What's new

Saudis risk playing with fire in shale-price showdown as crude crashes

temujin

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
447
Reaction score
0
Saudis risk playing with fire in shale-price showdown as crude crashes

Saudis risk playing with fire in shale-price showdown as crude crashes - Telegraph

A deep slump in prices might heighten geostrategic turmoil across the Middle East


Saudi Arabia and the core Opec states are taking an immense political gamble by letting crude oil prices crash to $66 a barrel, if their aim is to shake out the weakest shale producers in the US. A deep slump in prices might equally heighten geostrategic turmoil across the broader Middle East and boomerang against the Gulf’s petro-sheikhdoms before it inflicts a knock-out blow on US rivals.

Caliphate leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has already opened a “second front” in North Africa, targeting Algeria and Libya – two states that live off energy exports – as well as Egypt and the Sahel as far as northern Nigeria. "The resilience of US shale may prove greater than the resilience of Opec,” said Alistair Newton, head of political risk at Nomura.

Chris Skrebowski, former editor of Petroleum Review, said the Saudis want to cut the annual growth rate of US shale output from 1m barrels per day (bpd) to 500,000 bpd to bring the market closer to balance. “They want to unnerve the shale oil model and undermine financial confidence, but they won’t stop the growth altogether,” he said.

There is no question that the US has entirely changed the global energy landscape and poses an existential threat to Opec. America has cut its net oil imports by 8.7m bpd since 2006, equal to the combined oil exports of Saudi Arabia and Nigeria.

The country had a trade deficit of $354bn in oil and gas as recently as 2011. Citigroup said this will return to balance by 2018, one of the most extraordinary turnarounds in modern economic history.


“When it comes to crude and other hydrocarbons, the US is bursting at the seams,” said Edward Morse, Citigroup’s commodities chief. “This situation is unlikely to stop, even if prevailing prices for oil fall significantly. The US should become a net exporter of crude oil and petroleum products combined by 2019, if not 2018.”

Opec has misjudged the threat. As late as last year, it was dismissing US shale as a flash in the pan. Abdalla El-Badri, the group’s secretary-general, still insists that half of all US shale output is vulnerable below $85.

This is bravado. US producers have locked in higher prices through derivatives contracts. Noble Energy and Devon Energy have both hedged over three-quarters of their output for 2015.

Pioneer Natural Resources said it has options through 2016 covering two- thirds of its likely production. “We can produce down to $50 a barrel,” said Harold Hamm, from Continental Resources. The International Energy Agency said most of North Dakota’s vast Bakken field “remains profitable at or below $42 per barrel. The break-even price in McKenzie County, the most productive county in the state, is only $28 per barrel.”

Efficiency is improving and drillers are switching to lower-cost spots, confronting Opec with a moving target. “The (price) floor is falling and may not be nearly as firm as the Saudi view assumes,” said Citigroup.

Mr Morse says the “full cycle” cost for shale production is $70 to $80, but this includes the original land grab and infrastructure. “The remaining capex required to bring on an additional well is far lower, and could be as low as the high-$30s range,” he said.

Critics of US shale may have misunderstood its economics. There is a fast decline in output from new wells but this is offset by a “long-tail phase” for a growing number of legacy wells. The Bakken field has already reached 1.1m bpd, and this is expected to double again over the next five years.


Other oil projects around the world may be more vulnerable to a price squeeze, including the North Sea, the ultra-deepwater ventures in the Atlantic off Brazil and Angola, Canadian oil sands, or Russia’s contentious plans for the Arctic in the “High North”. But the damage will be gradual.

In the meantime, oil below $70 is already playing havoc with budgets across the global petro-nexus. The fiscal break-even cost is $161 for Venezuela, $160 for Yemen, $132 for Algeria, $131 for Iran, $126 for Nigeria, and $125 for Bahrain, $111 for Iraq, and $105 for Russia, and even $98 for Saudi Arabia itself, according to Citigroup.

Opec may not be worried about countries such as Nigeria, but even there a full-blown economic and political crisis could turn the north into a Jihadi stronghold under Boko Haram.

The growing Jihadi movements in the Maghreb – combining with events in Syria and Iraq – clearly pose a first-order security threat to the Saudi regime itself.

The Libyan city of Derna is already in the hands of the Salafist group Ansar al-Shariah and has pledged allegiance to Islamic State. Terrorist movements in the Egyptian Sinai have also rallied to the black and white flag of IS, prompting Egypt’s leader Abdel al-Sisi to call last week for a “general mobilisation” of all leading Arab and Western powers to defeat the spreading movement.

