Fundamental factors to strengthen Pemex

The Government of Mexico has repeatedly mentioned that one of its main goals in the National Hydrocarbons Plan is the production of 2.6 million barrels of crude oil per day at the end of 2024.

The production profile brings components such as the base production already in place of oil fields operating in the country, the plan proposes operations of drilling and development of more than 20 new fields of which PEMEX has already been hiring and asking for authorizations for the development, contains projects related to secondary and improved recovery of the deposits that already exist and production that is associating future discoveries.

PEMEX has 22 fields for new development, of which 18 are in shallow waters.

Thanks to the investment that is planned for drilling and infrastructure, there is the possibility that in these 18 fields we might find more extension and thickness in their deposits to be found, since this has happened before.

The energy policy is being modified by the nature of the political change in the Country, the strengthening of PEMEX could be increased with support of the process of migration of Oil Assignments (Farmouts).

Fracking is a technique that is required to obtain physical resources, in the United States the increase in production is known derived from the use of this technique. Thanks to it, a high production of liquids and gas is obtained which are offered at a low price to countries like Mexico. Fracking in Mexico is a prospective resource since, whether or not it can be used as a production technique depends of a previous exploration in order to know if it can be extracted profitably since the operation in Mexico might be more expensive.

Using all the tools provided by the current legal framework in Mexico regarding energy is essential for PEMEX to increase its technical execution and financial capacity in such a way that it shares the risk.

Successful decisions will give more opportunities for the development not only of the sector, but also of the human component that makes it possible, such as engineers, people who have service companies, investors, among others.

If you want to know more information about experts from the Energy Sector in Mexico, click on the video to see the interview of Gaspar Franco Former Commissioner of the CNH and Graciela Álvarez Hoth, General Director of NRGI Broker.

Check out our news section and follow us on our social media networks.

Offshore Project Development: The Road to First Oil

As new offshore operators continue to settle into their awarded blocks and develop them into a stable production phase as quickly as possible, new models of collaboration between the public and private sectors must arise in view of the new administration’s focus on PEMEX, panelists at the Mexico Oil & Gas Summit 2019, said on Wednesday July 17 in Mexico City.

Private operators and service providers are ready to comply with government plans: Graciela Alvarez Hoth, panel moderator

According to Graciela Álvarez Hoth, CEO of NRGI Broker, both private operators and Mexican service providers are ready to collaborate with the government’s plans to strengthen the NOC while also building upon the many successes achieved in a short period of time within the fields awarded through the bidding rounds. “The number of new discoveries highlights the need for exploration activities to capitalize on the available opportunities in the country,” she said.

Álvarez Hoth made her remarks on the first day of the two-day summit held at the Sheraton Maria Isabel Hotel as part of her introductory remarks to the panel she moderated, entitled “Offshore Project Development: The Road to First Oil.”

Four panelists from key public and private institutions provided a crucial mix of perspectives on Mexico’s offshore development, particularly in terms of achieving production in new shallow water fields.


“Talos Energy wants to have a positive impact in Mexico. The president has set his production goal and our goal is to do our part to help. ”

Francisco Noyola, Country Manager of Mexico for Talos Energy, was the first to provide the necessary background with a chronology of Talos’ success with its Zama discoveries, of which the latest appraisal well, Zama-3, was completed this past June.

He highlighted the historical breakthroughs made by Talos in the Mexican context, which have included the most core samples extracted (over 440m) and the first block unification agreement with PEMEX in Mexico’s history.

The historical dimension of these milestones promoted a transparent relationship with regulators and authorities that he believes plays a key role in their current and future success. “Talos wants to have a positive impact in Mexico. The president has set his production goal and we aim to do our part to help,” Noyola said.

“The success of MARINSA as a driller is to be committed to the objective of increasing production to contribute significantly to what Pemex and the Government of Mexico have established”

The panel then progressed toward the perspective of another private player whose successes have also been quite public as of late: Marinsa, represented by Chief Strategy Officer Sergio Suarez. After detailing the ways in which the crisis period during 2016 and 2017 prepared them for the road ahead, Suárez said that “The development of Marinsa has been the strengthened result of a set of readjustments to meet the needs of the national market and hill mentioning that Mexico has “qualified, strong Mexican suppliers and “under the conditions established by the current administration, being a national player gives us a competitive advantage. However, we also have strong alliances with international companies. ”

The CNH has had to experience “logarithmic learning” in order to perform its functions as a regulator, now it could reach response times for approvals as low as 34 days on average

Fausto Álvarez Hernández, Head of the Exploration and Production Compliance Unit at CNH, provided a direct public sector assessment of the success factors for offshore projects looking for a quick launch procedure.

He noted that CNH has had to experience “logarithmic learning” in order to perform its duties as a regulator as effectively as possible. He also praised the efficient path forward forged by ENI, Hokchi and Fieldwood toward first oil and eventual full production, which might total up to 220Mb/d from all three. “Optimization has been a key priority for CNH, particularly in approvals, as well as simplification in the documentation needed to present a project,” he said.

He also made a point of specifying that CNH now could reach turnaround times for approvals as low as 34 days on average, which he considers an extremely important component of fast offshore development.

Transparency and a long-term vision are key to sustainable social development projects. Enviromental Resources Management (ERM)

The fourth and final participant in the panel was Alberto Sambartolomé, Senior Partner at ERM, which has participated significantly in the sustainability assessments of many of Mexico’s offshore production projects. He  highlighted the chief importance of efficiently introducing new operators to the legal and social expectations of the Mexican environment.

This not only leads to reduced downtime for drilling and development through quick regulatory compliance, but it also ensures the longevity of production once first oil is reached.

Projects that engage with regulators and communities early and promptly can look forward to productivity uninterrupted by protests or shutdowns, he said. “Transparency and a long-term vision are key for sustainable social development projects.”

Our country has a historic opportunity to demonstrate the competitiveness of the sector and recover its place in the world as an oil country without losing its vision of social development and environmental responsibility, thus concluded Graciela Alvarez Hoth this applauded panel.

Mexican President Weighs Bids on Huge New Oil Refinery Construction

Sputnik News / Latin America / December 10

 

MEXICO CITY (Sputnik) – Mexico’s new President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said on Sunday that tenders for the construction of a new large oil refinery in the country’s southeastern state of Tabasco would be announced no later than March 2019.

“The oil refinery will be built here because oil will be processed here as well, it will not be exported. This is the best site for the construction of the new refinery,” Obrador said at a ceremony of the laying of a symbolic cornerstone for the future facility as quoted by the Excelsior news portal.

The Mexican president also confirmed that the state-owned Pemex petroleum company would receive additional $3.6 billion to boost its oil production.

According to Obrador, Mexico will seek to increase oil production from the current less than 1.8 million barrels per day to 2.4 million barrels per day in 2024. The new oil refinery is expected to process 340,000 barrels of oil per day.

 

Sputnik News / Latin America / December 10

 

As new Mexican president takes office, experts foresee rocky road in relations with U.S.

Houston Chronicle / Olivia P. Tallet / November 15

Two men with outsized personalities, both intent on bringing dramatic change to their societies. Two countries, side by side, with a long history of friendly trade and sometimes hostile diplomacy.

As leftist president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador takes the mantle of the Mexican presidency Dec. 1, political experts, former diplomats and business leaders are bracing for a potential collision with self-styled nationalist President Donald Trump.

The anticipated confrontation between Trump and Lopez Obrador — commonly called by his initials, AMLO — could affect Texas more than any other state given the billions of dollars in Lone Star products that are sold south of the border.

The possible flash points include a changing energy policy, trade protections, increased heroin and methamphetamine trafficking and an abrupt reversal of the Mexican government’s costly campaign to confront the powerful drug cartels. But perhaps the biggest is the bitterness engendered by Trump’s harsh immigration policies and his plan to erect an impenetrable wall along 1,200 miles of U.S.-Mexico border.

“There is a rocky road ahead for the relationship between the U.S. and Mexico and the two presidents,” said Duncan Wood, the director of the Wilson Center’s Mexico Institute, during in a recent visit to Houston.

Lopez Obrador is a skilled politician who was mayor of Mexico City from 2000 to 2005 and national party leader, running twice for the presidency prior to winning. He and Trump are forceful, charismatic leaders with a populist, anti-establishment bent to their politics and are adept at inflaming the passions of their base supporters. And perhaps more to the point when it comes to a personality contest, “Neither of them likes to be contradicted,” said Wood.

Indeed, Trump had reportedly referred to the Mexican president-elect as “Juan Trump,” a recognition of the similarities between him and the populist Mexican politician, according to a story in Americas Quarterly.

Both leaders have taken unexpected steps to demonstrate their resolve. Lopez Obrador has put Mexico’s $218 million presidential jet up for sale, while Trump earlier renegotiated the price tag of two Air Force One replacements and claimed savings of $1.4 billion.

But Lopez Obrador has distanced himself from any semblance to Trump, who, in his opinion, “fuels racism … as a political strategy” and a leader who has done Mexico much damage, according to an interview with the Spanish language TV network Univision.

Vice President Mike Pence will lead the U.S. delegation to Mexico to attend Lopez Obrador’s inauguration.

New course for Mexico?

Observers say the Mexican leader has already given some key indications of the course he will steer.

Lopez Obrador’s plan to cancel the construction of the Mexico City airport, a $13.3 billion project with a third of the work already completed, sent shock waves through the investment and business sectors. With U.S. foreign direct investments in Mexico of $110 billion last year, concerns rose about Mexico as a reliable business partner.

“We are already getting a sense of what an AMLO presidency might look like, since the administration has named many of the key policy personnel and moved forward on some campaign promises, such as its consultation for whether or not to keep building the new Mexico City airport,” said Antonio “Tony” Garza, the former U.S. ambassador to Mexico.

Lopez Obrador was able to easily wrest power from outgoing President Enrique Peña Nieto, whose Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) had supported global open markets and free trade. But Peña Nieto’s presidency was also hamstrung by unchecked corruption and what was perceived by the Mexican populace as a submissive stance when Trump met with the president and insisted that Mexico would pay for the border wall.

“Trump’s nationalism looks outward; it manifests in attacks on international institutions and the leaders and people from other countries,” said Tony Payan, the director of the Baker Institute’s Mexico Center.

Lopez Obrador’s nationalism looks inward to restoring Mexico’s working class with subsidized policies, “seeking to restore the state as a central economic agent, and his criticism of globalization and the (North American) free trade agreement has to do with his belief that previous administrations implemented a neoliberal economic model that punished the poor,” Payan said.

Key energy policy changes

The stakes are high for the future of the U.S. economic relationship with Mexico, its third-largest trading partner with combined trade of $616 billion.

Mexico was the second largest export market for U.S. products in 2017, while becoming the largest provider of fruits and vegetables and other agricultural products, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative. Cross-border trade between Texas and Mexico was $187 billion.

Wood agreed that Lopez Obrador’s appointees so far signal a cabinet that is committed to unraveling the energy reforms signed into law in August 2014 by the previous administration, with AMLO already announcing a plan to suspend auctions for oil production contracts in the Gulf of Mexico. “I am particularly worried about the energy sector and what happens next with it,” Wood said.

So far, 110 oil and gas contracts representing about $200 billion in foreign investment have been granted under Mexico’s reform of its energy sector and the national PEMEX oil monopoly, with U.S. companies winning the second highest number of contracts after private Mexican firms.

The energy reforms were considered to be particularly beneficial to Houston’s economy, given its leadership in offshore oil exploration and production technologies.

At a minimum, the airport pullout signaled that Lopez Obrador plans to deliver on campaign promises.

In a recent speech, he pledged to “rescue the oil and gas industry,” from a decline in production that he blamed to the historic opening of PEMEX to foreign investment. When enacted, Lopez Obrador accused the current president of being a “traitor to the country” for handing over “the country’s natural resources to foreigners.”

“The likelihood of the next (Mexican) administration impacting how business is done in the energy sector is high,” said Garza, who’s now counsel to the law firm of White & Case in Mexico City. “The question is how disruptive will it be and if returns will be seen as justifying the additional risk.”

“So far AMLO’s party has proposed legislation aimed at the new regulatory framework,” said Garza, adding that the president elect has been “all over the board on issues having to do with gas and power, and essentially come out against fracking, all of which, if he’s serious about, have the potential to impact Texas.”

Gov. Greg Abbott, through a press aide, said he welcomes working with Mexico’s new administration to build on economic and cultural bonds.

“Governor Abbott believes that a strong relationship with Mexico, our largest trade partner, is essential to Texas’ economic success,” said Ciara Matthews, deputy communications director. “Through cooperation on infrastructure, energy, trade, and security, Texas and Mexico will continue to strengthen our long-standing relationship and bring even greater prosperity to both sides of the border.”

Differences over immigration

Differences with Mexico regarding Trump’s immigration policies, analysts said, could be another contentious topic.

As caravans of migrants departed Central America to seek asylum at the U.S. border in the weeks before midterm elections, Trump moved quickly to politicize the “caravan” by branding it an “invasion” and claiming that Middle Eastern terrorists and gang members were among their ranks.

Trump ordered the U.S. military to the border, and meanwhile threatened to withhold foreign aid to Mexico and the Central American countries whose citizens are fleeing economic hardship and violence.

Mexico choose not to halt the migrants by force, but instead offered visas and asylum to the Central Americans in an effort to induce many to abandon the long trek to the north. Trump has declared the migrant caravans a national security threat, and ordered border agents not to accept asylum seekers who enter the U.S. away from legal ports of entry.

Lopez Obrador has repeatedly criticized Trump’s “xenophobic” and disrespectful depiction of migrants and insisted they should receive humanitarian treatment.

During his presidential campaign, Lopez Obrador introduced a petition before the Inter American Commission on Human Rights condemning Trump for allegedly persecuting immigrants and implementing hate speeches and policies, such as the border wall, in violation of human rights, as he and a lawyer explained the action.

War on drugs in flux

Earlier this month, Lopez Obrador said his administration will de-emphasize the fight against drug cartels, focusing instead on roots of crime, according to a Bloomberg report.

Main points of the strategy include creating a national guard and stressing regional coordination of security efforts, eradicating corruption, rethinking the prohibition of some drugs and creating job opportunities, Lopez Obrador and cabinet members have said.

 

Houston Chronicle / Olivia P. Tallet / November 15

 

Relief On Horizon for Mexico Natural Gas Market, Despite Short-Term Challenges

Mexico’s natural gas market faces multiple short-term challenges, the most urgent of which is a lack of supply to power generators, petrochemical plants, and industrial consumers in the southern and southeastern part of the country, as the state-owned oil and gas producer struggles to increase output.

Amid declining gas output by national oil company Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex) and delays to critical midstream infrastructure that would bring abundant and inexpensive gas from Texas, consumers in southern Mexico now face the prospect of switching to more expensive fuel oil, diesel and liquid petroleum gas (LPG) in order to continue operating over the coming months.

A lack of Pemex supply and scarce available cross-border pipeline capacity for private sector gas shippers, as well as a dearth of storage capacity, are compounded by the fact that a new government will take over on Dec. 1.

However, relief appears to be on the horizon. The 2.6 Bcf/d Sur de Texas-Tuxpan marine pipeline is expected to enter operation next month or in January, with the Cempoala compressor station reversal project slated to finish in April. Both projects should provide relief to consumers in the south, the energy ministry’s general director of natural gas and petrochemicals, David Rosales, told NGI’s Mexico Gas Price Index.

While details of a planned tender to construct 45 Bcf of underground storage capacity still need to be ironed out, Rosales said the hope is for the new administration to give an order to proceed with the tender by early next year.

“I think it’s very clear for them that this is a [project] that will not cost the state, and will be paid for by the users of the gas system themselves,” Rosales said.

The incoming administration has generated unease among investors with its proposed oil policies, such as a pledge to halt crude exports and to divert Pemex investments from exploration and production to new refineries, but Rosales said a dramatic shift in course on natural gas policy is less likely. An efficiently run gas segment translates directly to cheaper electricity prices for end-users, he noted.

Recent days have also seen progress on other cross-border pipeline projects that should help meet rising demand from the power sector.

San Antonio, TX-based Mirage Energy Corp. last week said it has a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for reserved capacity on its proposed Texas-to-Mexico gas pipeline with commodities trader TrailStone NA Asset Holdings LLC.

The nonbinding MOU would allow TrailStone to purchase 150,000 MMBtu/d (146 MMcf/d) of reserved capacity for 10 years at a fixed tariff from the Banquete/Agua Dulce area in South Texas to Compressor Station 19 and Los Ramones interconnection points on the national pipeline network Sistrangas,” Mirage said. TrailStone is a partner and commercial operator in the recently commissioned Banquete header near Corpus Christi, TX.

The 42-inch diameter, bi-directional pipeline system under development would include nearly 140 miles of pipeline in Texas and about 103 miles of pipeline in Mexico. In addition to the four sections of pipelines in the two countries, Mirage said another interconnect in Falfurrias, TX, also in far South Texas, to Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line (Transco) is being considered, as is a 14-mile pipeline in Mexico known as the Storage Line that would connect the Progreso, TX, on the border to the Brasil storage field in Tamaulipas, Mexico.

Mirage expects to begin final development work on the project in December, “with a view toward receiving required United States and Mexico permits and authorizations in 3Q2019. The company has completed the necessary engineering and design of the pipeline. The alignment for the pipeline has also been substantially completed and Mirage is in the process of securing right-of-way agreements.”

Valley Crossing To Supply CFE Import Capacity

The Mirage news follows the startup of Enbridge Inc.’s Valley Crossing gas pipeline, which spans 168 miles in Texas from the Agua Dulce hub near Corpus to the Gulf of Mexico east of Brownsville.

Valley Crossing’s primary customer is Mexican state power utility Comisión Federal de Electricidad (CFE), which is undertaking a massive shift to combined-cycle gas turbines (CCGT) from fuel oil and diesel-fired power generation capacity. Mexico’s installed CCGT capacity stood at 28,084 MW at the end of 2017, a figure that is expected to double by 2032, according to the Energy Ministry’s 2018-2032 power sector development program.

“Valley Crossing is expected to account for about half of the CFE’s total import capacity,” Enbridge said last week. Transport capacity is “half the average daily production output of the entire Eagle Ford Shale basin — in fact, it’s more than 10% of the average daily production for the entire state of Texas.”

The pipeline is designed to “support Mexico’s growing electricity generation needs, as power companies like the CFE choose natural gas,” which is a “cleaner” burning fuel and more economical than imported liquefied natural gas, the Calgary-based operator said.

“Supply in Mexico continues to decline, but at the same time their demand continues to grow,” said Enbridge Executive Vice-President Bill Yardley. “And the U.S. has some of the most economical, plentiful and reliable natural gas supplies in the world.”

Valley Crossing connects to the Sur de Texas-Tuxpan pipeline, a joint venture of Sempra Energy unit Infraestructura Energética Nova and TransCanada Corp.

Fitch Bullish On Mexico Power Sector

A FitchRatings unit said last week it holds a positive outlook for Mexico’s gas-dependent electric power sector over the next 10 years, despite uncertainty over the energy and infrastructure policies of incoming President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who is commonly known by his initials AMLO.

“We expect the Mexican power sector to register strong growth and offer investors significant opportunities over the coming decade, thanks to rising energy demand, a supportive market structure and favorable policies,” Fitch analysts said. “Our positive view for the market is premised on the expectation that AMLO will adopt a pragmatic approach and will not reverse reforms of the power sector that contribute to attracting investment in the market.”

Fitch analysts said they expect “Mexico’s total installed capacity — net of project retirements — to increase by almost 30% between 2018 and 2027, driven primarily by the development of wind, solar and thermal power projects. Moreover, we expect Mexico’s power consumption to increase by an annual average of 2.4% over the same period.”

Although wind and solar capacity is expected to increase the most on a proportional basis to current levels, conventional thermal power is seen accounting for about two-thirds of the country’s total capacity through 2026, Fitch said, citing projections from Mexican energy ministry Sener and the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Despite the overall optimistic outlook, analysts cautioned that, “AMLO’s unorthodox approach toward decision making for the infrastructure sector could weaken private companies’ interest in investing in the market.” Fitch cited investor unease over López Obrador’s recent decision to cancel a $13 billion airport for which construction was more than 30% complete via a referendum in which only about 1.1 million of Mexico’s 129.2 million people voted.

Other risks to the power sector include López Obrador’s ability, because of the comfortable majorities held by his coalition in both of the national legislative chambers, to reverse the 2013-14 energy reform of predecessor Enrique Peña Nieto.

“AMLO has long opposed the liberalization of the Mexican energy sector, although his criticisms have mostly focused on the oil and gas industry rather than the electricity industry. A risk of changes to the power sector’s regulatory framework, however, must be taken into account.”

Fitch also cited the risk of an economic slowdown in Mexico, but noted that this risk is mitigated by the tentative agreement reached Oct. 1 by Mexico, Canada and the United States on the U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement, an updated version of the North American Free Trade Agreement. The agreement has yet to be completed.

 

Natural Gas Intelligence / Andrew Baker / November 12

 

Unfinished business: Putting the final touches on the USMCA

The Hill /  David L. Goldwyn / October 29

 

The proposed US Mexico Canada Agreement (USMCA) makes important, but incomplete, progress in securing an integrated North American energy market.

In terms of progress, the agreement preserves zero tariffs for trade in oil, gas and petroleum products across North America. It effectively locks in Mexico’s historic energy reforms by ensuring that Mexico cannot reinstate restrictions on US investment in the oil and gas sector. A “ratchet” clause ensures that if Mexico decides to further liberalize the sector, then that higher floor becomes the new USMCA commitment.

While Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms are weaker, they remain in force for certain “covered sectors,” including oil and gas investments in Mexico and power generation and pipeline investments where the investor has a contract with the government.

These are all positive steps for North American energy security. Mexico and Canada provide the United States with the heavy grades of oil not produced domestically, helping US refineries produce gasoline at the lowest possible cost. Thanks to this relationship,  the United States is an efficient net exporter of petroleum products.

However, while this progress is laudable, it remains incomplete.

In the rush to conclude the agreement, effective protection for power generation investments like new wind and solar plants, refining and natural gas infrastructure, and power transmission lines were left out, perhaps inadvertently. Contracts for these investments are with state owned enterprises (SOEs) like Mexico’s CFE and PEMEX, which do not now fall within the definition of “federal government” because they are not disposing of assets but signing a contract for service. These essential investments, in the gas and refined product infrastructure which carry US products to and through Mexico, transmission lines which carry US electricity south, and investments in power generation are not permitted to bring ISDS claims to enforce their rights.

This is an oversight, and a protection these investments should enjoy. Rather, the proposed agreement creates an uneven playing field as investors who do have a contract with the Federal government, say for exploration, are entitled to bring an ISDS claim for any of their businesses, while those who do not have such contract do not. The problem can be easily fixed by expanding the definition of federal government to include these wholly owned SOEs.

These (for now) unprotected investments are critical to North American energy security. They secure US exports of electricity and natural gas and assure the continued reliability of the North American electricity system. They are the lifelines which carry US exports to Mexico – currently our number one customer for natural gas and petroleum products.

Protecting investments in Mexico’s electricity sector improves US national security by supporting Mexico’s prosperity through a more resilient power system.

Finally, if US power sector investments in Mexico are not protected and thus potentially hindered or lost, China is certain to fill the gap.

Chinese investment in all forms of power generation, transmission, and distribution is rapidly accelerating throughout Latin America. According to a recent Atlantic Council report, cumulative flows of Chinese foreign direct investment in Latin America have reached $110 billion, with $25 billion in oil and gas investment, and $13 billion in electricity, utilities and alternative energy. China’s State Grid has invested $7 billion in Brazil, through a combination of greenfield investments and acquisitions.

If the Mexican government is willing to offer these investments protections (and they are), and create a level playing field for American companies investing in our closest neighbor, the US should not object.

Fortunately, there is still time to correct the definition of eligible claimants as both sides ready the agreement for ratification.  With these modest steps, the United States, Mexico and Canada can improve the resilience of North America’s energy system, and the US can simultaneously advance its economic and national security interests.

David L. Goldwyn is president of Goldwyn Global Strategies, an international energy advisory consultancy and serves as chairman of the Atlantic Council Global Energy Center Energy Advisory Group. He served as the U.S. State Department’s special envoy and coordinator for international energy affairs from 2009 to 2011; he previously served as assistant secretary of energy for international affairs and as national security deputy to U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Bill Richardson. He is a member of the U.S. National Petroleum Council and the Council on Foreign Relations.

 

The Hill /  David L. Goldwyn / October 29

 

Comment: Investors keep a watchful eye on Mexico’s new leftist leader

International Investment / Jonathan Clare / October 22

 

Jonathan Clare recalls the strikingly different Mexico of the 1990s, and looks at the country’s prospects today under a new, left-wing, administration.

The Mexico of today is very different from the country I first experienced in the late 1990s. Back then I was based in Mexico City – the local population was still reeling from a banking crisis and severe recession.

Talking to locals in the fashionable coffee shops you would hear of the steady exodus of the middle class from the sprawling metropolis. There was a sense of gloom that the Institutional Revolutionary Party’s long stranglehold on Mexican politics would never end. Investor confidence was pretty low and lawlessness was a constant worry.

The bleak financial news and security risks preyed on people’s minds, but there were some notable compensations, principally the idyllic beaches and a world-class cuisine. Today, high-levels of crime continue to scar the nation, but the country has undergone an economic transformation – and one that has not been confined to the urban and industrial centres in Mexico City and Monterrey, where gleaming office blocks dominate the skyscape.

Since the PRI lost power in 2000, successive governments have worked hard to forge trading relationships with some 44 countries, as far afield as Israel and Japan. The previous perception of a tourism-and agriculture-based economy no longer holds. The country has diversified to include a variety of sectors from chemical, telecommunications and automotive, to energy to name just a few.

 

Taking the lead
Mexico is recognised as the leading emerging market in Latin America, while top Mexican companies are significant players across the Americas, Europe and Asia through a wave of mergers and acquisitions over the last decade. Increasingly, they are helping to drive growth in these markets. CEOs of top local conglomerates I speak to enthuse about the opportunities they have forged by connecting and partnering with research and development centres and companies in the UK, Germany and Switzerland.

Some question whether the recent economic progress, albeit sluggish of late, can be maintained following the election victory in July of the leftist Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (popularly known as AMLO, an acronym of his initials). His key campaign theme was curbing corruption, which remains a national scourge. More broadly, though, Mexicans are still trying to gauge what his leadership will mean for the country, in particular its impact on foreign investors in the energy sector.

AMLO has sought to salve business fears over the direction he will take by insisting there will be no nationalisation and promising fiscal discipline. But over time he will come under pressure from his support base of those “left behind” by the country’s revival to introduce populist measures. He has already pledged to double pensions when he officially takes office on 1 December.

Indeed, the business community remains nervous about possible attempts to reverse previous administrations’ reforms, many of which have helped Mexico to make some important advances, not least within the telecommunications and energy sectors. However, his critics’ concerns should be tempered by AMLO’s record in office. As mayor of Mexico City in the early 2000s, he proved to be an effective operator, and one would hope that his penchant for organising disruptive political protests during national election campaigns is now a thing of the past.

Fortunately for AMLO, his tenure begins amid some positive developments. The protracted and thorny re-negotiation of NAFTA has been completed. The parties prudently agreed the successor United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) in advance of the new administration being sworn in at the end of year. And the strong economic outlook in the US can only benefit Mexico, as it will continue to be one of Washington’s most important regional trading partners for the foreseeable future.

The trade war between China and the US may also reap dividends for AMLO’s term as US companies look to their immediate neighbour to fill any supply chain gaps. According to the OECD, the Mexican economy is set to maintain its growth rate of over 2% in 2018. The same is forecast to hold in 2019.

 

The benefit of the doubt
In Mexico City and Monterrey it’s business as usual: traffic madness, buoyant trade, and deals still getting done. Looking ahead, there is no doubt there will be a shift in the new government’s approach to ensure the needs of AMLO’s support base are met, but there is likely to be a strong dose of pragmatism and deal-making when addressing the various challenges ahead. In all probability, AMLO will balance the needs of his constituency with keeping the political elite and business community onside.

Critically, the international investment community, for now at least, appears to have given the president-elect the benefit of the doubt, despite all the background noise and fears over the reversal of reforms. Building a consensus is the key going forward, and AMLO will be well advised to maintain close relations with foreign investors, and local business leaders in general, however much his supporters might protest.

The sentiment on the street is that he has shown enough to be trusted to move the economy in the right direction. Nearly twenty years on, in the trendy coffee shops, restaurants and bars of the capital’s upscale districts of Polanco and Roma there is little talk of escaping the city – quite the reverse in fact.

 

International Investment / Jonathan Clare / October 22

 

A 14-year-long oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico could become one of the worst in U.S. history

Tampa Bay Times / Darryl Fears / October 22

 

NEW ORLEANS — An oil spill that has been quietly leaking millions of barrels into the Gulf of Mexico has gone unplugged for so long that it now verges on becoming one of the worst offshore disasters in U.S. history.

Between 300 and 700 barrels of oil per day have been spewing from a site 12 miles off the Louisiana coast since 2004, when an oil-production platform owned by Taylor Energy sank in a mudslide triggered by Hurricane Ivan. Many of the wells have not been capped, and federal officials estimate that the spill could continue through this century. With no fix in sight, the Taylor offshore spill is threatening to overtake BP’s Deepwater Horizon disaster as the largest ever.

As oil continues to spoil the Gulf, the Trump administration is proposing the largest expansion of leases for the oil and gas industry, with the potential to open nearly the entire outer continental shelf to offshore drilling. That includes the Atlantic coast, where drilling hasn’t happened in more than a century and where hurricanes hit with double the regularity of the Gulf.

Expansion plans come despite fears that the offshore oil industry is poorly regulated and that the planet needs to decrease fossil fuels to combat climate change, as well as the knowledge that 14 years after Ivan took down Taylor’s platform, the broken wells are releasing so much oil that researchers needed respirators to study the damage.

“I don’t think people know that we have this ocean in the United States that’s filled with industry,” said Scott Eustis, an ecologist for the Gulf Restoration Network, as his six-seat plane circled the spill site on a flyover last summer. On the horizon, a forest of oil platforms rose up from the Gulf’s waters, and all that is left of the doomed Taylor platform are rainbow-colored oil slicks that are often visible for miles. He cannot imagine similar development in the Atlantic, where the majority of coastal state governors, lawmakers, attorneys general and residents have aligned against the administration’s proposal.

The Taylor Energy spill is largely unknown outside Louisiana because of the company’s effort to keep it secret in the hopes of protecting its reputation and proprietary information about its operations, according to a lawsuit that eventually forced the company to reveal its cleanup plan. The spill was hidden for six years before environmental watchdog groups stumbled on oil slicks while monitoring the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster a few miles north of the Taylor site in 2010.

The Interior Department is fighting an effort by Taylor Energy to walk away from the disaster. The company sued Interior in federal court, seeking the return of about $450 million left in a trust it established with the government to fund its work to recover part of the wreckage and locate wells buried under 100 feet of muck.

Taylor Energy declined to comment. The company has argued that there’s no evidence to prove any of the wells are leaking. Last month, the Justice Department submitted an independent analysis showing that the spill was much larger than the one-to-55 barrels per day that the U.S. Coast Guard National Response Center (NRC) claimed, using data supplied by the oil company.

The author of the analysis, Oscar Garcia-Pineda, a geoscience consultant who specializes in remote sensing of oil spills, said there were several instances when the NRC reported low estimates on the same days he was finding heavy layers of oil in the field.

“There is abundant evidence that supports the fact that these reports from NRC are incorrect,” Garcia-Pineda wrote. Later he said: “My conclusion is that NRC reports are not reliable.”

In an era of climate change and warmer open waters, the storms are becoming more frequent and violent. Starting with Ivan in 2004, several hurricanes battered or destroyed more than 150 platforms in just four years.

On average, 330,000 gallons of crude are spilled each year in Louisiana from offshore platforms and onshore oil tanks, according to a state agency that monitors them.

The Gulf is one of the richest and most productive oil and gas regions in the world, expected to yield more than 600 million barrels this year alone, nearly 20 percent of the total U.S. oil production. Another 40 billion barrels rest underground, waiting to be recovered, government analysts say.

About 2,000 platforms stand in the waters off the Bayou State. Nearly 2,000 others are off the coasts of its neighbors, Texas and Mississippi. On top of that are nearly 50,000 miles of active and inactive pipelines carrying oil and minerals to the shore.

And the costs are high.

For every 1,000 wells in state and federal waters, there’s an average of 20 uncontrolled releases of oil – or blowouts – every year. A fire erupts offshore every three days, on average, and hundreds of workers are injured annually.

BP has paid or set aside $66 billion for fines, legal settlements and cleanup of the 168 million-gallon spill – a sum that the oil giant could, painfully, afford. But many companies with Gulf leases and drilling operations are small, financially at-risk and hard-pressed to pay for an accident approaching that scale.

One of them was Taylor Energy.

– – –

Taylor Energy was a giant in New Orleans.

Owned by Patrick Taylor, a magnate and philanthropist who launched an ambitious college scholarship program for low-income students, it was once the only individually owned company to explore for and produce oil in the Gulf of Mexico, according to his namesake foundation.

Taylor made what was arguably his most ambitious transaction in 1995, when he took over an oil-production platform once operated by BP. Standing in more than 450 feet of water, it was about 40 stories tall. Its legs were pile-driven into the muddy ocean floor and funnels were attached to 28 drilled oil wells.

At its peak, the oil company helped make Taylor and his wife, Phyllis, the richest couple in the Big Easy.

That investment was obliterated on Sept. 15, 2004, when Hurricane Ivan unleashed 145 mph winds and waves that topped 70 feet as it roared into the Gulf. Deep underwater, the Category 4 storm shook loose tons of mud and buckled the platform.

The avalanche sank the colossal structure and knocked it “170 meters down slope of its original location,” researcher Sarah Josephine Harrison wrote in a postmortem of the incident.

