Thursday, July 06, 2023

What China’s Solar Dominance Means For Global Trade

  • China dominates the solar PV supply chain, especially in the production of polysilicon, a key raw material, as well as the manufacturing of wafers and cells, largely due to the convenience and cost-effectiveness of proximity to polysilicon production.

  • The U.S. reliance on China for clean energy infrastructure is highlighted by the Biden administration's pause on tariff increases for the next two years, despite many solar components being produced by Chinese firms seeking to evade U.S. tariffs.

  • China has used its economic might to exercise geopolitical influence, including import bans and restrictions on countries like Norway and Australia and recent indications of new export controls over solar panel technologies.

China’s rise as a global economic superpower has brought with it an ability for the nation to utilize its economic dominance for geopolitical purposes.

As Visual Capitalist's Marcus Lu shows in this infographic, sponsored by The Hinrich Foundation, China’s dominant position in the solar photovoltaic (PV) supply chain has used as leverage against countries that are dependent on it for clean energy. 

Dominance in the Solar Supply Chain

Solar energy is playing a significant role in the green energy transition, and as this infographic shows, China’s dominance in the sector is clear.

The solar PV supply chain starts with polysilicon, a key raw material needed to create wafers. China is home to seven of the top 10 producers of polysilicon, which includes companies like Tongwei Solar and Asia Silicon. 

Where China is most dominant though, is in the manufacturing of wafers and cells. This is partly because it’s more economical to make these components close to wherever polysilicon is being produced. 

The second-largest producer of cells and panels is the APAC region (ex-China), at 12% and 15% of total capacity. However, according to U.S. officials, much of this output is actually owned by Chinese firms attempting to evade U.S. tariffs. 

While these companies would normally be subject to higher tariffs, the Biden administration has paused any tariff increases for the next two years. This can be interpreted as a sign of the country’s dependence on China for clean energy infrastructure, which could prove problematic given China’s history of economic coercion.

Leveraging Trade for Geopolitical Purposes

The second part of this infographic highlights past instances where China has used its commercial dominance for geopolitical purposes. 

For example, in October 2010, the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo, a jailed Chinese dissident. China began stalling Norwegian salmon imports in response, and Norway’s market share of salmon exports to China fell from 92% in 2010, to 29% in 2013, according to the Financial Times.

China took similar actions towards Australia in April 2020 after the island nation called for a detailed probe into the origins of COVID-19. Import bans on Australian goods like beef, timber, and coal were announced in retaliation. These restrictions were eventually lifted in May 2023.

Given the massive size of China’s economy, import bans such as these can heavily impact a trading partner’s industries.

More recently, China announced in December 2022 that it would be looking into new export controls over solar panel technologies. Given China’s already tight grip over the solar PV industry, this move could expand the nation’s playbook when it comes to economic coercion.

By Zerohedge.com

WORKERS CAPITAL RIPPED OFF
UK
Ex-Thames Water owner accused of ‘money-grabbing’ cuts to Cadent pension scheme


Alex Lawson
Mon, 3 July 2023 

Photograph: Dinendra Haria/Alamy

The former owner of crisis-hit Thames Water has been accused by union leaders of staging a “cost-cutting money grab” at another critical UK infrastructure asset under its control, as it emerged that Cadent Gas is considering cuts to its pension scheme.

Macquarie, the Australian banking powerhouse that owned Thames for a decade, has led a consortium controlling Cadent since 2016. Cadent, Britain’s biggest gas network, serving 11 million people, was formerly part of National Grid.

It is understood that Macquarie bosses are considering closing Cadent’s defined benefit pension scheme, provoking anger among trade unions, which are consulting about taking strike action over the issue.


The scheme, which closed to new members in 2002, has 430 active employees with at least 20 years’ service as well as several thousand retired members.

It is understood that Cadent is considering closing the scheme because it believes the level of investment required could be better spent on new technology and training its workforce.

The GMB union, which represents workers at the company, said the defined benefit scheme was “fully funded and in surplus” and estimated that it cost Cadent about £10m a year to service.

Gary Carter, a national officer at GMB, said: “This is a cost-cutting money grab by Macquarie to increase profits and dividends to shareholders.