The new worry is Algeria as the Bouteflika regime goes into its final agonies. “They have an entrenched terrorist problem as we saw in the seizure of the Amenas gas refinery last year. These people are aligning themselves with Islamic State as part of the franchise,” said Mr Newton.

Algeria exports 1.5m bpd of petroleum products. Its gas exports matter more but the price of liquefied natural gas shipped to Europe is indirectly linked to oil over time.

It is an open question what will happen to Algeria, Iraq, and Libya if oil prices hover at half the budget break-even costs for a year or two, given the extreme fragility of the region and political risk of cutting subsidies.


The Sunni Salafist tornado sweeping across the Middle East – so strangely like the lightning expansion of Islam in the mid-7th century – is moving to its own inner rhythms. It is not a simple function of economic welfare, let alone oil prices.

Yet Saudi Arabia’s ruling dynasty tests fate if it is betting that the Middle East’s fraying political order can withstand a regional economic shock for another two years.

It's all getting very interesting.On a positive note, the US is less likely to be tempted into further foreign misadventures to secure its oil supply in the future and another year or two of falling crude prices are also likely to put a significant squeeze on (private) Saudi and Qatari funding to IS..
 
.
itsa supa rich country ma frnd n oil export s lyka side bsns.
 
.
itsa supa rich country ma frnd n oil export s lyka side bsns.

Over 90% of Saudi's state revenues are derived from Petroleum exports and the sector directly accounts for over 50% of the economy-the rest largely comprises of services which are supported by the oil industry anyway. Saudi Arabia is a classical example of the 'Dutch Disease', wholly reliant on natural resources and devoid of any industry or a 'real' economy. Whilst it's true that SA has been running a primary surplus for several years on account of high oil prices and holds over $750 ban in reserves, a sustained fall in oil prices will hurt it's economy due to its over reliance on export revenues...
 
.
oh m sorry. dunno much bout sa. i juzz said wha i read on pdf by a supa rich pdfmemba from sa
 
. .
OPEC can still easily blackmail Europe and Asia. They're not broken yet.
 
.
@temujin

Will see where that goes. My question is where is the U.S pressure on OPEC to save its ongoing Shale oil revolution? That's an energy independence policy for the U.S, which naturally it should keep safe from harassment. Isn't it an important political card they have been looking to have for long time?

Dear @Chinese-Dragon, your thought here will be greatly appreciated.
 
Last edited:
.
Will see where that goes. My question here is where is the U.S pressure on OPEC to save the ongoing Shale oil revolution? That's an energy independence policy for the U.S that it should keep safe from harassment. It is an important political card they have been looking to have for long time.

Dear @Chinese-Dragon, your thought here will be greatly appreciated.

It's obvious..The shale industry does not need saving as the bulk of it will remain viable at sub $60 pb due to improvements in technology and lower operational costs from front loading of capital expenditure at existing sites. And its not just US the OPEC should be worried about-the success of US shale is being closely followed by other major OPEC clients, including in Europe, many of who are sitting on vast shale reserves themselves. In this battle of falling prices, its only the profit margins of private players that stand to suffer in the US whereas entire countries in the Gulf face ruin if prices dont recover.

Saudi, for instance, could lose around $150-175 billion a year in revenues if oil hits $ 60 as widely expected, which would in turn generate a budget shortfall of around $70-90 bln per annum at current rates of spending...Considering the fact that SA has around $750 billion in reserves, how long do you think it would it take the country to burn through all that cash (assuming prices/expenditure remain constant)? Do the maths...

Given the shale industry is still evolving and the US is adding capacity year on year, who would you rather have your money on?

@LeveragedBuyout
 
Last edited:
.
It's obvious..The shale industry does not need saving as the bulk of it will remain viable at sub $60 pb due to improvements in technology and lower operational costs from front loading of capital expenditure at existing sites. And its not just US the OPEC should be worried about-the success of US shale is being closely followed by other major OPEC clients, including in Europe, many of who are sitting on vast shale reserves themselves. In this battle of falling prices, its only the profit margins of private players that stand to suffer in the US whereas entire countries in the Gulf face ruin if prices dont recover.

Saudi, for instance, could lose around $150-175 billion a year in revenues if oil hits $ 60 as widely expected, which would in turn generate a budget shortfall of around $70-90 bln per annum at current rates of spending...Considering the fact that SA has around $750 billion in reserves, how long do you think it would it take the country to burn through all that cash (assuming prices/expenditure remain constant)? Do the maths...

