Netherland Sewell Adds Mexico City to the 2018 Oil & Gas Property Evaluation Seminar Lineup

/, , ,

Oil & Gas 360º / May 29

 

NSAI Oil & Gas Property Evaluation seminars coming to London, Singapore and Mexico City this summer

Netherland Sewell & Associates (NSAI) has again expanded the reach of its popular Oil & Gas Property Evaluation Seminars for financial professionals, with the new addition of a seminar in Mexico City on September 5-6, 2018.

“We are very excited to introduce the NSAI Oil & Gas Property Evaluation seminars to Mexico,” said NSAI SVP & CFO Scott Frost. “With the country opening its hydrocarbon sector to foreign investors and international partners, the time is right for NSAI to host a seminar in Mexico.”

Seminars deliver a basic understanding of the upstream oil and gas industry

The two-day seminars are designed to help energy finance professionals gain a deeper understanding of the various aspects of the evaluation of hydrocarbon reserves and learn how to use reserves reports and studies.  Participants can expect to gain a basic understanding of the upstream oil and gas industry, including basic geology of different plays, reservoir evaluation basics, reserves and resources definitions, understanding hydrocarbons-in-place, recovery factors and rates, operating expenses and capital costs, and more.

The seminar speakers are NSAI professionals that have significant career expertise in reserves determination methods, the economics of hydrocarbon extraction, and petroleum geology. The seminars are popular with financial institutions that invest in energy development as well as banks that are involved in making lending decisions for oil and gas exploration and production projects.

Below is the 2018 NSAI Oil & Gas Property Evaluation seminar calendar:

  • May 7 & 8 and 9 & 10, 2018 – Dallas (Both sessions had record attendance with a waiting list)
  • June 26 & 27, 2018 – London: Grange City Hotel
  • July 10 & 11, 2018 – Singapore: Singapore Exchange – SGX Auditorium
  • September 5 – 6, 2018 – Mexico City: Asturiano Polanco Banquet Room

NSAI encourages energy industry and oil and gas financial professionals to pass this information on to colleagues who may benefit from attending. “We are excited about the opportunity to meet again with petroleum industry financial professionals and would like to thank you for recommending our seminars to your colleagues,” said NSAI SVP Joseph Spellman.

Scott Rees, NSAI Chairman and CEO, told Oil & Gas 360® that the firm has graduated about 6,500 people during 38 cumulative years of seminars in Dallas, London and Singapore. “We are glad to be adding Mexico City to that list,” Rees said.

Interested parties may learn more and register at NSAI’s website.

 

Oil & Gas 360º / May 29

 

Canada’s Freeland to visit Washington this week for NAFTA talks

/, ,

Reuters / Reuters Staff / May 28

 

OTTAWA (Reuters) – Canada’s Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland will go to Washington on Tuesday to meet with the U.S. trade chief, officials said on Monday, as officials press for a deal on reworking the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

Freeland will be in Washington on Tuesday and Wednesday, said her spokesman Adam Austen. The United States, Mexico and Canada have spent months struggling to settle deep differences over what a new NAFTA should look like.

“We’ve said all along we are ready to go (to Washington) at any time,” Austen said by phone, but declined to comment when asked about the chances of the three nations sealing a deal.

A spokesman for U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said Freeland would meet the U.S. trade chief on Tuesday, but did not give details of the meeting. A Canadian official said that NAFTA would be on the agenda during the talks.

Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo said last week there was about a 40-percent chance of concluding the NAFTA talks before Mexico’s July 1 presidential election.

Guajardo will not be at the Tuesday meeting in Washington.

The Mexican minister’s office said that he and his deputy Juan Carlos Baker would be in Paris through Thursday for high level meetings of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the World Trade Organization.

Earlier, the European Commission said Lighthizer and U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross are scheduled to be in Paris on Wednesday for meetings with Europe’s top trade official on the sidelines of the OECD event.

Meanwhile, the Mexican economy ministry said Guajardo and Baker would be holding bilateral talks with ministers from Mexico’s top trade partners while in Paris. The United States is easily Mexico’s most important trading partner.

Guajardo and Freeland have held several rounds of talks with Lighthizer, who says he wants a quick deal to avoid the talks overlapping with election campaigning in Mexico.

The negotiations are moving slowly as Mexico and Canada try to grapple with U.S. demands to impose tougher minimum content requirements for autos built in the region, along with several other contentious proposals.

 

Reuters / Reuters Staff / May 28

 

PROGRAMA INTEGRAL DE SEGUROS: LA CLAVE EN EL SECTOR HIDROCARBUROS

/, , , , , ,

Contratar un seguro no basta para decir que una empresa está adecuadamente protegida contra los eventuales riesgos que pueda enfrentar; lo anterior, toda vez que un seguro sólo va a cubrir ciertos riesgos y a excluir otros. Por ello, la clave es contar con un programa integral de seguros.