“The pension scheme is not in trouble; it’s fully funded and in surplus. Cadent Gas makes hundreds of millions of pounds’ profit and pays large dividends.

“These are long-serving and skilled employees who have given many years of service in the gas sector, serving communities and customers.

“Cadent was well aware when it purchased the business that the pension scheme was there and it has a moral and financial obligation to it.”

Last month, Cadent said that an increase in revenues had helped it record a £945m profit in the 2022-23 financial year, up from £685m the year before. It paid a £350m dividend to shareholders and had net debts of £7.4bn.

It said the defined benefit pension scheme had a £729m surplus in 2023, down from just over £1bn in 2022.

Cadent also told the union it paid disproportionately more into the defined benefit scheme compared with the defined contribution scheme, which has just over 6,000 members.

Last week fears over the financial health of Thames Water emerged hours after the shock resignation of its chief executive, Sarah Bentley.

Related: In charts: how privatisation drained Thames Water’s coffers

Macquarie, which now owns Southern Water, has been criticised for its ownership of Thames Water. It is estimated that Macquarie left Thames with an extra £2.2bn in loans. Over 11 years, £2.8bn was paid out in dividends, while Thames’s debt rose sharply from £3.2bn to £10.5bn.

The chairman of Cadent, Sir Adrian Montague, has been parachuted in to replace Ian Marchant, who held the same role at Thames.

It emerged over the weekend that one of Thames’s largest shareholders, the Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS), is backing the company to turn around its financial position.

“We have given our backing to Thames Water’s turnaround plan and net zero roadmap and engage with them regularly to support their long-term strategy,” Bill Galvin, the chief executive of USS, said on Friday in a note to the pension fund’s sponsoring employers.

The biggest shareholder is the Ontario Municipal Employees’ Retirement System, which has a 32% stake. USS is the second largest, controlling about 20%. Another 10% is owned by a subsidiary of the Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund, and almost 9% is held by China’s sovereign wealth fund.

Thames took on much of its debt when it was under the ownership of Macquarie. It has missed targets for improving operational and environmental performance and is under pressure to fix leaks from its pipes, which are at a five-year high, and to stem the flow of raw sewage into rivers, for which it has been repeatedly fined.

In May, ministers were urged by GMB to intervene if Macquarie pushed the button on a mooted £3bn deal to take full control of National Grid’s former gas transmission and meter business.

Macquarie and Cadent declined to comment.

Thames Water's Debt Crisis Is Just The Beginning

  • Thames Water, UK's largest supplier, is facing a financial crisis, with its £13.7bn debt signalling industry-wide issues as other suppliers collectively accrue arrears of £65bn.

  • The precarious financial health of the industry is causing investors to turn away, with company credit ratings dropping to a 30-year low and increasing regulatory risks predicted.

  • The crisis has sparked discussions about potential solutions, including nationalisation, with a majority of Britons supporting this, and turning suppliers into 'social purpose' vehicles with tighter regulations.

Thames Water’s travails have taken the media spotlight in recent days, and deservedly so, with growing fears the country’s largest supplier could be on the verge of collapse. Shareholders injected £500m into the company in March, and committed to a further £1bn in funding before discussions later faltered – with chief executive Sarah Bentley abruptly stepping down last week, and the supplier bringing in crisis manager Sir Adrian Montague as its new chairman.

It recognises the suppliers ”significant issues to address” including the “need to improve their financial resilience” but also pointed to the group’s ”strong liquidity position….. with £4.4bn of cash and committed funding”.

However, the government appears unconvinced with Whitehall and regulator Ofwat now reportedly drawing contingency plans – similar to the crisis measures brought in to protect Bulb Energy when it fell into de-facto nationalisation.

Reflecting the scale of such a rescue plan, Bulb had one-tenth of Thames Water’s 15m customers, and cost £3bn in gross funding to support the fallen supplier on life support with transfusions of public cash.

Who could be next?

The company’s £13.7bn debt pile is not unique in the industry, even if it places Thames Water top of the pops among its peers.

Debt is commonplace across the water sector, with suppliers collectively accruing arrears of £65bn despite widespread underinvestment – including £54bn across the big nine suppliers between 1989 and 2022.

