Analysis by the father of American Geopolitics Dr. Daniel Fine, MIT.

Posts tagged ‘OilandGas’

Increasing Natural Gas Trade Between the U.S and Mexico


The Heritage Foundation Background Paper

Increasing Natural Gas Trade Between the U.S and Mexico

July 1, 2019 22 min read Download Report

Authors: Dr. Daniel Fine, Ph.D and Nicolas Loris

 

SUMMARY

Increased energy trade has important economic and strategic significance for the United States and Mexico. Mexico’s energy-market reforms that opened access and improved natural gas trade between American producers and Mexican consumers have been beneficial for citizens in both countries. President López Obrador’s desire to return to energy nationalism threatens those gains. Both the U.S. and Mexico should commit to policies and regulations that continue to open access to markets, improve transparency, and expand opportunities for investment. Doing so will benefit both Americans and Mexicans.

Analysis: Trump and Saudi collision on oil, and Bingaman’s return to Santa Fe by Dr. Daniel Fine


The whole article is here->https://www.daily-times.com/story/money/industries/oil-gas/2018/11/25/analysis-trump-and-saudi-collision-oil-bingamans-return-santa-fe/2015081002/

n an earlier column, readers overseas benefited from this writer’s forecast that crude oil prices would fall dramatically because most commodity traders got it wrong. Simply, this column’s analysis was the buying of oil assumed a shortage would result once the sanctions against Iran would be activated the first week of November.

President Trump wanted lower oil prices with OPEC and Saudi Arabia pumping more. Two weeks ago, a call from the Middle East confirmed readers of the column had followed the analysis in the Energy Magazine and sold Brent oil — and profited.

Oil has slumped under $60 as the delusion of a shortage vanished. In the November issue column, this writer made a call: the oil price would reach $50 as a low. There is no change in that forecast. The price in the commodity market for WTI crude would touch in the very high $40 range before the Saudi-led production cut-back is realized. Why? Again, too much capacity to produce too much oil for demand.

What’s the impact on SW oil?

Oil demand without commodity traders’ bets on the sanctions against Iranian oil production and export contradicts flagging demand. Some Southwest shale producers, faced with discounts on domestic sales, are exporting oil to world markets and capturing the higher Brent price or differential between the WTI priced Midland domestic and the Brent price for the World.

But this would shift Southwest tight oil into a world market where such supply also chases weaker demand. This switches U.S. oil into world oil as exports and diverts it from going into U.S. storage.

Unlike the last three price sell-offs Saudi Arabia, speaking for OPEC, is strangely silent on calling on non-OPEC producers join it in lowering production or “balancing” the

market.

Quite the opposite. Led by shale producers in the Delaware (New Mexico) Basin in the Permian complex, United State production approaches 12 million barrels per day, a historic high and number one position against the Middle East and Russia.

Only a serious price decline, short of the 2015 bottom, would signal oil non-completions. A cutback of U.S. production by 750,000 barrels per with an OPEC cutback independent of Russian production of around one million barrels will stabilize or balance the world oil market.

But U.S producers cannot (anti-trust) belong to a collective price-setting organization (cartel).

President Trump wants lower prices, even if this means a breakup of OPEC into two and a moderate production roll-back by Southwest producers – a negative cash flow for those without or less advantaged by Tier One wells.

The overwhelming Democratic Party electoral win influenced OPEC and Saudi Arabia to resist President Trump’s pressure for lower world oil prices because he is much weaker and easier to upend in oil supply and demand world “domination.”

Bingaman is back!

The Democratic Party indirectly dimmed the “blue flame” price outlook regardless of blue wave voting margins. But enough of “color revolutions” in politics or economics?

This writer is constructively reacting to the return of former Sen. Jeff Bingaman to New Mexico’s politics through new state Governor-elect Michelle Lujan Grisham. She asked him to head her transition team.

With Democratic Party factionalism into Progressive/Ultra-Progressive forces against the traditional Moderate/Conservatives, Sen. Bingaman’s experience and history in working with the late Senator Domenici in forging the U.S Energy Act of 2005 is in best interest of New Mexico.