Especificamente en el sector de hidrocarburos y sus derivados, la cadena de valor  es amplia y compleja, abarca distintas actividades: Exploración, Extracción, Refinación y Procesamiento, Transporte, Almacenamiento, Distribución y Expendio al público.

Se trata de actividades que son altamente riesgosas por las características intrínsecas de los hidrocarburos (explosivos  y flamables) las cuales les otorgan el potencial de causar daños y perjuicios. A dichos riesgos, se le suman aquellos que son particulares de cada actividad. Por ejemplo, en las actividades de extracción existe la posibilidad de un descontrol de pozo, lo que puede causar severos daños a personas y medio ambiente; los auto-tanques que transportan gasolina o gas licuado de petróleo pueden ocasionar pérdidas catastróficas en caso de una explosión pues transitan en zonas de alta densidad poblacional; los ductos son sujetos a actos vandálicos para sustraer los hidrocarburos, lo cual puede provocar contaminación a partir de los derrames.

Para evitar este tipo de eventualidades, las empresas generalmente implementan una serie de medidas de seguridad industrial y protección ambiental a través de un proceso de administración de riesgos, sin embargo la posibilidad de que alguna de éstas falle siempre existirá, por eso es sumamente importante contar con los mecanismos de transferencia de riesgos que otorguen respaldo económico en caso de siniestro.

Los seguros son instrumentos de transferencia del riesgo, que están diseñados para cumplir con objetivos específicos. Por ejemplo, un seguro de responsabilidad civil otorga cobertura por los daños y perjuicios que se causen a terceros en sus personas y bienes; un seguro de responsabilidad ambiental sirve para absorber los costos de remediación o compensación por contaminación ambiental; un seguro de control de pozos, como su nombre lo indica, está diseñado para asumir los costos que se deriven de un accidente en un pozo de perforación que provoque su descontrol.

La mejor manera de que las empresas de la industria de hidrocarburos estén debidamente protegidas es a través  de un programa integral de seguros que abarque todas sus áreas de riesgo.

En el contexto actual de la Reforma Energética,en la que participan activamente nuevos operadores que han comprometido su capital, las empresas  deben estar preparadas para actuar en un escenario de riesgo, donde deberán ajustar sus esquemas de aseguramiento a fin de evitar una reducción de la utilidad esperada o incluso un impacto negativo en su patrimonio.

En NRGI Bróker somos expertos  en administración de riesgos y programas integrales de seguros. Acércate a nosotros, con gusto te atenderemos.

 

¿POR QUÉ LOS SEGUROS Y NO OTRAS GARANTÍAS FINANCIERAS EN EL SECTOR HIDROCARBUROS?

/

Las garantías financieras son instrumentos a través de los cuales los titulares de los contratos  garantizan el cumplimiento de las obligaciones asumidas.

Entre éstas se encuentran los seguros que, en estricto sentido, se definen como un contrato bilateral, a través del cual una de las partes (el asegurado) obtiene, a cambio del pago de  una prima, la protección de una determinada suma económica que la otra parte (la aseguradora) se compromete a pagar en caso de que se presente un hecho no deseado, fortuito, súbito e inesperado, determinado previamente en la póliza de seguro.

La principal característica de los seguros es la de fungir como un respaldo económico ante diversas contingencias, ya sea que recaigan en el mismo asegurado o un tercero afectado, como consecuencia de una acción u omisión del asegurado.

Un claro ejemplo del primer caso es un seguro de gastos médicos mayores, donde en caso de que el asegurado presente un padecimiento considerado como gasto médico mayor, la aseguradora deberá pagar el monto establecido como indemnización.

En el segundo caso, se configura la responsabilidad civil, según la cual aquel que cause un daño a un tercero en su persona o en sus bienes está obligado a repararlo. De manera que si el asegurado causa un daño a otro, la aseguradora deberá indemnizar al afectado.

Los seguros en el sector hidrocarburos fueron regulados a partir de la Reforma Energética. El artículo 6, fracción I, inciso c, de la Ley de la Agencia de Seguridad, Energía y Ambiente (ASEA), se establece la facultad de dicha Agencia, para:

“Regular el requerimiento de garantías o cualquier otro instrumento financiero necesario para que los Regulados cuenten con coberturas financieras contingentes frente a daños o perjuicios que se pudieran generar. Dicha regulación deberá contar con la opinión favorable de la Secretaría de Energía y de la Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público”.

Hasta la fecha únicamente se ha regulado en materia de seguros para las actividades de exploración y extracción de hidrocarburos, tratamiento y refinación de petróleo y procesamiento de gas natural, a través de las Disposiciones Administrativas en materia de Seguros  (DACGS), en donde se establecieron los elementos y características con los que deben contar los seguros de control de pozos y responsabilidad civil-ambiental que deben contratar los regulados.