Rounding off the top five are United Utilities (£8.2bn), Severn Trent (£7.2bn), Anglian Water (£6.5bn) and Yorkshire Water (£5.7bn).

Over the same time period, they paid £66bn out to shareholders – averaged £2bn per year since privatisation over three decades ago.

Just last week, Yorkshire Water also reported a £500m successful scramble for funds.

The firm said the move was part of a long-term equity plan, playing down the prospect of problems at the supplier – but with its debt levels any move it makes is rightly scrutinised.

Especially when the debt ratios are also so high.

While Thames Water’s 80 per cent leverage is significant, it barely contrasts with other suppliers – with South East Water reporting a leverage of 74.8 per cent while Affinity Water has a ratio of 74 per cent.

Now, the consequences of this are being felt with the country’s creaking, leaking pipelines insufficient to cope with rising demand from a growing population and warmer summer weather and colder winters over the past two decades.

Thames Water is far from alone in accruing huge debts in the industry

Investors turn away from water sector

Ofwat’s industry reports reveal that of the UK’s 17 water companies, only three had a gearing ratio below the 60 per cent – which the watchdog considers a healthy target range for debt levels.

Jefferies is unimpressed, warning that “Thames Water’s financing situation exacerbates the challenges facing the water sector.”

The investment analyst fears the “sector faces an increasingly difficult challenge of balancing the growing need for environmental capex with customer affordability, whilst also enhancing its financial resiliency.”

Meanwhile, company credit ratings across the have dropped to their lowest levels in 30 years.

It is now predicting further regulatory risks for the industry, and recommends a close-to-nil premium on trading in listed water companies.

Thames Water is home to multiple stakeholders – a complicated set-up for a supplier under scrutiny

This financial shakiness across the entire industry means its difficult to predict which supplier is next to report difficulties, but it also means its hard to make a case for any of them being in particularly healthy shape – despite Ofwat and Water UK attempting to reassure customers.

What also makes it more challenging is that six of England and Wales’ water companies are either owned or controlled by overseas investors.

In the case of Thames Water –its backers include Canadian pension giant Omers as its largest stakeholder, but also features the Chinese Investment Corporation – a state-backed vehicle – and Infinity, a UAE-based group.

While Thames Water investor Universities Superannuation Scheme has publicly lent its support to the company – City A.M. has approached every other investor in the company and so far received no comments, creating a deafening sense of silence over the supplier’s fortunes.

However, with such high debt burdens, it is difficult to have such certainty in any supplier’s future.

What happens now?

Liv Garfield, chief executive of Severn Trent, has invited other utility chief executives to an “off-the-record roundtable” with economist Will Hutton.

In confidential emails first reported by the Evening Standard, she outlined proposals for suppliers to remain privatised but be reformed as ‘social purpose’ vehicles with more stringent regulations funding and environmental concerns such as leaks.

She added, she has been in discussions with Labour – which is widely tipped to win next year’s election and are over 20 points ahead in the polls – over reforming the sector.

Business and trade committee chair and Labour MP Darren Jones declined to lend his support re-nationalisation last week, recognising that it was an “option, but not necessarily the right one.”

In his view, the problem was not the ownership model, but instead the behaviour of “the directors and the shareholders who own and operate these businesses.”

However, nationalisation is now increasingly popular with the British public, with seven in ten supporting taking water companies back into public ownership according to YouGov polling.

Brits are increasingly supportive of re-nationalising the water industry

So far, Therese Coffey, environment secretary, has been absent from the debate, having unveiled a new industry plan for water earlier this year which included unlimited fines for sewage dumping.

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt met with Ofwat last week, with the regulator agreeing to push suppliers further help vulnerable customers.

But there is still the painful possibility of higher water bills, raising the prospect of potentially 40 per cent higher bills to tackle sewage leaks, increased demand and climate change.

Water UK has also confirmed to City A.M. that households will have to foot the bill for companies’ £10bn plans to tackle storm overflows this decades

Supplier – chief executive

Pay (salary, bonuses, dividends)

Liv Garfield – Severn Trent

£3.2m

Steven Mogford – United Utilities

£3.2m

Sarah Bentley – Thames Water*

£2m

Liz Barber – Yorkshire Water

£1.4m

Peter Simpson – Anglian Water

£1m

Top five highest paid water industry bosses (Source: Companies House reports)

Currently, 20 per cent of UK water bills each year pay dividends and interest payments, according to the Competition and Markets Authority.

