Print This Post
PBR’s Sub-Salt Oil Discoveries a Very Long Way from Recovery
The discovery of enormous oil supplies in the Santos basin offshore Brazil that lie deep under a salt layer is the most optimistic development for future oil supplies perhaps in decades, eclipsing the GOM Thunderhorse or Jack discoveries or the African offshore discoveries. But since the price of oil has slipped below $70 these Brazilian prospects, and the outlook for Petrobras (PBR), the state-controlled oil company slated to benefit from them, is much more questionable as discussed in the essay below published at Seeking Alpha.
Brazil has published plans to increase their oil production by nearly 1 mb/d between 2012 and 2015 based on the Santos fields. But if these new lower oil prices levels persist for a couple of years, which I think is highly likely given the global economic decline that is just starting, the new Brazilian oil may not start flowing until well after 2015 because of the enormous costs detailed below for recovering the Santos Basin oil and because of cash flow constraints based on the global credit contraction and the effects of lower oil prices on the Brazilian company and the Brazilian government.
This potential deferral of Santos production is one specific piece of the new outlook for longer term oil prices that recent developments has caused. In a netshell, here is my own sense of how the credit crisis and global slowdown will impact oil supply and demand for the next six years:
1. Prices will stay low for 2 - 3 years, perhaps not going back above $100 before 2010 unless the U.S. dollar tanks for some reason. Megaprojects analysis had led me to believe that supply would be ample compared with demand through some point in 2010.
2. With the new lower demand levels for 2008 - 2010 caused by the global economic slowdown, some fields can be managed better for longer-lived production. Moreover, when oil demand begins to build again it will be building from a lower base. So in the 2010 - 2012 time frame that will see demand growing faster than supply oil prices should remain moderate, perhaps under $150. Thus it may take more than four years before the price of oil will make a new high.
3. However, production will peak in the 2012 - 2014 time frame, economic recovery could lead to robust demand, and the new supplies such as these Brazilian fields will have been delayed. Moreover some oil conservation measures, such as the car fleet starting to convert to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, will not proceed as fast as had been expected because of the current low oil price environment. Therefore, I think that the shortfall in oil production compared with demand that will start in the 2013 - 2014 time frame will be even more severe than has previously been predicted.
All of the above would be optimistic - perhaps wildly optimistic - if the going forward rate of decline in mature fields is actually around 9% as the Financial Times has recently published. My analysis of megaprojects data was based on decline rates of 4% - 5%.
Petrobras: Dead In The Water
by: Alan von Altendorf October 20, 2008 | about stocks: PBR

Alan von Altendorf
Brazil’s oil giant Petrobras (PBR) on Friday postponed the disclosure of its new business plan so that it could evaluate the impact of the global financial crisis.
The global credit crunch has smashed the deepwater building program at Petrobras. Whether it can pay for current orders is questionable. The Brazilian state investment council voted to shore up PBR in the short term. That suggests Petrobras has cash flow problems now — without the presalt development cost expected to total $500 billion over the next decade.
We noted previously that Petrobras was borrowing to pay dividends, but the precipitous drop in oil price hit its business plan hard. Suddenly, a $20 billion bond issue is impossible.
PBR’s published capex budget covered construction of huge new petrochemical and oil refineries, thermal energy network, maintenance and overhaul of P-17 and P-23 platforms, drillship and FPSO charters, and construction of the new Rio Grande shipyard. It has contractual commitments in Africa and deepwater GOM. Zero $ capex was budgeted for production of Tupi-Carioca.
Funding the presalt play was supposed to be easy. Modec is building three FPSOs for Tupi pilot production, which Petrobras agreed to pay $400,000 per day for 5 years with deferred option to buy at $1 billion each. $5 billion total, no cash upfront. Jurong Shipyard in Singapore is funding another FPSO for Roncador field, $1.6 billion plus operating cost. Eight more FPSOs are supposed to be magically assembled on a crash schedule at Rio Grande when it’s completed and if they somehow pull together a trained local workforce and 3000 new homes on government subsidies.