More than 620 barrels of crude oil stacked on its deck came tumbling down with it. The sleeves that conducted oil from its wells were mangled and ripped away. A mixture of steel and leaking oil was buried in 150 feet of mud.

Less than two months after the storm, Patrick F. Taylor died of a heart infection at 67, leaving a fortune for philanthropy and a massive cleanup bill.

Taylor Energy reported the spill to the Coast Guard, which monitored the site for more than half a decade without making the public fully aware of the mess it was seeing. Four years after the leak started, in July 2008, the Coast Guard informed the company that the spill had been deemed “a continuous, unsecured crude oil discharge” that posed “a significant threat to the environment,” according to a lawsuit between Taylor Energy and its insurer.

Taylor Energy made a deal with federal officials to establish a $666 million trust to stop the spill.

It would be a delicate, risky operation. Taylor and the contractors it hired were asked to somehow locate wells in a nearly impenetrable grave of mud and debris, then cap them. Failing that, it could create a device to contain the leak.

But they were forbidden from boring or drilling through the muck for fear that they would strike a pipe or well, risking the kind of catastrophe on the scale of the BP disaster a few miles south. That precaution slowed the pace of the salvage operation.

“We had no idea that any of that was going on,” said Marylee Orr, executive director of the Louisiana Environmental Action Network.

Taylor Energy spent a fortune to pluck the deck of the platform from the ocean and plug about a third of the wells. It built a kind of shield to keep the crude from rising.

But no matter what it did, the oil kept leaking.

– – –

In 2010, six years after the oil leak started, scientists studying the BP spill realized something was amiss with the oil slicks they were seeing.

“We were flying to monitor the BP disaster and we kept seeing these slicks, but they were nowhere near the BP spill,” said Cynthia Sarthou, executive director of the Gulf Restoration Network, which monitors the water from boats and planes.

Satellite images confirmed the oddity.

“It was there all the time, longer than the BP spill,” said John Amos, founder and president of Sky Truth, a nonprofit organization that tracks pollution.

Under the Oil Pollution Act, companies are obligated to report hazardous spills to the NRC, which maintains a database of chemical pollution.

No law compels the companies or the federal government to raise public awareness, but the Clean Water Act clearly calls for citizen involvement.

Environmentalists took Taylor Energy to court.

In their lawsuit, the conservationists called the agreement between Taylor Energy and the federal government a secret deal “that was inconsistent with national policy.”

That policy, they argued, was made clear in the Clean Water Act, which mandates “public participation in the . . . enforcement of any regulation.” Citizen participation, the act says, “shall be provided for, encouraged and assisted.”

Taylor Energy and the Coast Guard – which is part of a Unified Command of federal agencies that includes the Interior Department, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency – did not live up to the policy. In fact, the public wasn’t made aware of the spill even after a private firm tested fish in the area and submitted an assessment to Taylor Energy in 2009 that said “there is an acceptable risk to humans if fish from the . . . area are consumed.”

“Taylor has failed to provide the public with information regarding the pace and extent of the oil leaks and Taylor’s efforts to control the leaks,” the lawsuit said.

It would take another three years before the government revealed an even deeper truth. Taylor Energy had been playing down the severity of the spill. An Associated Press investigation in 2015 determined that it was about 20 times worse than the company had reported.

Taylor Energy had argued that the leak was two gallons per day; the Coast Guard finally said it was 84 gallons or more, and was almost certainly coming from any of 16 wells.

“There’s a fine for not reporting, but none for underreporting,” Amos said. “If it’s only three gallons a day, who cares, that’s a trivial problem.”

– – –

Nearly a decade after the oil platform went down, the government determined that the actual level of oil leaking into the Gulf was between one and 55 barrels per day. Now, the new estimate dwarfs that: up to 700 barrels per day. Each barrel contains 42 gallons.

Despite that finding, NOAA is still in the early stages of a resource assessment of marine life that could explain the impact of the Taylor Energy spill, and is more than three years behind a deadline to issue a biological determination of the BP spill’s impact on marine life.

In July, Earthjustice, a nonprofit legal organization that represents conservation groups, sued NOAA for failing to produce a timely study.

Like Eustis, Amos said Atlantic coast residents should be wary. But in that region, where beaches and tourism enrich nearly every state, distrust over offshore leasing and drilling is bipartisan.

Governors, state lawmakers and attorneys general lashed out at the administration’s proposal. New Jersey passed a law that forbids oil and infrastructure in state waters three miles from shore, crippling any effort to run pipelines from platforms to the shore. Other states passed similar laws.

In the Carolinas, where Hurricane Florence’s winds topped 150 mph and produced a monster 83-foot wave as it neared landfall, governors who represent both political parties implored Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to rethink the plan.

Meanwhile, in the Gulf, Taylor Energy was down to a single employee – its president, William Pecue.

At a 2016 public forum in Baton Rouge, Pecue made the case for allowing the company to walk away from its obligation to clean up the mess. Taylor Energy had been sold to a joint venture of South Korean companies in 2008, the same year it started the $666 million trust. A third of the money had been spent on cleanup, and only a third of the leaking wells had been fixed. But Pecue wanted to recover $450 million, arguing the spill could not be contained.

“I can affirmatively say that we do believe this was an act of God under the legal definition,” Pecue said. In other words, Taylor Energy had no control over the hurricane.

But Ivan was no freak storm.

It was one of more than 600 that have been tracked in the Gulf since records were kept in the mid-1800s, according to NOAA.

Fourteen years after the Taylor spill, and 10 years after the Deepwater Horizon disaster, the federal government still doesn’t know the spills’ full impact on marine life. And there is no economic analysis showing the value of the oil flowing into the sea and potential royalties lost to taxpayers. Activists also want an analysis to determine if oil is ruining marshland and making its way to beaches.