Recall the energy policy of “all of the above” in the Bush and Obama Administrations coupled with the Energy Policy of outgoing Governor Susana Martinez was a compromise of give-and-take between two New Mexico Senators of different parties and energy policy objectives.

Dr. Daniel Fine is the associate director of New Mexico Tech’s Center for Energy Policy and the State of New Mexico Natural Gas Export Coordinator. The opinions expressed are his own.

Fine: OPEC in Houston and steel pipes from China


The article by Dr. Daniel Fine is found here-> https://www.daily-times.com/story/money/business/2018/03/25/russia-us-opec-oil-conference-houston-trump-steel-tariffs-china/421943002/

“For a week in March, Houston was the site of a world assembly of oil producers engaged in an OPEC-Russia dialogue with American shale or light tight oil producers on supply and — indirectly — price.

OPEC and Saudi Arabia pitched a market information offensive.

Put simply, American oil producers should cut-back or stabilize output in a “family” arrangement to avoid an expansion of supply that threatens the price of world oil.

But there is no U.S. Oil Company (government owned) in America, unlike all members plus Russia which are state companies. Russia is a mix. OPEC members are a price-setting cartel. So, a restaurant in Houston was selected as the site for an elite dinner of OPEC and American shale oil operators.

Platitudes and generalizations dominated the American-initiated conversation, because anything more would be in violation of U.S. anti-trust laws.

Saudi Arabia, consistent with its effort to sell shares in itself in an Initial Public Offering (forthcoming), emphasized there was enough future world demand to satisfy the Americans as well as OPEC.

This was 1.5 percent growth per year for the next decade or two.  Almost silence, however, on Saudi Aramco’s capacity expansion of another l.5 million barrels per day as “spare capacity.”

Does the future demand short term or long term offer support for an unspeakable and unenforceable supply agreement that involves enough for all? Will American shale producers in the Permian exclude themselves from capturing any growth of demand?

Devon, no longer in the San Juan Basin, but dominant in Oklahoma, is going for double-digit production increases yearly and is increasing its dividend to shareholders who might otherwise be attracted to the idea of drilling and completing less to prop up the price per barrel.

The Houston dinner failed, as a half a dozen companies did not show up in compliance with legal restrictions. It failed to persuade the America shale industry to act with OPEC’s oil supply and price management as a “family” and not as a law-breaking cartel.

Flashback to 2016: Iranian oil likely to push prices lower

Less than a week later, Iran signaled that it would not renew the production cut that has removed 1.8 million OPEC barrels of oil from the world and increased prices.
Saudi Arabia was projecting a forecast that a tight market for oil is ahead this year or next as oil projects will not replace wells while demand is strong.

Few were sold on this forecast since shale oil well completions are effectively responsive to price signals with well completions compared to conventional replacement-based on prior oil field investment.

Oil traders are largely unconvinced or agnostic listening in to the Houston contradictions. Most will watch Iran in late May as a sell signal in the making of algorithms.

The Trump Administration on steel tariffs takes the Obama Administration’s failure to do so as a starting point. It was Secretary of the Treasury Lew under Obama who made the case for tariffs during his many visits to Beijing. He would accuse China of promoting an overcapacity of steel production for export and consequent flooding of the American market and the United States with cheap steel.

The Chinese no doubt listened politely to the words but did not anticipate action. They followed a strategy of export price advantage for driving American-owned and operated steel out of business.

Action was taken last month by President Donald Trump. And yet nothing in the customary reaction against Trump recalled that President George W. Bush declared sanctions against Chinese Steel export dumping over 10 years ago, which lasted 18 months, and is credited for an American steel innovation-led comeback.

National security requires American made high-quality steel not only for defense and defense-industrial capability, but also for the complex steel in San Juan and Permian natural gas and steel pipelines.

What is needed is metallurgy for manufacturing and equipment for continuous casting, cooling, rolling and welding. There is only one plant left in the United States that has some capacity for high strength pipeline steel (API X70 and X80).

The oil and gas industry in the San Juan Basin should not depend on imports from a non-continental foreign source as a matter of national security.
China already dominates the American market (oil and gas) for steel valves. There is vulnerability if China follows its rare earth history.

First, it lowered prices via exports. Second, with this weapon, American rare earth domestic production failed and China bought the technology and transferred it to China. Third, China raises prices for American users of rare earths.

The North American Trade Agreement (NAFTA) negotiations continue with more confidence that fuels (natural gas) will be exempt from negative outcomes. The exemption for Canada and Mexico from steel and aluminum tariffs based on a no-threat-to-national-security finding and continental sources, suggests understanding that trade in fuels will not be restricted.

Daniel Fine is the associate director of New Mexico Tech’s Center for Energy Policy and the State of New Mexico Natural Gas Export Coordinator. The opinions expressed are his own.

For a week in March, Houston was the site of a world assembly of oil producers engaged in an OPEC-Russia dialogue with American shale or light tight oil producers on supply and — indirectly — price.

OPEC and Saudi Arabia pitched a market information offensive.

Put simply, American oil producers should cut-back or stabilize output in a “family” arrangement to avoid an expansion of supply that threatens the price of world oil.

But there is no U.S. Oil Company (government owned) in America, unlike all members plus Russia which are state companies. Russia is a mix. OPEC members are a price-setting cartel. So, a restaurant in Houston was selected as the site for an elite dinner of OPEC and American shale oil operators.

Platitudes and generalizations dominated the American-initiated conversation, because anything more would be in violation of U.S. anti-trust laws.

Saudi Arabia, consistent with its effort to sell shares in itself in an Initial Public Offering (forthcoming), emphasized there was enough future world demand to satisfy the Americans as well as OPEC.

This was 1.5 percent growth per year for the next decade or two.  Almost silence, however, on Saudi Aramco’s capacity expansion of another l.5 million barrels per day as “spare capacity.”

Does the future demand short term or long term offer support for an unspeakable and unenforceable supply agreement that involves enough for all? Will American shale producers in the Permian exclude themselves from capturing any growth of demand?

Devon, no longer in the San Juan Basin, but dominant in Oklahoma, is going for double-digit production increases yearly and is increasing its dividend to shareholders who might otherwise be attracted to the idea of drilling and completing less to prop up the price per barrel.

The Houston dinner failed, as a half a dozen companies did not show up in compliance with legal restrictions. It failed to persuade the America shale industry to act with OPEC’s oil supply and price management as a “family” and not as a law-breaking cartel.

Flashback to 2016: Iranian oil likely to push prices lower

Less than a week later, Iran signaled that it would not renew the production cut that has removed 1.8 million OPEC barrels of oil from the world and increased prices.
Saudi Arabia was projecting a forecast that a tight market for oil is ahead this year or next as oil projects will not replace wells while demand is strong.

Few were sold on this forecast since shale oil well completions are effectively responsive to price signals with well completions compared to conventional replacement-based on prior oil field investment.

Oil traders are largely unconvinced or agnostic listening in to the Houston contradictions. Most will watch Iran in late May as a sell signal in the making of algorithms.

The Trump Administration on steel tariffs takes the Obama Administration’s failure to do so as a starting point. It was Secretary of the Treasury Lew under Obama who made the case for tariffs during his many visits to Beijing. He would accuse China of promoting an overcapacity of steel production for export and consequent flooding of the American market and the United States with cheap steel.

The Chinese no doubt listened politely to the words but did not anticipate action. They followed a strategy of export price advantage for driving American-owned and operated steel out of business.

Action was taken last month by President Donald Trump. And yet nothing in the customary reaction against Trump recalled that President George W. Bush declared sanctions against Chinese Steel export dumping over 10 years ago, which lasted 18 months, and is credited for an American steel innovation-led comeback.

National security requires American made high-quality steel not only for defense and defense-industrial capability, but also for the complex steel in San Juan and Permian natural gas and steel pipelines.

