for very little pay.

Oxfam’s calculations are based on the most up-to-date and comprehensive data sources available. Figures on the very richest in society come from Forbes’ 2020 Billionaires List and Credit Suisse’s Global Wealth Report. Because data on wealth was very volatile in 2020, the Credit Suisse Research Institute has delayed the release of its annual estimates on the wealth of humanity to spring 2021. This means we have not been able to compare the wealth of billionaires to the bottom half of humanity, as in previous years.

According to Forbes, the 10 richest people increased their fortunes by $540 billion (£400 billion) between 18 March and 31 December 2020. The annual Forbes list was published on 18 March, the week after the pandemic was officially declared by the World Health Organisation. The ten richest men were listed as: Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Bernard Arnault and family, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison, Warren Buffett, Zhong Shanshan, Larry Page and Mukesh Ambani.

The World Bank has simulated what the impact of an increase in inequality in almost every country at once would mean for global poverty. The Bank finds that if inequality (as measured by the Gini coefficient) increases by two percentage points and global per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth contracts by eight per cent, 501 million more people will still be living on less than $5.50 (£4.00) a day in 2030. This means that global poverty levels would be higher in 2030 than they were before the pandemic struck, with 3.3 billion people still living on less than $5.50 (£4.00) a day. This is the Bank’s worst-case scenario, however projections for economic contraction across most of the developing world are in line with this scenario, and our own evidence suggests that an increase in inequality of two percentage points is very likely.

In preparation for this report Oxfam surveyed 295 economists from 79 countries. They included economists such as Jayati Ghosh, Jeffrey Sachs and Gabriel Zucman. We asked them to say whether they thought inequality would increase because of the impact of the coronavirus pandemic. We asked questions about income and wealth inequality as well as about gender and racial inequality. 87% of respondents expected income inequality in their country was either going to increase or strongly increase as a result of coronavirus.

Oxfam is using the cost of a Covid-19 vaccine for all as an illustrative example. Oxfam is part of the People’s Vaccine Alliance which is calling for open access to all relevant patents and technology to enable safe and effective vaccines and treatments for all.

The oldest historical records of inequality trends are based on tax records that go back to the beginning of the 20th century.

In the World Economic Outlook (October 2020), the International Monetary Fund’s worst-case scenario does not see GDP returning to pre-crisis levels until the end of 2022.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development has warned this will lead to long-term increases in inequality unless action is taken.

Oxfam calculated that an extra 112 million women are at risk of losing their jobs or income overall based on an International Labour Organisation brief published in July 2020.

Oxfam is part of the Fight Inequality Alliance, a growing global coalition of civil society organizations and activists that are holding the Global Protest to Fight Inequality from 23-30 January in around 30 countries, including Kenya, Mexico, Norway and the Philippines, to promote solutions to inequality and demand that economies work for everyone.

WE OWN TRANS MOUNTAIN, KENNEY BET AGAINST IT

Canada's Trans Mountain pipeline sees fortunes shine after KXL's demise

WITH TAXPAYERS MONEY 

By Rod Nickel and Steve Scherer

© Reuters/DENNIS OWEN FILE PHOTO: 

Steel pipe for Canadian government’s Trans Mountain Expansion Project lies at a stockpile site in Kamloops

WINNIPEG/OTTAWA (Reuters) - The expansion of Canada's government-owned Trans Mountain pipeline assumes greater importance for the oil sector after the cancellation of rival Keystone XL reduced future options to carry crude, potential buyers say.

Trans Mountain Corp, a government corporation, is spending C$12.6 billion ($9.9 billion) to nearly triple capacity to 890,000 barrels per day (bpd), a 14% increase from current total Canadian capacity.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government bought the 68-year-old pipeline in 2018 when previous owner Kinder Morgan faced legal hurdles to expand the 1,150-kilometre (715-mile) line running from Alberta to the British Columbia coast. Ottawa has always said it would find new owners.

This week, U.S. President Joe Biden revoked the presidential permit for TC Energy's Keystone XL pipeline (KXL), undoing efforts by former President Donald Trump to build the line that would have supplied U.S. refiners with 830,000 bpd of Canadian oil.

That decision has made the case for completing Trans Mountain's expansion stronger.

"This pipeline is even more valuable now," said Joe Dion, chief executive of Western Indigenous Pipeline Group, one of several First Nations groups interested in buying Trans Mountain.

"Everybody thought Trudeau wasn't going to get things done in Canada, and he's the one who successfully got a pipeline over Trump."

Trans Mountain takes on more strategic importance with KXL cancelled, but it does not mean his group would pay more for it, Dion said.

Trans Mountain has completed 22% of the expansion project, called TMX, which is scheduled for service in December 2022. Suncor Energy Inc, Canadian Natural Resources Ltd and BP PLC are among the committed shippers who have secured 80% of its additional capacity long-term.

"All eyes are on TMX," said Delbert Wapass, executive chair of Project Reconciliation, a First Nations coalition that hopes to buy 51% this year.

Sharing Trans Mountain's profits would help improve living conditions on First Nations, he said.

Canadian companies have long struggled to secure top price for their crude as pipeline congestion forced them to sell at a discount.