Given the shale industry is still evolving and the US is adding capacity year on year, who would you rather have your money on?

@LeveragedBuyout

Let's assume it is confirmed that it remains viable at $ 60 or lower. That still doesn't explain why the U.S wouldn't put some pressure on OPEC. Why would the U.S accept $ 60 when the industry is still growing? It should be $100 and above to ensure further exploration and constant drilling. The U.S is still a super power and twisting OPEC's states arms isn't that hard any way.
 
. .
@temujin

Will see where that goes. My question is where is the U.S pressure on OPEC to save its ongoing Shale oil revolution? That's an energy independence policy for the U.S, which naturally it should keep safe from harassment. Isn't it an important political card they have been looking to have for long time?

Dear @Chinese-Dragon, your thought here will be greatly appreciated.

@Full Moon

The US government is already offering tax breaks and other incentives to encourage investment in Shale so the industry is well supported by the state in many respects. As for US intervention to stem price falls, the big drillers would still be making money at $ 60 pb and, in any case, the overwhelming benefits of a sustained drop in global oil prices for the US economy far outstrips any consequences for the shale industry. Every $ not spent in forecourts is 1 $ that would be spent by consumers elsewhere in the economy and cheaper energy prices are already feeding into lower inflation, allowing the Fed to continue monetary easing whilst keeping a lid on interest rates. More importantly, the US is witnessing a revival in high end manufacturing due to the availability of a skilled workforce, low rates on borrowing (partially driven by fall in oil) and cheap and abundant energy which is a direct result of the decline in oil prices.

In my view, OPEC's recent actions smack of desperate attempts by the cartel to not only maintain market share but retain monopoly on pricing in a scenario where two of the world's biggest petroleum producers, the US and Russia, remain outside the club. Ultimately, it costs little to dig the stuff out of the ground ($ 2 per barrel for SA and $ 3 per barrel for big producers in Russia) and the current market where supply exceeds demand and producers who account for 60% of production remain outside the club, there is a real possibility that prices eventually fall to a market dictated bottom, wrecking havoc with most Gulf economies.

As for the geo political consequences of such an outcome, if a 30% jump in bread prices in 2010 gave Egypt Tahrir Sqaure, imagine what an economic depression can do to the young, restive, politically disempowered and disenchanted population in a place like SA, especially with the IS next door offering its version of Salafi Max as an alternative to Al Saudism ?

Given the relative insignificance of the shale industry in the overall US economy, OPEC clearly has more to lose in the current scenario but they appear to be intent on pursuing this self destructive course.

@Nihonjin1051 Last time I heard, you were gloating about how you filled up the car with a $ 5 bill you found behind the sofa:P As a beneficiary of the shale boom, how do you see the current scenario playing out?
 
Last edited:
.
The new worry is Algeria as the Bouteflika regime goes into its final agonies. “They have an entrenched terrorist problem as we saw in the seizure of the Amenas gas refinery last year. These people are aligning themselves with Islamic State as part of the franchise,” said Mr Newton.
Who ever this Newton is, he has no knowledge of Algerian politics or economy. First of all the Algerian so called regime is not in agony, wether Bouteflika, is talking, walking, sleeping or in the coma. He was in the same state since he was elected the arab way back in 1989. Algeria's temperature doesn't fluctuate because Bouteflika has a cough or a group terroriste decides to join their houris. Algerian budget is balanced on a crude price of $38/barrel. If the crude dips below that, then Algeria will catch the chills.
This is not the first time the Sauds flooded the market, because they were ordered to! They acted the same in the 90's where the barrel plunged to $10, which led to the invasion of Kuweit by Saddam, and this will certainly lead to their invasion by their test tube baby, ISIS.
It is an open question what will happen to Algeria, Iraq, and Libya if oil prices hover at half the budget break-even costs for a year or two, given the extreme fragility of the region and political risk of cutting subsidies.
Nothing will happen to Algeria. Algeria has been under duress since the 90's, with 6 unstable bordering country, she is a very stable state andso far managed to keep all the threats at bay...
Libya is in complete chaos, even if the price surges, she will still in chaos.
t's all getting very interesting.On a positive note, the US is less likely to be tempted into further foreign misadventures to secure its oil supply in the future and another year or two of falling crude prices
I don't know if the last statement is your or Newton, in all cases neither you or Newton knows the US power projection and their energy interest throughout the world. If you look deep in the GCC existence, their energy reserves are GCC owned in name only!
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom