Category Archives: Oil Industry

Big oil: influence peddling in California and the Bay Area

Repost from Air Hugger
[Editor:  Global Community Monitor‘s excellent blog, Air Hugger, has been around since early 2010.  Tamhas Griffith’s piece is a thorough exploration of the oil industry’s influence over local, regional and California government officials.  See especially his expose on the behavior of Jack Broadbent, Chief Air Pollution Control Officer of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.  – RS]

Influence

By Tamhas Griffith, August 14, 2014

Recently I have been spending more time in city and county meetings where the topic is theoretically how local government will regulate the activity of a local refinery – which is actually a multi-national multi-billion dollar entity with a local franchise.  Somehow during these meetings the regulation of health and safety of the community always seems to take a back seat to jobs and money.

We all know  one thing that these big oil companies have is a lot of MONEY. For example, the 2013 profits for the BIG 5 oil companies, you know, BP, Chevron, Conoco Phillips, ExxonMobil, and Shell­­­­­­ – were $93.3 billion last year! That’s $177 G’s  per minute.

Admittedly, Big Oil companies do have some expenses. But where they are spending this money Top 5 oil co graphmay surprise you.

Over the past 15 years, Big Oil spent $123.6 million to lobby Sacramento and $143.3 million on California political candidates and campaigns. I wouldn’t know from experience but I’d bet you can make a lot of friends with that much money dropping out of your pockets, year after year.

These friends might attach more importance to Big Oil’s concerns about over-regulation than they would to a resident who might not have the funds to contribute to anyone’s campaign fund.

A recent report by the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment Institute (ACCE) and Common Cause, “Big Oil Floods the Capitol: How California’s Oil Companies Funnel Funds into the Legislature,” speaks to the extreme power of the Oil and Gas Lobby, as well as the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) in Sacramento.

Dan Bacher, California Central Valley reporter for IndyBay, in his review of the report, noted that the

“fact that the oil industry is the largest corporate lobby in California, one that dominates environmental politics like no other industry“ makes California “much closer to Louisiana and Florida in its domination by corporate interests.”

Another way oil companies grease the wheels of influence is through their charitable giving in local oil and gas lobbycommunities. Where I live in Martinez, the yellow Shell refinery logo is on virtually all city events including our local Earth Day celebration located at the historic home of iconic environmentalist John Muir.  In Richmond, Chevron ladles out millions of dollars to local social services nonprofits working with low-income Richmond residents while simultaneously polluting their community.

These kinds of donations seem  to  reduce  short term costs for the local government, but there is a very real long term cost as well.

And one of the most insidious dynamics is that city budgets are structurally reliant on tax revenue from refineries.   According to the Contra Costa Times, “tens of millions in Chevron tax revenue bolster the [Richmond] city budget, providing police and other services that similarly sized cities in Contra Costa County can only dream about.”

It certainly seems like Big Oil has a stranglehold on California politics and regulatory agencies. Recently, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) came out in favor of Chevron’s expansion project.  After being advised by members of the Stationary Source committee that the appropriate behavior would be to merely answer questions at the Richmond meetings, BAAQMD Chief Air Pollution Control Officer, Jack Broadbent, chose to sign up as a speaker at both Richmond public meetings. He spoke in favor of the Chevron project and formally stated that there was no scientifically feasible way to mitigate condensable particulate matter for the Chevron project. This kind of emission from refineries is composed of carcinogenic particles about 1 micron in width that can lodge deep down in your lungs – see reference below.

microns

Prior to the two Richmond meetings, it had been clearly spelled out for the BAAQMD Stationary Source committee by multiple experts (with Broadbent present) that there was a mitigation technique (SCAQMD FEA Rule 1105.1) that would lessen pollution in Richmond by some 56 tons of the worst stuff you can breathe per year. And it has been mitigated since 2003 in the South Coast Air Quality Management District. So, choosing not to mitigate the really dangerous stuff pouring out of Chevron, like cancer-causing condensable particulate matter, is an impossible conclusion to reach by the authority charged with air quality control. Especially when you know otherwise. This is a 56 ton stain on the BAAQMD board and staff. And 56 tons of micron sized particles are unnecessarily heading for the lungs of the men, women, children, and animals that live or work in Richmond over the next year.

Is anyone at these BAAQMD meetings pushing for cleaner air except the community rights advocates?  What influence removes the teeth from the bill, waters down the regulation at the last minute, and causes people to lose their most basic moral compass?  A healthy community and environment should always be the priority.  And nothing should influence you to believe otherwise.

-Tom Griffith, Martinez Environmental Group, August 14, 2014.

Blame the Environmentalists – a script in four despicable acts

Repost from The Post Carbon Institute

Blame the Environmentalists

Posted Aug 11, 2014 by Richard Heinberg
Confidential image via shutterstock.

Here’s The Script, in four despicable acts:

Act 1. Fracking boom goes bust as production from shale gas and tight oil wells stalls out and lurches into decline.
Act 2. Oil and gas industry loudly blames anti-fracking environmentalists and restrictive regulations.
Act 3. Congress rolls back environmental laws.
Act 4. Loosened regulations do little to boost actual oil and gas production, which continues to tank, but the industry wins the right to exploit marginal resources a little more cheaply than would otherwise have been the case.

You can bet The Script is being written in operational detail right now at corporate headquarters in Oklahoma City and Houston, and in the offices of PR firms in New York and Boston. Each of its elements has the inevitability of events in a Shakespearean tragedy.

It’s fairly clear that the fracking bubble will burst soon—almost certainly within the decade. Our ongoing analysis at Post Carbon Institute documents the high per-well decline rates (a typical well’s production drops 70% during the first year), the high variability of production potential within geological formations being tapped, and the dwindling number of remaining drilling sites in the few “sweet spots” that offer vaguely profitable drilling potential. Meanwhile, as the Energy Information Administration (EIA) has recently documented, the balance sheets of fracking companies are loaded with debt while surprisingly short on profits from sales of product—with real profits coming mostly from sales of assets (drilling leases).

The industry continues to claim that tight oil and shale gas are “game changers” and that these resources will last many decades if not centuries. Though the CEOs of companies engaged in shale gas and tight oil drilling are undoubtedly aware of what’s going on in their own balance sheets, hype is an essential part of their business model—which can be summarized as follows:

Step 1. Borrow money and use it to lease thousands of acres for drilling.
Step 2. Borrow more money and drill as many wells as you can, as quickly as you can.
Step 3. Tell everyone within shouting distance that this is just the beginning of a production boom that will continue for the remainder of our lives and the lives of our children, and that everyone who invests will get rich.
Step 4. Sell drilling leases to other (gullible) companies at a profit, raise funds through Initial Public Offerings or bond sales, and use the proceeds to hide financial losses from your drilling and production operations.

In the financial industry this would be recognized as a variation on the old “pump and dump” scam, yet the US government’s own EIA has just quietly confirmed that this is standard practice in the companies responsible for the “miraculous” US oil and gas renaissance that other departments of government are relying on for job creation projections, future tax revenues, and (reputed) energy export clout in the new cold war against Russia.

The bursting of the fracking bubble will have almost nothing to do with environmentalists, but they have deliberately and courageously put themselves in harm’s way. Fracking has terrible impacts on water, air, soil, human health, the welfare of livestock and wildlife, and the climate.

Hundreds of local anti-fracking groups have sprung up across the country in recent years, often started by ordinary citizens who suddenly found their wells fouled, their livestock sickened, or their children suffering from headaches and nosebleeds as a result of nearby fracking operations. Yet it has often been difficult for environmental scientists to document such impacts, due to deliberate efforts on the part of industry to impede studies and publications (for example, requiring non-disclosure agreements where complaints are met with cash settlements); indeed, industry spokespeople continue to deny that fracking is responsible for any environmental or human health problems. The industry despises environmentalists. But the real motivation for The Script is not petulance or revenge.

No, this is all business. Environmentalists will merely be handy scapegoats. Blaming environmentalists for the bursting of the fracking bubble will divert public attention from the industry’s own bad business practices. But even more usefully, telling receptive members of Congress that falling oil and gas production rates are due to anti-fracking, fear-mongering, business-hating enviros will set the stage for new and powerful calls to roll back local, state, and national regulations. Congress’s likely response: “Poor you! What can we do to help? How about some further exemptions to the Clean Air and Clean Water acts? Maybe a preemption of local fracking ordinances with a new industry-friendly national rule? Would you care for some drilling leases on millions of acres of federal land as an appetizer, while you’re waiting? They’re on the house.”

The industry has a lot to gain by portraying itself as the victim of powerful environmental interests. But will this gambit actually initiate a new round of oil and gas production growth? That’s remotely possible, since there are still billions of tons of low-grade hydrocarbon resources trapped beneath American soil. But don’t count on it. It takes money to drill, even if it’s other people’s money. As the quality of available resources declines, the amount of money needed to yield each new increment of energy from those resources grows. The industry will have to find and persuade a new flock of investors, which is likely to be difficult once shale gas and tight oil production is clearly headed south with an accelerating trend. Carrying loads of debt has been relatively easy due to ultra-low interest rates; if the Federal Reserve decides to let rates drift back upward, this alone could be a stake through the industry’s heart.

One way or another, the current fracking bubble is likely to constitute the last gasp of production growth for US oil and gas. The Script can’t solve all the industry’s problems. But it might yield a few consolation prizes.

What could keep The Script from succeeding? The industry’s PR offensive will be much less effective if mainstream media prominently and repeatedly publish good analyses of what’s going on in the geology of the fracking fields and the balance sheets of the drilling companies; and if public officials understand and talk about the real reasons for the coming stall and drop in US oil and gas production.

Both of these developments could in turn be facilitated by EIA doing its job. The Agency’s recent report was an excellent first step. The EIA works for the American people, not the oil and gas industry. Where the interests of the people and those of the industry diverge, it’s clear where the Agency’s loyalties should lie. Here’s an open plea to Agency officials: Please follow the evidence and tell public officials and the American people the real story of what’s happening as the national fracking boom turns to bust. You’re the authority everyone looks to.

Big oil producers in Texas shifting to crude-by-rail

Repost from Midland Reporter-Telegram
[Editor: Significant quote: ““The Permian Basin may be a lot larger than the Bakken and Eagle Ford combined….”  Note: I have added a map of the Permian Basin below this article.  – RS]

Basin operators increase interest in shipping oil by rail

By Mella McEwen. July 31, 2014

Oil Trains

Billions of dollars have been pouring into the Permian Basin in recent years as pipelines rush to help producers move their crude and natural gas to market.

Despite the investment in new pipelines and gathering lines and expansion of existing lines, takeaway capacity remains tight and producers are increasingly turning to the railroads for relief.

Using trains to move crude to market is nothing new, points out Bruce Carswell, West Texas operations manager for Iowa Pacific Holdings. “There has been, over time, crude oil moving by rail out of the Permian Basin almost since the beginning” of oil production, he said.

The increase in pipeline construction has not kept pace with the increase in production from drilling activity, he said, and the railroads his company operators are seeing increased shipments across the board.

Judging by the ringing of his phone, Christopher Keene, president and chief executive officer of Rangeland Energy, says demand for moving Permian Basin crude by rail is growing. His Sugar Land-based company is in the process of constructing the Rangeland Integrated Oil System in the Delaware Basin. A rail terminal is under construction near Loving, New Mexico that will open in October with truck-to-rail transload operations. Initial capacity will be 10,000 barrels a day, eventually growing to high-speed unit train loading capacity of over 100,000 barrels a day. It will be served by the BNSF Railway.

Rangeland is also planning its RIO Pipeline, which will connect the new RIO Hub in Loving to the RIO State Line Terminal and then Midland, which will provide connections to various terminals and interstate pipelines to Cushing and the Gulf Coast.

Carswell’s company operates two railroads, the Texas-New Mexico from Monahans to Hobbs and Lovington and the West-Texas Lubbock, which runs from Lubbock to Seagraves and a line that runs from Levelland to Whiteface.

While new pipelines will come online later this year and into next year, Carswell said, “But my observation is they’re drilling a lot more wells, too.”

Producers, observed Khory Ramage, president of Ironhorse Energy Partners, didn’t expect as big an increase in production as has been seen.

“It just accelerated,” said Ramage, whose company is building a rail terminal at Artesia. The company, which he founded with brother Kyle, already has laid 7,000 feet of track and connected to the BNSF main line. The first phase of the development calls for 18,000 feet of track to accommodate rail cars unloading proppants. By the time development of the unit train terminal is done, there will be nine-and-a-half miles of track with a loop track to hold 200 loaded railcars at once.

“The Permian Basin may be a lot larger than the Bakken and Eagle Ford combined,” he said. “Bringing production into and out of the market is vital.” He reported that his company is talking to two different entities about moving their production.

Keene said his company “just landed the 800 pound gorilla out there in the Permian Basin,” a name he was not yet ready to announce.

The rising use of rail to move crude production has caught the public’s attention recently in the aftermath of the derailment in Canada that killed over 40 people as well as derailments that have resulted in spills. New safety regulations are being proposed by the federal government, something Carswell said the industry welcomes because it has been waiting for the federal government to approve new standards for awhile.

“There’s been a fair amount of effort to improve the safety aspect of moving any flammable liquid,” he said.

Keene said he is glad there is a conversation about safety and said he sees three areas where change is occurring or needed: Safer rail cars need to be designed, the railways themselves need to be maintained and speed in certain areas should be addressed.

“I’m a firm believer rail is here to stay,” Keene said, “if it’s done the right way, in a safe and environmentally friendly manner. I think the industry is going to continue getting better.”

For his part, Ramage sees a need for both rail and pipelines, saying there will always be options for rail. He saw the impact on rail demand with the rise in production from the Bakken in North Dakota and Wyoming. That prompted him and his brother to form Ironhorse.