Petroserv, Sembcorp Marine, and Norway’s BW Offshore are busy converting old rustbuckets into shiny new FPSOs for Petrobras that will rent for $250,000 a day with an option to buy at the low, low discount price of $250 million. Three were tendered, $2.2 billion plus operating costs.
Meanwhile, Queiro Galveo is building three semi-submersibles, and the Quip Consortium (Queiro, UTC and Iesa) have orders for 10 FPSO hulls, plus topsides for P-53, P-55 and P-63 built by SBM.
Jurong Singapore, Daewoo, Keppel Fels and Sevan Norway are bidding more work. It’s difficult to track the entire list. PBR announced 40 total, of which 28 deepwater rigs to be built at domestic shipyards, 14 drillships and 14 semi-submersibles. Delba Baiana tapped WestLB Capital for $488 million to start four of those rigs. Aker Solutions has a multi-billion dollar order for subsea trees and National Oilwell Varco is tipped to provide thrusters and generators. The whole subsalt program is contingent on solving an esoteric puzzle — corrosion resistant risers that are immune to CO2 and hydrogen sulphide. Technip is working on it. PBR needs about 100 miles of this superpipe.
So what’s the total? Brazilian energy minister Edison Lobao says $115 billion. Maybe that’s the order book as of today — about 1/3 of the deepwater iron required to lift the tens of billions of barrels of oil that PBR claim as proved and probable subsalt reserves. Let’s suppose that it’s plenty to start with. Does it make sense as an investment?
Petrobras CEO Jose Sergio Gabrielli:
For each 150,000 barrels per day of output and a production system comprising a floating platform, wells and subsea lines, the cost may be between $6 billion and $8 billion. We don’t know whether we’ll need 20, 40 or 50 such production systems.
Not counting green crews, mismanagement, lost tools, sidetracks and drilling blunders, let’s say PBR’s guesstimate is correct: $7 billion to lift 150,000 barrels a day, 50 million barrels a year times 5 years = $30 per barrel. No way, Jose. Corrosion, natural decline, taxes, and interest expense make this financially improbable. Labor and supplies are another $20 per barrel. It does not include transporting whatever net oil & gas is produced 300 km by nonexistent pipeline or a never-before-attempted floating LNG liquefaction train. No one in the oil business has experience fracing tight reservoirs four miles down, and Wide Azimuth seismic won’t be available until Q2 2009.
Bottom line: PBR is counting on state funding, vendors and shipbuilders to finance construction, and betting that production will pay for it all. We affirm our negative outlook and SELL rating
Tags: peak oil investments
Print This Post





7 responses so far ↓
1 KV // Nov 1, 2008 at 6:34 am
Jim,
Thanks for the post on PBR.
Like PBR, many small and even large scale projects are doomed if oil goes below $50, as many predict. Natural gas may also face the same fate as supply has been exceeding demand. Employment picture does not look good either. Impact on solar and wind is unknown. So is on electric car. In less than a month we are seeing gas prices down below $2.30 (Costco - VA). All this may sound dire, but I see this as golden opportunity to breathe. We need to get alternate energy and conservation to a level that oil does not go back beyond the new trading range, to be established (six weeks don’t give us enough to know what this might be - thouugh $30~$80 may be the case). The objective of alternate energy should be to keep this in a tight range and a variable tax rate on oil and gas (high tax at low prices and low tax at high price with in the range, with supe high tax if the oil is priced outside the both ends of range) is needed.
Here I am advocating oil and dollar stabilty for the long term to get us out of the financial mess, and future peak oil. If we miss this opportunity, we are doomed in 10 years.
2 robert essian // Nov 1, 2008 at 10:59 am
Jim, on the 15th the IEA reports. I can’t wait because if the numbers are higher then we will have to move on an energy plan. If not everything will be delayed even an energy plan. I hope this will not be the case. Personally, I anticipate a higher number and can’t wait to see your revisions.
Jim, I would love to see your office because you have been working your ass off through the last three months.