This comes with executive bosses also facing criticism over pay, with Liv Garfield the highest paid chief executive in the industry.

Thames Water’s struggle for cash is likely to drag on for days and weeks, but the latest event to keep an eye on is tomorrow’s committee session in Westminster – with the House of Lord’s industry regulatory panel set to grill Ofwat’s chairman Ian Coucher and chief executive David Black over the state of the industry.

The following week, the MPs from the House of Commons’ environment, food and rural affairs committee will also grill Ofwat, alongside Thames Water and environment under-secretary Rebecca Pow.

This might give us some answers to questions over sewage leaks, company performance, customer service, and how the industry ended up with a vast debt mountain that threatens the entire sector.

By CityAM

THEY PRIVATIZED WATER UTILITIES
Britain is heading for drought - and it is an entirely man-made disaster


Philip Johnston
THE TELEGRAPH
Tue, July 4, 2023

An aerial view of low water levels at Woodhead Reservoir which is operated by United Utilities

Last month was the hottest June on record, we are told, which comes as a surprise to those of us in the South East who shivered in unusually keen easterly winds for the first week or so.

In fact it was not the hottest June ever, in England at least. The Met Office records go back to 1884, but the Hadley Centre’s Central England Temperature (CET) series, which predates them, made June 1846 hotter with a mean temperature of 18.2C, more than one degree celsius above last month.

The Junes of 1676, 1762, 1798, 1826 and 1976 were all nearly as hot or hotter in the CET rankings. Apart from possibly 1976, none could be attributed to carbon emissions caused by industrialisation.

Warm Junes have been rare over the past 100 years and yet they have recently become more common, which is why meteorologists say global warming is to blame. A few hot months scattered across the centuries are just the vagaries of the weather; a succession suggests a changing climate.

Indeed, this summer might be particularly warm because sea surface temperatures in the North Atlantic and around the British Isles are unusually high. Last month was also dominated by high pressure, with long spells of settled, dry weather.

Of course, these could be anomalies, not trends, but the Met Office inevitably detected the “fingerprint of climate change” in the June figures. To most of us, a hotter, sunnier and drier June is a pleasant early summer surprise; to the weather boffins, it is the harbinger of impending calamity.

“Alongside natural variability, the background warming of the Earth’s atmosphere due to human-induced climate change has driven up the possibility of reaching record high temperatures,” the Met Office said. It also pointed out that the UK’s 10 warmest years since 1884 have happened in the last two decades.

The response of the politicians to this trend is hubristic. They hope to turn down the global thermostat by cutting back on carbon emissions and heading hell-for-leather towards net zero. Taking people with them, however, is proving hard, despite the gloom-mongering. Resistance to the hair-shirt approach and eye-watering expense necessary to cut emissions even by a fraction is growing.

But there is another approach, or rather a complementary one, which is to prepare for the consequences of climate change. Foremost among these is drought. Amid the hoo-ha about the economic difficulties facing the privatised water companies, the most important issue is how to underpin the resilience of supply. Rainfall in June was only 68 per cent of the annual average and this is a pattern of recent years.

Even if it rains for weeks on end, it is seemingly never enough to replenish reservoirs and fill up the aquifers. Things are not too bad at the moment. As of June 20, total reservoir stocks in England were 83 per cent of capacity, though some areas, notably and unusually the South West, are below that. Hosepipe bans are in force already in Devon, Cornwall, Sussex and Kent and more will follow.

The National Drought Group, which met last week to review the position, said that by 2050 England will need four billion additional litres of water per day to meet demand. “Action on water resilience must be taken now to determine how these significant needs will be met,” the group‘s report concluded.

So what is happening? The Government published a Plan for Water in April which had a lot to say about regulating water quality, tackling sewage and removing plastics, but not much about supply.

It called for £1.6 billion extra to be spent on new infrastructure, but this is for the water companies to provide and, as we know, they are facing financial pressures, even bankruptcy. There is now talk of renationalisation, at least of Thames Water, but how would that help if governments continue to ignore the needs of the industry because they are spending so much on health and welfare?

After all, the reason water was privatised was to attract new investment because the state was not doing it itself and the system was falling apart.

Water is something that all politicians think will eventually drop out of the sky in Britain so they don’t really need to worry about supply. They believe nature will provide, forgetting that the areas with the biggest – and growing – populations are far drier than many people appreciate.

Rainfall levels in London and the Home Counties are among the lowest in Europe. In some years, the annual total in Essex is below that of Jerusalem. So, where are the desalination plants? There is one in east London. Opened in 2010, It was supposed to provide up to 150 million litres of drinking water each day – enough for 900,000 Londoners – but has only operated on three occasions at two-thirds of its planned capacity. We need half a dozen more working properly.

Where are the new storage facilities? Attempts to construct a new super-reservoir near Abingdon, first proposed in 2006, have foundered amid planning hold-ups, and arguments about design and the extraction of water from the Thames. Others are planned over the next 15 years, but where is the money to come from to build them?

One answer is to transfer water from areas where it is plentiful to the South East where it is most needed. This is hardly a new idea. The Chinese built a water grid 2,000 years ago and the Romans constructed a 30-mile aqueduct just to supply the people of Nimes with water for their ornamental fountains.

We’ve done it here, too. North Wales reservoirs were built to supply the Victorian boom cities of Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham. A water grid using pipelines and canals to link the Severn and the Thames has always been scorned as too expensive and impractical, even though the engineering is perfectly possible. A feasibility study commissioned by three water companies says an interconnector transferring up to 500 million litres a day during drought events can be completed by 2033. This could be expanded eventually to include other waterways.

The importance of ensuring water is available is obvious and a grid would be a lot cheaper than HS2. But if the water companies are going bust, who is going to build it?
P3 PUBLIC PENSIONS FUND PRIVATIZATION

Two Canadian pension plans risk reputation hit from investments in troubled Thames Water

U.K. utility fiasco plunges OMERS and BCI into the midst of potential rescue plan


Author of the article:Barbara Shecter
Published Jul 06, 2023 • Last updated 1 hour ago • 3 minute read
The U.K. government has expressed serious concern about the financial plight of the country's biggest privatized water company. 
PHOTO BY BEN STANSALL/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

A troubled water utility company in the United Kingdom that counts two of Canada’s biggest public pensions as large shareholders is facing regulatory scrutiny and fines for sewage leaks and could require a financial bailout

The Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS) and British Columbia Investment Management Corporation (BCI) own 31.8 per cent and and 8.7 per cent of Thames Water, respectively. Analysts at DBRS Morningstar said in a July 5 report that OMERS and BCI are expected to weather the storm with minimal financial damage given their size, diversification and long-term performance — even if Thames Water were to collapse — but there is reputational risk for the Canadian pensions, which could affect future investment opportunities.

Thames Water is the largest water utility in the U.K., serving about a quarter of the population. It is heavily indebted and has faced financial difficulties in the face of rising interest rates. Investors have been called on to pony up £1 billion, after injecting £500 million in March, to upgrade infrastructure and help manage the £14-billion debt load. However, the U.K. government is now understood to be considering a range of options to stave off the collapse of Thames Water, including the possibility of placing it into a special administration regime that could take the company into temporary public ownership and result in financial losses to the current shareholders, according to the DBRS report.


One of Thames Water’s large shareholders, the £90-billion Universities Superannuation Scheme, which has a 20 per cent stake in the utility, has publicly pledged support for Thames Water. It will face questions about its stake in Thames Water from the U.K.’s pension regulator, as early as this week, according to a July 5 report from the Financial Times, citing people familiar with the situation.


Both Canadian pensions declined to comment on their role in what is happening with Thames Water, referring instead to a June 28 statement from Thames Water Utilities Finance PLC, which said the utility “is continuing to work constructively with its shareholders in relation to the further equity funding expected to be required to support Thames Water’s turnaround and investment plans.”

That statement added that the utility’s regulator, Ofwat, is being kept “fully informed on progress of the company’s turnaround and engagement with shareholders” and that Thames Water maintained a strong liquidity position including £4.4 billion of cash and committed funding as at 31 March 2023.

OMERS has been an investor in Thames Water since 2017, following a divestiture by Australia’s Macquarie Group, which later faced criticism for ratcheting up the debt while taking profits from the utility. BCI has been an investor in Thames Water since 2006.

Keith Ambachtsheer, a Canadian pension expert and director emeritus of International Centre for Pension Management, said the Thames Water case pokes a hole in the frequent characterization of infrastructure investing as a suitable investment for long-term pension plans and an easy way to generate inflation-linked returns.


“Thames Water offers a counter to that view: infrastructure investing can also be challenging and risky,” Ambachtsheer said in an email to the Financial Post on July 5.

The growing scandal at the utility has raised questions in the U.K. about the strategy of privatizing critical utilities.

In one of the latest knocks for Thames Water, the embattled utility was fined £3.3 million on July 4 at Lewes Crown Court after a faulty storm pump that went unnoticed spilled sewage into rivers near Gatwick Airport.

On June 27, Sarah Bentley, the CEO of Thames Water, stepped down abruptly. Her exit came amid reports that the utility’s leakage rate was at a five-year high, according to a report in the Guardian. Before she stepped down, Bentley forfeited her bonuses but it appeared to be too little to dispel growing controversy.

The problems at Thames Water have also spilled into ESG funds, as the utility has issued around US$3 billion of green bonds since 2022.

RECOMMENDED FROM EDITORIAL

How PSP Investments is navigating choppy markets


Canada Pension Plan investing board posts 1.3% return


According to a Bloomberg News report on July 4, more than 200 ESG funds bought into those bond issues and are left assessing what impact any environmental, social and governance shortcomings at the utility will have on their holdings.

“Investing in water sounds ‘green’. Investing in a water utility with a long list of environmental problems and apparently no credible plan to resolve them is not,” said Ambachtsheer. “Where was the ‘due diligence’?”

The pensions invested in Thames Water may also face questions over the utility’s environmental impact.

Guyana's Oil Revolution Boosted By More New Discoveries

  • CGX Energy announced promising oil discoveries at the Wei-1 exploration well in the Corentyne Block, following the 2022 Kawa-1 discovery, bolstering Guyana's position in the global oil market.

  • The new discoveries confirm the oil fairway within the prolific Stabroek Block extends further than initially thought, possibly reaching offshore Suriname.

  • These developments offer hope for other energy companies like Repsol, which is looking to make viable oil discoveries in neighboring blocks, and lend support to the idea of substantial oil potential in Guyana's shallow territorial waters.

For a country of under one million, former British colony Guyana has emerged as a fossil fuel powerhouse. A series of more than 30 high-grade oil discoveries in the offshore Stabroek Block by energy supermajor Exxon have catapulted Guyana into the big league ending it with over 11 billion barrels of oil resources. While the Exxon-operated Stabroek Block is responsible for the South American country’s emergence as what analysts are calling the world’s hottest offshore oil play, the story isn’t only about that block. Guyana continues to experience new oil discoveries, with the latest reported by CGX Energy at the Wei-1 exploration well in the Corentyne Block. That followed the 2022 Kawa-1 discovery in the same block, boding well for Guyana’s oil boom to gain further momentum. 

CGX, in mid-June 2023, announced the discovery of oil with the troublesome Wei-1 wildcat well. According to the driller, 71 feet of net oil pay was found in the secondary reservoir targets in the Maastrichtian and Campanian intervals. CGX, on June 28, 2023, announced that the Wei-1 encountered 210 feet of hydrocarbon-bearing sands in the Santonian horizon. While the wildcat well made what is a promising oil discovery, many of the details are still being confirmed due to technical glitches which forced CGX to drill a bypass well. For that reason, the driller-stated rock and fluid samples from the Santonian interval are being evaluated by an independent third-party laboratory to determine the net oil pay and characteristics of the reservoirs discovered. CGX anticipates this will take two to three months to complete.

This came on the back of the earlier discovery at the Kawa-1 well announced during January 2022. CGX stated that:

“The Kawa-1 well encountered approximately 177 feet (54 meters) of hydrocarbon-bearing reservoirs within Maastrichtian, Campanian and Santonian horizons based on initial evaluation of Logging While Drilling (LWD) data.”