Ahora bien, es importante preguntar por qué las autoridades mexicanas decidieron requerir seguros sobre otras garantías financieras en el sector hidrocarburos:

  • Son el instrumento financiero más utilizado en el mundo por empresas petroleras. En países como los Estados Unidos de América, Brasil, Colombia, Reino Unido, Australia y Noruega se privilegia la adquisición de seguros para respaldar las operaciones nacionales e internacionales de las empresas.
  • Es muy expedito el proceso de autorización y emisión del seguro, cubre un gran número de riesgos propios del sector hidrocarburos. A través de los seguros adecuados, es posible cubrir desde un accidente personal hasta un descontrol de pozos que provoque un daño catastrófico.
  • No importa la fase operativa o la situación financiera de la empresa contratante del seguro. El seguro estará vigente siempre y cuando se paguen las primas correspondientes.
  • Su costo se reduce a las primas y, por ende, no inmoviliza capital.

 

En NRGI Broker, somos expertos en seguros para el sector hidrocarburos. Acércate a nosotros, con gusto te atenderemos.

 

 

Mexico’s Billion Dollar Oil Industry Ripe for the Picking

/, , ,

Baystreet Staff / May 22

 

It may have taken the better part of a century, but Mexico figured out that their state-owned energy monopoly, PEMEX, was a business model that just wasn’t working out. After hammering out legislation in 2013 to denationalize the nation’s oil and gas industry, the worst thing that could happen, did; oil prices collapsed, and companies globally hit the brakes on spending. What was expected to be the opening of floodgates to invest in arguably the biggest energy opportunity today didn’t happen quite as expected. With oil prices climbing to fresh three-and-a-half year highs, all that is changing and the Mexico’s oil space is starting to heat up with investment of $150 billion now secured.

As it happens, investors’ conservative approach worked perfectly in favor of Steve Hanson and his team at International Frontier Resources Corp. (TSX-V: IFR) . “We knew that we were heading to Mexico for the first onshore licensing round to build the cornerstones of our operations,” Hanson said in a phone call with Baystreet.ca. “We were in a strong financial position with a clear mission to become the next energy leader in Mexico. Others staying on the sidelines as oil bottomed in 2016 really worked to our benefit as a first-mover in Mexico’s energy reform.”

The savvy leadership at IFR, formed an equal partnership with a Mexican petrochemical giant, as a result, this Canadian company became the first foreign-owned joint venture (JV) and independent oil company to actively explore onshore opportunities in Mexico in over 80 years. Through its strategic JV, IFR is also the first foreign company to complete the regulatory review and drill onshore conventional oil in Mexico under license contract. You’d think it would have been a major like Halliburton (NYSE: HAL) or Baker Hughes (NYSE: BHGE) or Schlumberger (NYSE: SLB), companies that were already working in the area as service providers to PEMEX, but it wasn’t. It was a little $30 million market cap. company that was nimble enough to beat everyone to the punch.

“We weren’t afraid of the price of oil. Not even at the $40 per barrel that oil was fetching at the time; we knew we could still make money based on our expertise and interpretation of the geology,” said Hanson. “At $70 oil, we’re obviously excited with our position, ” he added.

Confident for Good Reason

Hanson’s confidence isn’t unfounded. He has over two decades of well-grounded experience in finance and corporate development, serving as chairman and managing director at the award-winning equity money management firm Van Arbor Asset Management before selling it with a sizable payout to the ZLC Private Investment Management in 2008. Next he was the CEO and president of PanAsian Petroleum that was sold profitably to Ivanhoe Energy, shortly after Hanson took charge. Likewise, that was followed by serving as a director at Lion Petroleum, a company focused on oil and gas in East Africa which was then acquired by Taipan Resources.

IFR’s management team is the embodiment of success and has experience across the finance and energy spectrum throughout the globe, including COO and director Andy Fisher, who has a history of taking companies with negligible assets to robust oil and gas production. For instance, he founded Arcan Resources and grew it from no production to 4,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day (boe/d), before the company was sold to Aspenleaf Energy Ltd., in June 2015 for CDN. $300 million. He was also VP, international contracts and negotiation, at Pacalta Resources Ltd. (“Pacalta”) in Ecuador, where he helped in growing the company from 100 boe/d in production to roughly 45,000 boe/d. In 1999, Alberta Energy Co., the predecessor to EnCana’s (TSX: ECA) (NYSE: ECA), bought Pacalta in a deal worth approximately CDN. $1.0 billion!

For the sake of brevity, the profiles of everyone contributing to IFR’s future can’t be covered; however, it certainly is worth mentioning that Colin Mills, an independent director at IFR, has more than three decades of diverse international experience in power generation, including building two power plants in Mexico, which adds to the local advantage of IFR in terms of navigating the regulatory environment in Mexico.

The commitment and confidence of these individuals to IFR is best recognized based on the fact that insiders hold more than one-third of the company’s outstanding shares.

It’s this experience and dedication at IFR that led to the formation of Tonalli Energia, a 50-50 JV between IFR’s Mexican subsidiary, Petro Frontera S.A.P.I de CV, and Mexican petrochemical giant Grupo IDESA. As a first mover, the partnership and its in-country experience gives Tonalli a serious competitive edge to catapult it forward into becoming the next energy leader in Mexico.

The Tecolutla Project – Now a Producer!

Imagine every bit of oil in Texas was controlled by one company for the last 80 years. That’s a rough analogy for what has been going on in Mexico. It’s explored enough (both on- and offshore) to know that there are tremendous reserves, possibly comparable to the all-resilient Permian Basin, but woefully little with respect to extracting oil and gas. Right now, Mexico ranks as the Western hemisphere’s third largest oil producer and host of the fourth largest known oil reserves.

Those could be conservative positions in the future considering Premier Oil last summer made a major offshore discovery in a block next to Talos Energy and Sierra Oil and Gas that is estimated to hold in excess of one billion barrels of oil that possibly extend into the adjacent block. This was discovered through the first shallow water offshore exploration well drilled since denationalization. Shares of Premier rocketed higher with the find. “Few think of Mexico in the same terms as Saudi Arabia, despite the fact that Mexico has similar quantities of hydrocarbon resources,” argued a recent report published by Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. However, this is about to change with higher oil prices and growing investor interest.

Lending further credence to Mexican oil potential, IHS Markit thinks the country’s untapped Tampico-Misantla Basin on the east coast of Mexico could be one of the world’s next “super basins.” Part of the basin includes the massive Poza Rica oil field, estimated to contain 3.8 billion boe, and IFR’s Tecolutla project which has now commenced completion operations for its recently drilled TEC-10 well.

The Tampico basin is known to have geology similar to the prolific North American basins, with stacked conventional and unconventional pay zones. In fact, IFR recently drilled 138 meters of reef thickness at its directional evaluation, TEC-10 well. It is also known that such basins tend to have “halo” zones of tight oil (light oil that is easily produced) surrounding them, this may be supported by the limited amount of exploration that has so far occurred at Tecolutla.

Seven wells were drilled between 1956-1972, with a well with last recorded production rates in January 2016. IFR announced the completion of a successful workover of a legacy TEC-2 well which was tested for production for a total of seven days and far exceeded management expectations. The well reported an average flow of 125 barrels of oil per day which was more than 13 times higher compared to last recorded production on the well! Newly drilled TEC-10 is next to test for production rates which is the most exciting moment for IFR JV since its inception!

IFR was awarded the block in May 2016 with no cash payment, merely a royalty agreement which offered one of the most favourable terms in comparison to the royalties on other blocks offered during the bid round. Furthermore, Export Development Canada (EDC) backstopped IFR by putting up the company’s portion of the performance bond required by Tonalli, allowing the company to conserve its cash, while lending a great deal of validation to the project. IFR ended the first quarter of 2018 with $2.81 million in cash and cash equivalents and no debt.

The first drill rig penetrated the ground in April, reached depth of 2,453 meters total vertical depth and was cased for production testing this month which was a historic moment for the Mexican oil and gas sector. Several points stand out when looking at the disclosed results, namely the fact that visible oil was noticeable from the core and the fact that oil was hit at deeper levels than oil was ever produced in the zone historically, indicating the El Abra reservoir at Tecolutla could have greater volume than ever believed.

Moreover, IFR, via Tonalli, is using modern exploration technology at Tecolutla for the first time. IFR is using the first-ever 3D seismic data shot for the whopping 81-billion-barrel Chicontepec formation with the aim of helping better understand Tecolutla field.

The beauty of the rock, according to Hanson, is not just that it is apparently flush with oil, but naturally fractured as well, making horizontal drilling easy, without the need for fracturing that draw the ire of environmentalists. These characteristics mean that the drilling is low cost, to the extent that Hanson believes the company can produce profitably at a cost of less than $20-$25 per barrel.

The Upcoming Catalysts

IFR is presently working on production testing, continuing analysis of the wireline, image logs and core analysis, refining the 3D seismic model and identifying the next drill target. The JV is looking ahead to the second tender of Round Three of bidding for projects (scheduled for September 27, 2018). Given the surge in value that Premier Oil experienced with its find, any positive data regarding the initial drill hole underpinned by historic production, should energize IFR shares and likely drive the attention of the investment community.

“We started IFR and moved aggressively in Mexico with the purpose of building a billion-dollar company,” Hanson added during the call. He continued, “We are very proud of being a first-mover in what we believe is going to quickly emerge as one of the most vibrant energy markets in the world and we’re not going to relent in our efforts to build value just as we have with previous companies.”

It’s difficult to disagree with anything Hanson says. They have nailed all of their milestones so far and certainly have plenty of running room to add to their portfolio. They have an outstanding partner in Grupo IDESA, the backing of EDC, are fully-funded for the existing work program, all the necessary infrastructure is in place, and they have outstanding experience across the entire supply chain that should allow IFR to sell oil at a price that couldn’t be realized anywhere else in the Western hemisphere.

Now, if they just start to prove the oil and the economic viability of the resource as they believe, IFR should be off to the races as the company looks to notch the next major success in their already impressive accomplishments.

Disclaimer: Nothing in this article should be considered as personalized financial advice. We are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular financial situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized financial advice. Please consult a licensed financial advisor before making any investment decision. This is a paid advertisement and is neither an offer nor recommendation to buy or sell any security. We hold no investment licenses and are thus neither licensed nor qualified to provide investment advice. The content in this article is not provided to any individual with a view toward their individual circumstances. Baystreet.ca has been paid a fee of four thousand dollars for International Frontier Resources Corp. advertising. This compensation constitutes a conflict of interest as to our ability to remain objective in our communication regarding the profiled company. Because of this conflict, individuals are strongly encouraged to not use this article as the basis for any investment decision. While all information is believed to be reliable, it is not guaranteed by us to be accurate. Individuals should assume that all information contained in this article is not trustworthy unless verified by their own independent research. Also, because events and circumstances frequently do not occur as expected, there will likely be differences between any predictions and actual results. Always consult a licensed investment professional before making any investment decision. Be extremely careful, investing in securities carries a high degree of risk; you may likely lose some or all of the investment.

 

Baystreet Staff / May 22

 

NAFTA Sticking Points: 9 Issues Standing In The Way Of A Deal

/, ,

Huffington Post / Alexander Panetta / May 22

 

From cars to milk to pharmaceuticals, there’s plenty left to resolve.

WASHINGTON — The NAFTA negotiations could continue for a while, with U.S. trade czar Robert Lighthizer signalling he wants significant changes in multiple areas and isn’t interested in a quick, limited deal.

Here are some key flashpoints involving Canada:

—Autos: This is the sticking point countries have spent the most effort trying to solve. The U.S. wants to stem the loss of manufacturing jobs to Mexico. Canada broadly shares that goal. However, the issue has prompted some concern, and not only from Mexico. While the U.S. has significantly softened its earlier demands, it still wants 40 per cent of every car built in a high-wage jurisdiction; 75 per cent of all parts to be North American; and 70 per cent of steel to be North American.

Critics of the plan say it could backfire: if auto-makers decide they don’t want to deal with all this red tape, they can just ignore NAFTA and simply pay the 2.5 per cent U.S. tariff on cars. Critics say that won’t create jobs — just more expensive cars, and less economic activity.

—Pharmaceuticals: It’s the stated goal of U.S. trade policy to make other countries pay more for drugs, so that foreigners shoulder more of the burden of research and development costs. The U.S. has a particular gripe with Canada: it’s reduced Canada’s ranking in an annual report card on intellectual property, partly over policy changes at Canada’s Patented Medicine Prices Review Board.

The U.S. wants more transparency in how drug prices are set in Canada. Its industry is also pushing for greater ability to appeal pricing decisions. Such objectives place it in direct conflict with the Trudeau government, which wants to create a national pharmacare plan and intends to argue that its policy is consistent with that of President Donald Trump, who campaigned on controlling drug prices.

—Dairy: The U.S. has two problems with Canadian dairy policy. First, Canada limits imports and sets fixed prices under a supply-management system, and does the same for poultry and eggs. Second, Canadian producers who are protected from competition are at the same time selling surplus ingredients onto the world market for cheese-making, contributing to a global glut.

The U.S. has demanded an end to these surplus sales, and also an end to supply management within 10 years. Canada’s counterpoint is that the U.S. engages in its own protections, supporting farmers during boom-bust cycles; it argues that Canada’s system at least has the benefit of being stable, and not requiring periodic bailouts. If past history is any guide, a middle-ground compromise might be possible: in agreements with Europe and the TPP countries, Canada opened up its dairy market by several percentage points.

—Dispute settlement: NAFTA is enforced by three main systems for settling disputes: Chapter 11 lets companies sue governments for unfair treatment, Chapter 19 lets industries fight punitive duties, and Chapter 20 lets countries sue countries.

The U.S. wants to weaken two of the three, and entirely end Chapter 19. It’s a historically emotional issue for Canada, as Chapter 19 was the original make-or-break condition for free trade with the U.S.; it’s also been used to fight softwood lumber duties. However, some observers question the relevance of Chapter 19 today, as other forums exist for fighting duties.

Take the spat against Bombardier, in which duties were overturned in the U.S. court system. As for Chapter 11, Canada has less of a historical attachment, although it’s extremely popular with those business allies in the U.S. fighting to preserve NAFTA.

The Trump administration’s trade czar dislikes all these systems — Lighthizer sees them not only as a violation of national sovereignty: he argues that Chapter 11 helps companies do the dirty deed of outsourcing jobs. He argues that if companies want to shift plants elsewhere, the U.S. government should not be in the business of protecting their legal rights in, for instance, Mexico.

—De minimis: Americans are allowed to spend $800 online before they pay duties on a foreign purchase; Canadians can spend $20. It’s one of the lowest rates in the world. Lighthizer says it might not be necessary to match the U.S. amount, but he says that 40-fold difference is unreasonable. Retailers argue that shifting the de minimis level would fuel a commercial real-estate crisis, and disproportionately benefit American tech companies which enjoy economies of scale.