However reduced fuel demand due to pandemic travel lockdowns and advancing pipeline expansions have eased the flow. Even without KXL, Canada may have surplus export pipeline capacity once TMX enters service, said Matt Taylor, director of infrastructure research at investment bank Tudor Pickering Holt, who expects modest oil production growth to 2025.

Ottawa plans to sell the pipeline once there are fewer risks to completion and consultations wrap up with First Nations, said Finance Ministry spokeswoman Katherine Cuplinskas. TMX has faced stiff opposition over spill concerns.

A second government source said it bought Trans Mountain for its strategic importance, as its Pacific Ocean connection enables shippers to move oil to Asia, as well as the United States, which buys most Canadian crude.

Now its importance is even greater, the source said.

Enbridge Inc, which runs North America's Mainline oil network, also stands to gain from KXL's demise. It intends to sell long-term contracts for most of the Mainline's capacity, pending regulator approval, rather than continue to ration it on the spot market.

KXL's cancellation frees up long-term commitments by shippers who may now sign Mainline contracts, Taylor said.

Farmers are concerned about higher long-term rail volumes following the cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline. Jackie Wilson reports.

($1 = 1.2710 Canadian dollars)

(Reporting by Rod Nickel in Winnipeg and Steve Scherer and Julie Gordon in Ottawa; Editing by Marguerita Choy)

BPs oil exploration team swept aside in climate revolution

By Ron Bousso

© Reuters/TOBY MELVILLE FILE PHOTO: 

BP's new Chief Executive Bernard Looney gives a speech in central London

LONDON (Reuters) - Nothing escapes the winds of change now sweeping through BP, not even the exploration team that for more than a century powered its profits by discovering billions of barrels of oil.

Its geologists, engineers and scientists have been cut to less than 100 from a peak of more than 700 a few years ago, company sources told Reuters, part of a climate change-driven overhaul triggered last year by CEO Bernard Looney.

"The winds have turned very chilly in the exploration team since Looney's arrival. This is happening incredibly fast," a senior member of the team told Reuters.

Hundreds have left the oil exploration team in recent months, either transferred to help develop new low-carbon activities or laid off, current and former employees said.

The exodus is the starkest sign yet from inside the company of its rapid shift away from oil and gas, which will nevertheless be its main source of cash to finance a switch to renewables for at least the next decade.

BP declined to comment on the staffing changes, which have not been publicly disclosed.

Reuters spoke to a dozen former and current employees of BP who highlighted the massive challenges the company faces in its transition from fossil fuels to carbon neutrality.

Looney made his intentions clear internally and externally by lowering BP's production targets and becoming the first oil major CEO to promote this as a positive to investors seeking a long-term vision for a lower-carbon economy.

BP is cutting some 10,000 jobs, around 15% of its workforce, under Looney's restructuring, the most aggressive among Europe's oil giants including Royal Dutch Shell and Total.

The 50-year-old, a veteran oil engineer who previously headed the oil and gas exploration and production division, aims to cut output by 1 million barrels per day, or 40%, over the next decade while growing renewable energy output 20 fold.

Despite the changes, oil and gas will remain BP's main source of revenue until at least 2030.

And Looney's drive to reinvent BP has done nothing to boost its shares, which hit their lowest level in 25 years late in 2020 and dropped 44% in the year, mostly over doubts whether it will be able transform and make the profits it aims for.

The change marks the end of an era for exploration teams from Moscow and Houston to BP's research headquarters in Sunbury near London, with farewell gatherings held on Zoom in recent months, they added.

"The atmosphere was brutal," a former employee said at the time of last year's lay-offs.

For BP's whittled down exploration team, led by Ariel Flores, the former North Sea boss, the focus has narrowed to searching for new resources near existing oil and gas fields in order to offset production declines and minimize spending.

"We are in a harvest mode and what isn't being said is that BP is going to be a much smaller company without exploration," a second source in BP's oil and production division said.

Flores was not available for comment.

Data from Norwegian consultancy Rystad Energy shows BP acquired around 3,000 square kilometres of new exploration licences in 2020, its lowest since at least 2015 and far less than at Shell, which acquired around 11,000 square kilometres, or Total, which bought some 17,000 square kilometres.

Although global exploration activity slowed last year due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the drop at BP was mainly a result of the change in strategy, four company sources said.

Graphic: BP's slowing exploration - 

https://graphics.reuters.com/BP-EXPLORATION/ygdpzakkkvw/chart.png

Graphic: BP exploration spending - 

https://graphics.reuters.com/BP-EXPLORATION/yzdvxgqxnpx/chart.png

Oil and gas exploration has been the spearhead of companies' evolution into huge multinationals that delivered enormous profits to shareholders over the decades.

BP began reducing its spending on exploration under former CEO Bob Dudley in response to the 2014 oil price crash, aiming to use technology to unlock more oil and gas reserves.

Looney is driving the exploration budget even lower, to around $350 to $400 million per year. That is around half of what BP spent in 2019 and a fraction of the $4.6 billion spent on exploration in 2010.