What is needed is metallurgy for manufacturing and equipment for continuous casting, cooling, rolling and welding. There is only one plant left in the United States that has some capacity for high strength pipeline steel (API X70 and X80).

The oil and gas industry in the San Juan Basin should not depend on imports from a non-continental foreign source as a matter of national security.
China already dominates the American market (oil and gas) for steel valves. There is vulnerability if China follows its rare earth history.

First, it lowered prices via exports. Second, with this weapon, American rare earth domestic production failed and China bought the technology and transferred it to China. Third, China raises prices for American users of rare earths.

The North American Trade Agreement (NAFTA) negotiations continue with more confidence that fuels (natural gas) will be exempt from negative outcomes. The exemption for Canada and Mexico from steel and aluminum tariffs based on a no-threat-to-national-security finding and continental sources, suggests understanding that trade in fuels will not be restricted.”

Daniel Fine is the associate director of New Mexico Tech’s Center for Energy Policy and the State of New Mexico Natural Gas Export Coordinator. The opinions expressed are his own.

New Mexico Energy Outlook Summit 2015 with Keynote leading energy expert Dr. Daniel Fine: Join us!


Join Albuquerque Business First for the 2nd Annual New Mexico Energy Outlook Summit. This Summit will offer business leaders unique access to energy insights that will affect your company in the year to come.

  • When: Thursday, November 12, 2015,7:30am-9:30am Add to my calendar
  • Where: Sandia Resort & Casino: Ballrooms A&BAlbuquerque NM
  • To register use this link–> http://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/event/115971#eventDetails
  • Sponsors

    Presenting Sponsor
    Supporting Sponsor
    Event Partner
    For more information on how your company can sponsor one of our events, please contact Tamra Fenstermaker at tfenstermaker@bizjournals.com or 505-348-8326.

    Event Information

    The second annual New Mexico Energy Outlook will offer business leaders unique access to energy insights that will affect your company in the year to come. Beginning with a keynote by Dr. Daniel Fine, this session will focus on how the evolving landscape of the energy industry and the world’s demand for energy will affect our state and economy. The 30-minute presentation will be followed by a panel discussion featuring executives from the top companies in New Mexico’s energy landscape. Moderated by Albuquerque Business First Publisher Candace Beeke, the panel will be driven by audience questions.

    Panelists include:

    • Dr. Daniel Fine, associate director, Center for Energy Policy
    • ConocoPhillips senior executive
    • Ron Darnell, senior vice president of public policy, PNM Resources
    • Regina Wheeler, CEO, Positive Energy Solar

    Session highlights include:

    • The OPEC price war and how it impacts NM
    • The price cycle for oil, natural gas and others, and outlook for prices
    • Production capacity – where it is rising, where it is falling
    • Outlook for employment in energy trades
    • Impact of and future for renewable energy in NM
    • Opportunities and challenges for the energy sector in NM as a whole
    • How the energy sector will shape the broader economy

    Daniel_Fine_Associate_Director_Center_for_Energy_Policy

    Keynote speaker:

    Dr. Daniel Fine
    Associate Director
    Center for Energy Policy

    New Mexico Tech

    Dr. Daniel Fine is the Associate Director of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy and is a Senior Policy Analyst in the New Mexico State Department of Energy Minerals and Natural Resources.

    He is a long time research associate at the Mining and Minerals Resources Institute (MIT). Fine is also a policy adviser on nonconventional oil and gas. He is co-editor of Resource War in 3-D: Dependence, Diplomacy and Defence, has contributed to Business Week, the Engineering and Mining Journal and the Washington Times. He has given testimony on strategic natural resources before the U.S. Senate Committees on Foreign Affairs and Energy and Natural Resources.

    ABOUT NEW MEXICO CENTER FOR ENERGY POLICY
    The New Mexico Center for Energy Policy (NMCEP) is the first community-centered response to the challenge of national energy security in the United States. Its location in Lea County reflects the New Mexico Southeast as a historic and contemporary source of energy production and technology. Energy policy-making in Washington and in state capitals is often limited to “witness” appearances from “locals”. Energy policy developed and promoted by an energy production community has been non-existent until now.