KV, I understand that deflation is the rage today and could last a couple of years. I also know that the printing presses will be running 24-7 and at some point inflation/super inflation will rule the day. So when you speak of long term how many years is that (regarding dollar stabilty)?
OPEC will cut again before December and the rescent cuts shows no one is cheating. I haven’t a clue as to the formula you would use to figure out what that means so if anyone could show me where to research I would really like to learn that part of things.
I hope all is well…Peace
3 KV // Nov 1, 2008 at 4:31 pm
RE – I would hope that dollar is stable forever. If we really develop alternate energy sources and through policy – just like we have for oil – make them economically viable, the dollar will be stable. Actually, we could even survive the monstrous and willful financial crisis perpetuated on us by the Bush administration. What happens is two fold; deflation in oil is not allowed to subvert long term goals of alternatives for oil, and fossil fuels and taxes on the oil will provide the cash needed to go to small electric cars and associated infrastructure, while creating domestic jobs.
Why I believe this has more than 50% chance of success? Because, the whole world needs to go on this path, and hence, the whole world needs this. It is in Arabs’ interest as well. It keeps oil to last for way longer than currently projected. It provides them much more time to reformulate their society from nearly feudal to democracy from within and to excel and it would be without our saber rattling. To a great extent, Talibans and al-Queda are Arabs’ problem for their own survival. It is a Muslim problem mostly created by themselves.
Bush and Cheney went on the old colonial route with British in the tow, and they have failed in any measure one may want to use. History will not judge them or us Americans kindly for our misadventures for the last eight years of these two clowns. But we still have one more shot to correct all the mistakes and do the right thing, not just for us, but the world. How? By a clear mandate for moderates on Nov 4.
4 robert essian // Nov 1, 2008 at 9:13 pm
KV, I truly hope we move in the direction of electric everything, wind, solar and natural gas. Develope our oil and R&D alternatives. We do this and OPEC will become less relavent to us.
The economy as you have stated will benefit and we must conserve so much more ourselves, in a more meaningful manner to make this a way of life.
My only concern is that as a society that thinks entitlements are a birth right we will consume until the day everything over heats and crashes. I thought those days are the present but with gas at $2.39 a gallon I don’t think we will change unfortunately.
The econony will force that issue short term but not for long.
In the back of my mind I keep hearing, those who have the oil makes the rules. Disconcerting to say the least.
I would imagine a great deal of energy will be spent on the infrastucture alone so if that’s the way we are headed I could imagine that oil is close to its bottom and may settle in the $80 to $100.00 dollar range near term. I used real crude numbers to guess because frankly I haven’t a clue as to where to research to get a clearer understanding. Any insight on this would be helpful. I am eager to learn by researching and applying.
If oil hits those numbers again hear soon, I would gladly pay it if I see the light at the end of the tunnel.
I will bow my head and hope that clearer heads prevail and that what we see as a sensable solution actually moves the people who have the power and purse strings to do it.
I thought that was us or rather we the people but our voices seem to be…Good night…Peace
5 robert essian // Nov 2, 2008 at 7:05 am
One last observation, we fill the SPR with oil that costs $147.00 a barrel and will postpone infrastructure projects when oil is so cheap so the logic escapes me on that thought. The infrastructure will pay us back many times over but releasing SPR reserves just costs us money.
6 d. waldo // Nov 15, 2008 at 7:28 am
thanks for the thoughtful analysis, concluding a sale on PBR. I’m heavily long, thou. Every incremental source of liquid petroleum; tar sands, deep water GOM, coal to oil needs 80-100$/bbl to be economic. That’s 3.00 gas. Who wouldn’t pay 3.00 to go 40 miles, or haul goods 8 miles to market. All bad investments are liquidated in an economic downcycle. But producing oil with a price expectation of 80 $/bbl, is not, in my opinion, one of these.
7 liz // Mar 21, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Good analysis at the time but would you revise this conclusion in light of the Chinese capital investment now in PBR and your latest article on price trends?
Leave a Comment