The driller went on to explain that:

“These intervals are similar in age and can be correlated using regional seismic data to recent successes in Block 58 in Suriname and Stabroek Block in Guyana.”

Those results support the assumptions that the Corentyne Block contains considerable hydrocarbon resources. These, in an earlier independent 2021 resource evaluation by McDaniel & Associates Consultants Ltd, were determined to be 1.5 billion to 7.3 billion barrels for the northern section of the Corentyne Block. The entire block is estimated, in the same report, to contain prospective resources of 1.7 billion to 10.7 billion barrels of oil equivalent. 

Wei-1 is the 45th oil discovery in Guyana’s territorial waters since 2015, and it is an important milestone for the oil-rich former British colony, which is on track to become a major petroleum producer and explorer. The two discoveries made by CGX and partner Frontera Energy, which holds a 68% non-operated working interest in the Corentyne Block and 77% of CGX, are a particularly important development for Guyana’s offshore oil boom. Especially so for Frontera, which after accounting for its ownership of CGX, has a nearly 93% consolidated interest in the Corentyne Block.

The Corentyne Block discoveries confirm that the oil fairway contained within the prolific Stabroek Block, where U.S. supermajor Exxon has made over 30 discoveries and found more than 11 billion barrels of oil, extends further than originally believed. There is speculation that this petroleum trend extends through the northern part of the Corentyne Block and into Block 58 offshore Suriname where TotalEnergies and 50% partner Apache have made five discoveries.

The Kawa-1 and Wei-1 discoveries bode well for Spanish energy major Repsol and its efforts to find oil in the neighboring Kanuku Block. Repsol, which is the operator with a 37.5% working interest along with Tullow Oil and TotalEnergies, holding 37.5% and 25%, respectively, has failed to make any commercially viable discoveries on the Kanuku Block. The last exploration well drilled, Beebei-Potaro, which was completed during August 2022, discovered oil but was capped and abandoned because the reservoirs were found to be water-bearing. CGX’s discoveries are encouraging for Repsol, which is considering conducting a field survey so as to maximize the chances of successfully making an oil discovery in the Kanuku Block.

The Wei discovery also supports the view that Guyana’s shallow territorial waters contain considerable oil potential. For Guyana’s latest oil auction, which was launched in December 2022, there are 14 blocks on offer, comprised of 11 shallow water and 3 deep water blocks. The date for submissions was pushed back until mid-July 2023. This has triggered considerable speculation that the volume of oil contained in the Guyana Suriname Basin could be far greater than originally anticipated. This includes the view that the geological body contains more oil than the 2.8 billion to 32.6 billion barrels estimated by the U.S. Geological Survey.

CGX’s oil discoveries bode well for offshore Suriname, where TotalEnergies, the operator, and Apache made five commercial discoveries. Poor drilling results, including dry wells, sparked speculation that the deepwater trend in Block 58 is not as significant as initially thought. It was that, along with conflicting seismic data and a high gas-to-oil ratio, that saw the final investment decision or FID for Block 58 delayed. The discoveries in the Corentyne Block, which is contiguous with Block 58, indicate Block 58 possesses the oil potential originally envisioned when the first discovery was made in 2020. That, along with successful appraisal drilling and flow testing at the Sapakara discovery, where over 500 million barrels of oil have been identified, bodes well for the development of Block 58. Those factors will assist with progressing the stalled FID with a decision expected in 2024.

By Matthew Smith for Oilprice.com

Big Oil Revives Offshore Exploration

  • Discipline in investment continues to be a major theme among Big Oil, but investment in exploration is rising.

  • Oil majors expect higher returns on investment from offshore oil and gas than from low-carbon energy investments.

  • SLB expects offshore exploration spending to increase by more than 20% this year.

Spending on exploration is growing as oil majors are now putting the security of oil and gas supply and higher upstream profits ahead of investment in lower-return low-carbon energy solutions. 

While the U.S. supermajors haven’t ventured into wind and solar, Europe’s biggest oil companies spent three years convincing investors that they would not grow oil and gas production further and invest more in renewables. Until last year’s energy crisis and skyrocketing commodity prices shifted the focus back to oil and gas supply. 