    Registration & Networking  | 7:30AM
    Breakfast and Program | 8:00AM – 9:30AM

    Sandia Resort & Casino has overnight accommodations at a reduced group rate of $159 until October 11, 2015. RESERVE OVERNIGHT ROOMS HERE.

Governor’s energy plan sets up New Mexico for new opportunities by Ripon Advance News Service


Governor’s energy plan sets up New Mexico for new opportunities by Ripon Advance News Service | Friday, Sep 25, 2015 @ 2:57pm For a link to the plan and the full article –> https://lnkd.in/e4mVTVk

New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez recently announced a sweeping, statewide energy plan aimed at embracing a wide array of energy sources, including oil and gas — which already accounts for more than $1 billion in yearly state revenues — solar, wind and new technologies. The far-reaching energy policy and implementation plan

entitled “Seizing our Energy Potential: Creating a More Diverse Economy in New Mexico,” is the state’s “first comprehensive energy policy and plan since 1991, nearly 25 years ago,” Michael Lonergan, Martinez’s press secretary, told Ripon Advance.

The plan put forth by Martinez, who is the nation’s first female Hispanic governor, calls for “an ‘all-of-the-above’ approach to energy development that promotes production from all sources” in order to create jobs, diversify a key sector of New Mexico’s economy and support the nation’s efforts to achieve energy independence, among other goals, Lonergan said this week.

Lonergan told Ripon Advance that the key components and initiatives of the plan include: improving New Mexico’s energy infrastructure; promoting greater production of all sources of energy; improving energy workforce training in the state’s higher education system; reducing freshwater consumption in production; streamlining regulatory processes; and exploring and potentially seizing on new energy opportunities.

Improving the state’s energy infrastructure, for example, will include new rail lines to improved electric transmission that will allow New Mexico to better move its energy and its products to markets in the Southwest and Southeast United States, as well as into Mexico and other markets.

In particular, rail from the Four Corners region to Interstate 40 would reduce the cost of transporting coal, crude oil and agricultural and other non-energy products from northwest New Mexico to markets throughout the state and beyond. Such improvements also would allow materials for energy production to be brought into New Mexico at a lower cost to producers.

In a statement unveiling her statewide energy plan earlier this month, Martinez called New Mexico “one of the most energy-rich and energy-diverse states in the nation.”

Editorial: Governor’s energy plan is excellent future blueprint


New Mexico has a wealth of energy resources. And now it has a comprehensive plan to help guide development of those riches to grow the state’s economy.

Last week at the 2015 Southeastern New Mexico Mayor’s Energy Summit in Carlsbad, Gov. Susana Martinez laid out a broad “all of the above” energy policy. “There is no reason we shouldn’t be an energy leader,” she later told attendees at the eighth annual Domenici Public Policy Conference in Las Cruces.

Her plan embraces a wide range of energy sources, ranging from oil and gas to solar, wind and up-and-coming technologies, such as “small modular reactors,” which must still be approved by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

While the oil and gas industry has been – and still is – the backbone of the state’s energy economy (accounting for more than a billion dollars in revenues to the state each year), it’s clear there is plenty of opportunity for the growing renewable energy sector given New Mexico’s abundant sunshine, miles of windswept open spaces and nuclear experience and expertise.

One of the keys is development of more infrastructure – electricity transmission lines to move power generated by wind and solar, and new refineries and improved roads, rail and pipelines to transport resources in and out of the energy-producing areas in the southeastern and northwestern parts of the state.

It also proposes deployment of new battery storage technologies and exporting coal as utilities start using less of that resource as a result of agreements with the federal government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality.

Energy expert Daniel Fine discusses impact of falling global oil prices John Locke Foundation (video)


Published on Aug 21, 2015 Please Share!

Dr. Daniel Fine, associate director of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy, discusses the impact of falling oil prices on the domestic energy industry. Fine offered these comments during an interview for Carolina Journal Radio (CarolinaJournalRadio.com) Program No. 640. Video courtesy of CarolinaJournal.tv.

Tag Cloud