—Intellectual property: The U.S. complains about Canada’s border controls on counterfeit goods. It says it’s concerned that Canada doesn’t provide customs officials with the ability to inspect, seize, and destroy pirated goods moving through Canada to the United States. It complains that there were no known criminal prosecutions for counterfeiting in Canada in 2017, calling Canada an outlier among developed countries. It also bemoans what it calls excessive use of education-related exceptions to copyright laws, which it says have damaged the market for educational publishers and authors.

—Procurement: Canada’s aim is to increase companies’ access to public-works contracts abroad, expanding that access from federal contracts to state/provincial and local ones. Currently, subnational procurement rights are negotiated on a case-by-case basis. The U.S. has the opposite goal: It wants to limit the access Canadian and Mexican companies already enjoy at the federal level, restricted to whatever amount of contracts American companies win in the other countries.

—Sunset clause: One of the most controversial ideas of this negotiation. The U.S. has pushed for a clause in the deal that would cancel NAFTA after five years, unless every country agrees to keep it. Critics say this is a recipe for permanent uncertainty. They ask how a car company, for instance, is supposed to invest in all the assembly-line changes demanded in this deal, when the whole deal could be over in five years. They also point out that NAFTA already has a termination clause, which countries can invoke if they’re unhappy.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau ridiculed the sunset idea in a public event in New York. He used a real-estate metaphor and made clear he was addressing President Donald Trump: What developer would build a skyscraper on a piece of land, Trudeau asked, if access to that land was only guaranteed for five years?

—Professional visas: Canada wants to modernize the list of professions eligible for a NAFTA work visa under Chapter 16. The current list of jobs eligible for these visas is decades old, and features almost nothing for the tech industry. Companies complain this makes it hard to send their own employees to branches across the border. The U.S. has put up some resistance, as any expansion of work-related migration risks being wrapped into the heated U.S. immigration debate.

 

Huffington Post / Alexander Panetta / May 22

 

 

Proveedores y prestadores de servicios para las operaciones de Exploración y Extracción de hidrocarburos en el mar

/, , ,

En un sector tan complejo como el de los Hidrocarburos, las empresas no pueden ser autosuficientes, por lo que requieren que terceros les provean de bienes y servicios que les permitan llevar a cabo sus actividades.

La exactitud, prontitud y calidad con la que proveedores y contratistas presten sus servicios son factores indispensables para el adecuado funcionamiento de una organización.

En el caso específico de las empresas que realizan actividades en el Sector Hidrocarburos, al desempeñarse en un ámbito de alto riesgo requieren la certeza de que sus proveedores y prestadores de servicios desempeñarán sus tareas con los más altos estándares de seguridad, para evitar la ocurrencia de accidentes, que pongan en peligro la vida y/o integridad de personas, daños a bienes o al medio ambiente.

Por eso, de acuerdo con las Disposiciones Administrativas de carácter general que establecen las reglas para el requerimiento mínimo de seguros a los Regulados que lleven a cabo obras o actividades de exploración y extracción de hidrocarburos, tratamiento y refinación de petróleo y procesamiento de gas natural (DACGS), emitidas el 23 de junio de 2016, las empresas del Sector Hidrocarburos que realicen las actividades antes mencionadas, deben requerir a sus contratistas, subcontratistas, proveedores o prestadores de servicio que cuenten con pólizas de seguro con las coberturas y montos necesarios y suficientes para amparar la responsabilidad por los daños que pudieran generar con motivo de las obras, servicios y/o actividades que realicen.

En este sentido, es responsabilidad de las empresas titulares de las licencias para operar, asegurarse que sus proveedores y contratistas podrán responder por los daños que llegaran a causar en el desarrollo de sus operaciones, además de que deberán contar con las coberturas de control de pozos, responsabilidad civil y responsabilidad ambiental, de acuerdo con la regulación aplicable.

En el caso de los montos, por ejemplo, una empresa que lleve a cabo la exploración y extracción de hidrocarburos que requiera de lanchas rápidas y embarcaciones menores de servicio y para ello contrate los servicios de otra empresa que se dedique al transporte marítimo, deberá solicitarle sus pólizas de seguro de protección e indemnización (P&I) por un monto no menor a USD 5´000,000 (cinco millones de dólares de los Estados Unidos de América), de conformidad con  el artículo 29, fracción II de las DACGS. En caso de que las embarcaciones que sean utilizadas no estén listadas en el artículo antes mencionado, la fracción V del mismo dispone que la póliza de seguro sea por un monto no menor a USD  100,000,000.00 (cien millones de dólares de los Estados Unidos de América).

En NRGI Broker somos expertos en seguros de protección e indemnización y en regulación en materia de seguridad industrial y protección ambiental. Acércate a nosotros, con gusto te atenderemos.