Energy Security - Keyword For Growing Oil And Gas Supply 

Discipline in investment continues to be a major theme among Big Oil, but investment in exploration is rising as the majors expect much higher returns from large offshore projects compared to low-single-digit returns from investment in renewables and other clean energy solutions. 

The recent strategy shifts from BP and Shell signaled oil and gas production at these firms hasn’t peaked – as promised back in 2020 – and will rise this decade to ensure adequate oil and gas supply. 

Some institutional investors have already expressed disappointment at the pivot from BP and Shell, who doubled down on oil and gas in their updated strategies earlier this year. 

Shell said last month it would grow its gas business and extend its position in the upstream.

“In our Upstream business, Deep Water has a proven track record of sustained cash flows from high-margin, lower-carbon barrels,” Zoë Yujnovich, Integrated Gas and Upstream Director at Shell, said on Shell’s Capital Markets Day 2023. 

“Continued investments in oil and gas will be needed to make sure that the energy transition happens in a balanced way with a secure supply of affordable and increasingly lower-carbon energy. We will contribute to this balanced transition by focusing our investments on the most profitable and carbon-competitive projects,” Yujnovich said, expecting Shell’s total production to grow from 2025 “given our confidence in our portfolio and our capabilities.” Related: Iran’s Growing Oil Production: A New Threat To OPEC’s Market Grip

One exciting opportunity, Yujnovich noted, is offshore Namibia, where Shell will continue with its exploration efforts after making three discoveries in the Orange Basin there in the past two years. 

Exploration Success

French supermajor TotalEnergies also made a significant discovery of light oil with associated gas on the Venus prospect in the Orange Basin early last year. Venus in Namibia could be a “giant oil and gas discovery,” TotalEnergies said in an investor presentation last September.

TotalEnergies was recently named the upstream industry’s most-admired explorer and received the Discovery of the Year award for the Venus discovery offshore Namibia. 

Commenting on the state of exploration these days, Dr. Andrew Latham, Senior Vice President, Energy Research at Wood Mackenzie, said last week, 

“The exploration industry continues to see an excellent series of high-impact finds in many parts of the world.” 

“The industry remains very dynamic and these recognized companies, as well as many others, continue to deliver advantaged resources that can displace less sustainable supply,” Latham added. 

Offshore Rig Demand Rising 

Deepwater rig utilization is rising, and so are rates as companies increase exploration, WoodMac said in a report last month. Rig utilization has returned to pre-COVID levels, driving rates surging by 40% in the past year, and demand is set to increase by another 20% from 2024-2025, the consultancy noted. 

“Higher oil prices, the focus on energy security and deepwater’s emissions advantages have supported deepwater development and, to some extent, boosted exploration,” said Leslie Cook, principal analyst for Wood Mackenzie. 

“We expect demand to continue to rise.”

Most of the expected drilling growth and offshore rig demand is expected to come from the so-called “Golden Triangle” of Latin America, North America, and Africa, as well as parts of the Mediterranean. These areas will account for 75% of global floating rig demand through 2027, according to Wood Mackenzie. 

SLB, the world’s largest oilfield services provider, is optimistic about offshore drilling and exploration, too. 

“Today, offshore is the fastest growing market globally driven by long-cycle developments, production capacity expansions, the return of exploration and appraisal in brownfields and new frontiers, and the criticality of gas as a long-term fuel for energy security,” SLB’s chief executive Olivier Le Peuch said at the J.P. Morgan Energy, Power & Renewables Conference 2023 last month. 

“Offshore is experiencing a renaissance, with significant breadth and anticipated durability,” Le Peuch added. 

SLB expects offshore exploration spending to increase by more than 20% this year, said the executive at the oilfield services giant, which generates around 50% of its international revenue from offshore activities. 

“To conclude, we are in the midst of a distinct cycle with qualities that enhance the long-term outlook for our industry — Breadth, Resilience, and Durability — all reinforced by a pivot to international, offshore, gas, and the return of exploration and appraisal,” Le Peuch said. 

The International Energy Agency (IEA) also sees global upstream investment in oil and gas exploration, extraction and production on track to rise by 11% this year from 2022 and reach $528 billion in 2023—the highest upstream investment level since 2015.  

By Tsvetana Paraskova for Oilprice.com