BP last year also wiped $20 billion from the value of its oil and gas assets after slashing its outlook for energy prices. At those lower price assumptions, BP no longer considered many of its oil and gas reserves worth developing.

Graphic: BP share performance - https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/ce/bdwvkyzndvm/Pasted%20image%201611156827068.png

BEYOND PETROLEUM

BP, which started as the Anglo-Persian Oil Company in 1908 and has since discovered massive fossil fuel resources in places such as Iran, Iraq, Azerbaijan, the North Sea and the Gulf of Mexico, has attempted to diversify into renewables before.

Under CEO John Browne BP launched "Beyond Petroleum," investing billions in wind farms and solar power technology, but the vast majority of the investments failed.

Looney believes his plan will succeed with unprecedented government support for the energy transition and technological advances that make renewable energy more affordable than ever. He has enlisted Giulia Chierchia, a former McKinsey executive to oversee the development of BP's strategy.

And a team of geologists and data crunchers led by Houston-based Kirsty McCormack, who was previously in the exploration unit, will now apply analytics used to study and map rock structures in search of fossil fuels to develop low-carbon technologies such as carbon capture, usage and storage (CCUS) and geothermal energy, company sources said.

Absorbing carbon dioxide emitted by heavily polluting industries and injecting it into depleted oil reservoirs is seen as key in the energy transition by helping to offset emissions.

Other oil veterans have also been reassigned, with Felipe Arbelaez, who previously headed BP's oil and gas operations in Latin America, now leading its renewables business and Louise Jacobsen Plutt, an experienced oil engineer, now senior vice president hydrogen CCUS.

BP also poached staff from Uber, Toyota and Silicon Valley to boost its understanding of electric vehicles, power markets, renewables and expanding its capabilities in big data.

Franziska Bell, a former Toyota employee, is vice president for data and analytics at BP while Justin Lewis joined the company in July to head its high-tech start-up venture after working as a software engineer at Tesla.

The transformation has been met with a mix of awe and concern among employees who are wondering if the pace is sustainable and whether it is enough for BP to compete in a rapidly-changing energy world.

Some senior current and former employees warned that BP risks rushing into investments in new fields before fully understanding how they will fit into a transformed company, while abandoning long-standing sources of cash.

"There is so much internal change that it will be a big job to pick up the organisation and get things going," a senior employee in the exploration division said.

Graphic: Big Oil's spending -

https://graphics.reuters.com/OILMAJORS-CAPEX/gjnpwkmwypw/chart.png

(This story was refiled to correct paragraph 11 by removing extraneous words)

(Reporting by Ron Bousso; Editing by Alexander Smith)

HYDROCARBONS A SUNSET INDUSTRY

Big Oil hits brakes on search for new fossil fuels

By Ron Bousso

© Reuters/Christian Hartmann FILE PHOTO: 

The sun sets behind a pump-jack outside Saint-Fiacre

LONDON (Reuters) - Top oil and gas companies sharply slowed their search for new fossil fuel resources last year, data shows, as lower energy prices due to the coronavirus crisis triggered spending cuts.

Acquisitions of new onshore and offshore exploration licences for the top five Western energy giants dropped to the lowest in at least five years, data from Oslo-based consultancy Rystad Energy showed.

The number of exploration licensing rounds dropped last year due to the epidemic while companies including Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch Shell and France's Total also reduced spending, Rystad Energy analyst Palzor Shenga said.

"Acquiring additional leases comes with a cost and it demands some work commitments to be fulfilled. Hence, companies would not want to pile up on additional acreages in their non-core areas of operations," Shenga said.

Slowing exploration

Oil majors sharply slowed down acquisitions of oil and gas exploration acreage in 2020

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

X

6636

11666

ExxonMobil

7049

60859

16780

62297

17012

18447

Total

15201

33983

22084

60758

16912

14480

Eni

6952

63950

12128

35094

11434

11730

Shell

10435

4203

52880

51630

11657

5396

BP

11158

10062

19208

16646

2979

1065

Chevron

6255

13327

5941

9955

11666

Note: Exploration acreage licences acquired, in thousands of square kilometres

GRAPHIC: Slowing exploration - 

https://graphics.reuters.com/OIL-EXPLORATION/azgpolnldvd/index.html

Of the five companies, BP saw by far the largest drop in new acreage acquisition in 2020. Bernard Looney, who became BP's CEO in February, outlined a strategy to reduce oil output by 40% or 1 million barrels per day by 2030. BP has rapidly scaled back its exploration team in recent months.

Exxon, the largest U.S. energy company, acquired the largest acreage in 2020 in the group, with 63% in three blocks in Angola, according to Rystad Energy.

Total was second with two large blocks acquired in Angola and Oman.

Acquiring exploration acreage means companies can search for oil and gas. If new resources are discovered in sufficient volumes, the companies need to decide whether to develop them, a costly process that can take years.

As a result, the drop in exploration activity could lead to a supply gap in the second half of the decade, analysts said.

(Graphic: Oil majors' spending - https://graphics.reuters.com/OILMAJORS-CAPEX/jznvnqwzdpl/index.html)

(Reporting by Ron Bousso; Editing by Alexander Smith)