 

Expert questions BP’s drilling plans for offshore Nova Scotia

/, , ,

The Canadian Press / The Chronicle Herald / May 15

 

An engineering expert and former oil industry consultant has raised the alarm on BP Canada Energy Group’s plans to drill off Nova Scotia.

“Given BP’s current proposals for exploratory drilling offshore Nova Scotia, the likelihood of an uncontrolled blowout exceeds the upper limits for tolerability of exploratory well drilling risks,” said Robert Bea in his risk analysis of BP’s plans.

Bea, who is professor emeritus at the Center for Catastrophic Risk Management at the University of California at Berkeley, has investigated catastrophes including the Columbia space shuttle explosion in 1987 and the blowout of a Deepwater Horizon rig owned by BP eight years ago.

“Based on the information provided by BP, the blowout risk is clearly not acceptable,” Bea said in an interview Monday.

Bea uses a complex risk assessment system that looks into factors such as the commitment of everyone involved in an operation to safety, from contractors to the company’s top managers. The company’s awareness of major risks and its technical and management ability to assess risk is also taken into account.

After applying these criteria to BP’s plans for offshore Nova Scotia, Bea said the risk of an uncontrolled blowout like Deepwater Horizon was high. Eleven rig workers were killed in the Deepwater explosion on April 20, 2010, in the Gulf of Mexico and it triggered the biggest oil spill in U.S. history at an estimated 4.9 million barrels.

In a decision in early April, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board authorized BP Canada to do preparatory work in advance of its plan to drill an exploration well about 50 kilometres off Sable Island. The decision drew protests from groups, including the Council of Canadians, about the environmental risks associated with the project and the strength of the regulations that govern the offshore.

BP contends that if there was a blowout off Nova Scotia, there would be sufficient time to drill a relief well and to get access to equipment such as a capping stack to contain the situation. But Bea said he questions that optimism, based on the documentation he’s seen and his personal experience in assessing gas and oil projects.

The provincial and federal governments have denied that the project, which could see up to seven exploration wells drilled off the southeast coast of Nova Scotia over a three-year period, poses unacceptable environmental risks.

Premier Stephen McNeil has said he’s confident that BP would take the appropriate measures to ensure safety and environmental responsibility throughout the project. He said BP has taken strides to strengthen regulations since Deepwater.

Federal Environment Minister Catherine McKenna has said the project “is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects.”

Bea agrees there would be economic benefits for Nova Scotia but only if the project is done successfully.

“I don’t think it’s a case of we should do this at all,” he said. “I think it’s a case of if we choose to do this, we need to do it with the best available technology. Because the consequences of being wrong are too high.”

 

The Canadian Press / The Chronicle Herald / May 15

 

NAFTA countries set to blow through Paul Ryan’s May 17 deadline without a deal

/,

Bloomberg.com / Financial Post / May 14

 

The three countries’ ministers working on the deal aren’t scheduled to meet this week, sources say, though lower-level talks continue and may yield a breakthrough

NAFTA negotiators from the U.S., Canada and Mexico are poised to miss the deadline this week cited by House Speaker Paul Ryan, the latest blown marker for reworking the 24-year-old deal.

U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo and Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland aren’t scheduled to meet together in person this week, according to three government officials familiar with talks who spoke on condition of anonymity. The trio met at least bilaterally every day last week.

The Trump administration is increasingly preoccupied with its efforts to reach a peace deal with North Korea and avoid a trade war with China. Senior economic adviser Liu He will be in Washington this week for talks with the administration on ways to resolve the trade dispute between the two countries.

Lower-level NAFTA talks will continue and could yield a breakthrough and a ministerial meeting, but none has been scheduled so far, according to the people. The three officials said the ministers could meet next week, or later in the month. Chief negotiators are scheduled to hold a conference call early this week to assess the status of the talks and whether a ministerial meeting is feasible later this week, one of the people said.

While the ministers will keep in touch by phone, the lack of a face-to-face meeting after such a big push last week would show how far apart the sides remain on updating the North American Free Trade Agreement. Ryan injected a sense of urgency when he said lawmakers need notice of intent to sign a deal by May 17 so they can vote before this Congress ends in December.

The Canadian dollar pared its gain in Monday trading, while Mexico’s peso extended its losses, falling 0.7 per cent to 19.5585 per dollar at 1:45 p.m. in New York.

WORK CONTINUES

Although Ryan’s comments put the firmest deadline yet on NAFTA talks, many analysts have said U.S. deadlines are murky, and that a deal reached later in May or even in June could theoretically get passed. A spokeswoman for Ryan, AshLee Strong, said the May 17 target is due to timelines set out in U.S. trade law, not an arbitrary political date. “This is not a statutory deadline, but a timeline and calendar deadline,” Strong said by email Friday.

Whether Lighthizer could seek to notify Ryan by Thursday of his intent to sign, without an actual deal in place, is somewhat unclear. Lighthizer cited the House speaker’s deadline to pressure his Canadian and Mexican counterparts during a trilateral meeting Friday, according to two people familiar with the talks. President Donald Trump’s trade chief has indicated he needs a deal this month but hasn’t publicly identified a particular day.

Emily Davis, a spokeswoman for Lighthizer, referred to a written statement he released Friday when asked for comment Monday. In it, Lighthizer said talks have “covered a large number of very complex issues” and the U.S. “is ready to continue working with Mexico and Canada to achieve needed breakthroughs on these objectives.” The statement made no mention of any deadline.

‘TOO STUBBORN’

Former Mexican President Vicente Fox said Mexico will only sign on to a good NAFTA deal, otherwise it could withdraw and pivot to expanded trade with countries such as China, Argentina and Brazil.

“Mexico is not weak on this negotiation. We have leverage, and this should be understood on the U.S. side — which, by the way, everybody understands how this can be solved except Señor Trump,” Fox said Monday in an interview with Bloomberg Television. “He’s too stubborn. He just wants to win, he wants all the marbles for himself and nothing for the rest.”

Freeland is in Mexico City Monday for talks on Venezuela and hasn’t said if she will meet Guajardo privately there. In a sign of the dimming odds for an imminent deal, Guajardo and his team told dozens of stakeholders from Mexico’s private sector they should return home from Washington because no breakthrough was expected, according to two people familiar with the meeting. Stakeholders from all three countries are cancelling or delaying visits to Washington this week, four other people familiar with the talks said.

The existing NAFTA remains on the books unless a country withdraws, which would require six months notice. No country has given that notice, though Trump has threatened to do so. On Friday, the president called NAFTA a “horrible disaster” for the U.S.

Lighthizer has said the political calculus for passing a new NAFTA would change if it had to be voted on by the next Congress. Mexico and Canada have downplayed the urgency to reach a deal this week.

The countries have been holding periodic discussions since August. They had initially sought a deal by December, and then by March, and are now in what they consider a continuous round of negotiations. Talks have focused recently on the auto sector, with Canada hailing progress but with big gaps still remaining. Even if the sides agree on auto rules, they remain far apart on issues such as a sunset clause and dispute-settlement panels.

Ryan is pushing for a deal because of timelines in U.S. trade law, but another deadline looms. Mexico’s election will be held July 1 and looks set to usher in a new president who could seek changes to anything not yet finalized.

 

Bloomberg.com / Financial Post / May 14

 

Los retos ambientales en el Sector Energético

/,

Es indiscutible que la dinámica del mundo se basa en gran medida en el consumo de energía, no obstante actualmente nos enfrentamos al reto de desarrollar fuentes de energía que sean sostenibles y sustentables, lo cual implica armonizar el  binomio compuesto por el desarrollo económico y la protección ambiental.

En este contexto, es importante destacar que si bien, en algunas partes del mundo se pueden observar avances importantes para el desarrollo de energías renovables, una fuente muy importante siguen siendo los hidrocarburos[1].

El reto para las naciones que están comprometidas en desarrollar fuentes de energía limpias es mayúsculo. El caso de México es un gran ejemplo, pues se trata de un país que se encuentra en pleno desarrollo de su Reforma Energética, que implica por un lado, el aprovechamiento de recursos energéticos estratégicos como el petróleo (a través de las Rondas de licitaciones), pero por otro lado, se encuentra comprometido con lograr el avance en la generación de energías limpias en un plazo de tiempo determinado, como puede verse en el documento denominado Agenda 2030, signado por nuestro país.

Lo anterior implica actuar en diversos frentes, a fin de lograr consciencia entre los diversos actores que se desempeñan en el sector de la energía,  un sector que además típicamente ha sido considerado como de alto riesgo.

Afortunadamente, entre los ciudadanos existe también una mayor conciencia acerca de la importancia de cuidar los ecosistemas y en este sentido valoran mucho que una empresa genere y utilice responsablemente la energía.

La ley es muy clara cuando señala que “el que contamina paga”, de manera que aquellos que lleguen a causar un daño al medio ambiente, deberán repararlo adecuadamente. Sabemos que los costos de una catástrofe ambiental pueden llegar a ser muy altos, de ahí que aquellos sectores que son considerados de alto riesgo, la regulación establezca la obligación de contratar seguros, que les permitan responder por los daños que puedan causar con sus actividades.

Por lo anterior, uno de los retos ambientales más importantes en el sector energético es reforzar la cultura de aseguramiento, pero tomando en cuenta que los seguros aunque son indispensables, -dado que el riesgo siempre está presente- deben ser el último recurso. Lo más importante es que a las actividades de toda la cadena de valor se incorporen las mejores prácticas internacionales para evitar que sucedan accidentes.

En NRGI Broker, somos expertos en seguros para el Sector Energético. Acércate a nosotros, con gusto te atenderemos.

[1]De acuerdo con el reporte World Energy Resources 2016,emitido por el Consejo Mundial de Energía, Ver: http://www.worldenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/World-Energy-Resources_Report_2016.pdf, p. 4.