“Even though oil did not reach a lot of these beaches [during the BP spill], the fact that the public heard about it, it killed the beach economy for quite some time,” Sarthou said. “You don’t want to go to a beach with tar balls or oil washing up.”

At the time, Sarthou was unaware that Garcia-Pineda was conducting a study in the Gulf that would show the spill was far worse than imagined – up to 10 times worse than what the federal government was reporting.

As the saga in the Gulf plays out, wary officials on the Atlantic coast are anxiously watching President Donald Trump’s proposal to offer federal offshore leases.

It would take at least a decade for Atlantic drilling to start. The industry would first want to conduct seismic testing to determine the amount of oil and gas in the ground. Depending on the results, companies would bid for the leases. Interior has yet to approve seismic testing, which some studies say harms marine life, including large mammals such as dolphins and whales.

Oil and gas representatives say energy development off that coast could provide South Carolina with $2.7 billion in annual economic growth, 35,000 jobs and potentially lower heating costs for residents struggling to pay their bills.

During a federal informational hearing in South Carolina to explain the Trump administration’s plan in February, Mark Harmon, the director of a state unit of the American Petroleum Institute, stressed that point. “Ultimately, it means the potential for jobs and reinvestment in the community,” he said.

Once the oil industry gains a foothold in a region, it’s game over, said Chris Eaton, an Earthjustice attorney.

“A major part of the economy starts to change” as jobs with pay approaching $100,000 transform a tourism market to oil. “If it gets going, that train isn’t going to stop,” he said. “Let’s talk about what’s happening in the Gulf before we move into the Atlantic.”

 

Tampa Bay Times / Darryl Fears / October 22

 

Mexican President-Elect Pledges to Save Country’s Oil Sector

Sputnik News / October 15

 

MEXICO CITY (Sputnik) – Mexican President-elect Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has pledged to save the country’s oil sector just like former Mexican President Lazaro Cardenas, who headed the country from 1934 to 1940, had done.

In March 1938, Cardenas announced the nationalization of the oil industry, and only in 2013, the Mexican Congress approved an energy reform opening the oil sector to private companies, including the foreign ones.

“We will produce oil because oil and gas production has been decreasing since the beginning of the energy reform. We will save the oil industry like Gen. Cardenas did in 1938,” Lopez Obrador posted on Twitter late on Sunday.

In September, Lopez Obrador, who won the election in July and will assume office on December 1, pledged that crude oil production would increase up to 2.6 million barrels per day from the current level of 1.8 million barrels per day by the end of his six-year-long administration.

In August, Pemex, Mexico’s major oil and gas company, produced oil at the average level of 1,816 million barrels per day, which is a 5.9 percent decrease year-on-year, and a 28 percent decrease compared with the notch registered in August 2013.

 

Sputnik News / October 15

 

UPDATE 7-Gulf of Mexico offshore platforms evacuated ahead of hurricane

CNBC / Gary McWilliams and Liz Hampton / October 8

 

(Adds Anadarko Petroleum cutbacks)

HOUSTON, Oct 8 (Reuters) – Energy companies on Monday halted nearly a fifth of Gulf of Mexico oil production and evacuated staff from 13 platforms as Hurricane Michael intensified and headed for a path up the eastern U.S. Gulf.

Offshore producers including Anadarko Petroleum Corp , BHP Billiton, BP and Chevron Corp evacuated workers from oil and gas platforms in the Gulf.

Forecasters predicted the storm would become a Category 3 hurricane with sustained winds of 111 to 129 miles per hour (178 to 208 km per hour) and bring heavy seas to producing areas.

Companies turned off 324,190 barrels per day of oil and nearly 284 million cubic feet of natural gas at midday on Monday, according to a survey of producers. Five drilling rigs were moved out of the storm’s path, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement said.

U.S. oil prices ended mostly flat as traders discounted any long-term effect on output by the storm, projected to be the first major hurricane to enter the U.S. Gulf this year. Crude futures on Monday settled at $74.29 a barrel, down 5 cents.

The storm’s current path is taking it away from refinery-heavy areas along the central and western Gulf.

Anadarko, Chevron and BHP Billiton shut-in production and evacuated staff at two platforms each. BP shut down production at four.

The platforms evacuating personnel and stopping production include Anadarko’s Horn Mountain and Marlin, Chevron’s Blind Faith and Petronius, BHP’s Shenzi and Neptune and BP’s Atlantis, Mad Dog, Na Kika and Thunder Horse facilities, the companies said.

Norwegian state oil company Equinor evacuated its Titan production platform and Exxon Mobil Corp removed staff from its Lena production platform, the companies said. Exxon said it did not expect the staff reduction to affect output.

Hess Corp and Royal Dutch Shell said they were monitoring the storm and would take action as needed. Shell was securing some drilling operations on Monday but facilities were staffed and operating, spokeswoman Kimberly Windon said.

The storm’s intensity is being fed by warm sea surface temperatures and a lack of upper-level windshear, forecasters said. Those conditions should result in 15-foot to 20-foot waves, “enough to be disruptive of oil production operations” west of the storm track, said John Tharp, operations supervisor at Weather Decision Technologies.

Shipping ports including Gulfport and Pascagoula, Mississippi; Mobile, Alabama, and Pensacola, Florida, were open on Monday, but the U.S. Coast Guard warned of gale-force winds in the next 48 hours.

Offshore production in the Gulf accounts for 17 percent of total U.S. crude oil output, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Natural gas production from Gulf offshore operations provides 5 percent of the U.S. total.

Over 45 percent of U.S. refining capacity is located along the Gulf Coast, along with 51 percent of the nation’s natural gas processing plant capacity, the EIA said. (Reporting by Gary McWilliams and Liz Hampton in Houston Editing by Jonathan Oatis and Dan Grebler)

 

CNBC / Gary McWilliams and Liz Hampton / October 8