Keene said the Delaware Basin is different in that the crude seems to want to move by pipeline, but when it can’t, for whatever reason, producers are turning to railroads.

Another benefit of railroads, Carswell said, is they offer producers flexibility as to where to send their commodities, especially given the price differentials. “This week, shipments may go to the Gulf Coast but next month they may go to the West Coast or the East Coast.”

“What’s predominantly driving this is the price differentials” between West Texas Intermediate-Midland, West Texas Intermediate Cushing and even Louisiana Light Sweet, Keene said, a gap that has reached as much as $20. “That’s huge,” he said.

Another driver, he said, is pipeline constraints, and even though significant new and expanded capacity is expected in the coming year, he said price differentials are still playing a role.

Ramage said flexibility is important, especially as traditional pipeline destinations like Cushing, Oklahoma and the Gulf Coast are becoming inundated with light sweet crude. In the 1990s, he noted, refineries were retrofitted to process heavier, more sulfur-laden crudes that were being imported, making them slower to respond to the rise of light sweet crudes from unconventional shale plays.

That quality, Keene said, is the third driver in rail demand. “A lot of the new crude is outside pipeline specifications” of 42 API Gravity, though some pipelines have inched that up to 44 API Gravity. Much of the crudes now coming from shale plays are 45 to 55 API Gravity, he said and can even be considered condensate or natural gasoline.

Producers then have three options, Keene said: Rail the crude to a splitter, where the condensate is split into different components like distillates and naphtha, send it by rail to Canada for use as diluents or send it by rail to coastal terminals where, hopefully, the government will classify it as stabilized condensates that can be exported overseas.

Allowing exports could be key to the industry’s future, Ramage said.

“The only concern is if the government doesn’t consider the importance of lifting the export ban,” he said. “We may see prices decrease and the energy revolution we’re experiencing slow down.

Map of the Permian Basin:

 

 

Global oil market: demand for road fuels has peaked and is now falling

Repost from The Economist
[Editor: An interesting European perspective on the future of world oil production and sales.  Note references to Valero near the end.  – RS]

A fuel’s errand

Making the most of a difficult business

| RUNCORN

THE sprawling acres of pipes, towers and tanks, which smash and rebuild hydrocarbon chains to turn crude oil into petrol, diesel and other useful stuff are vast and complicated. But the impressive scale of oil refineries is not matched by their profits. Refining in Britain is a miserable business these days.

In the 1960s big oil companies were so sure that demand for petrol would rise forever that they built the refineries to match. But demand for road fuels has peaked and is now falling—by 8% between 2007 and 2011. High fuel prices and stalling sales of vehicles that are anyway far more efficient are to blame. The result is wafer-thin margins and closures. Since 2009 two British refineries, at Coryton in Essex and in Teesside, have shut down. All but one of the remaining seven has been sold or been put up for sale in recent years.

Refineries operate in a global market. Petrol and diesel can be sent by tanker around the globe as readily as crude. Competing with sparkly, super-efficient new refineries in Asia and the Middle East is hard. Moreover, Britain’s older refineries were designed to produce petrol, which is increasingly the wrong fuel. Petrol sales by volume fell by 34% in the decade to 2011 while diesel grew by 73%. Around 40% of diesel is now imported. Nor do British refineries produce enough kerosene, which powers passenger jets, to supply the home market.

Big oil firms have sold up, preferring to invest in exploration and production. But why was anyone buying? For one thing, refineries are going cheap. Shell sold Stanlow to Essar Oil, an Indian firm, in 2011 for $350m (then £220m). In the same year Valero, an American refiner, bought Pembroke from Chevron for $730m.

The efforts to squeeze more returns from Stanlow show how refining can pay. Independent refiners like Essar and Valero are prepared to spend more time and money than big oil firms. Expertise and investment has put Stanlow, a 75m barrels-a-year refinery, well on the way in its plan to improve margins by $3 a barrel by 2014.

Essar aims to make Stanlow at least break even in bad times (in 2011 two-thirds of European refineries were losing money) and make decent profits when conditions improve. Generating energy using gas and tweaking technology to take crude from sources other than the North Sea, at better prices, is helping. Stanlow also has some natural advantages. It is the only refinery in the north-west and the closest to Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham. Though refined fuel can be moved by pipeline, some 55% of the refinery’s output goes “off the rack”, loaded into road tankers to feed a big local market. More distant refineries, with higher transport costs, would have trouble competing.

But the market for fuel is still shrinking and tiny margins mean profits can be wiped out by small shifts in the price of crude or other costs. In the past five years Europe has lost 2.2m barrels a day (b/d) of refining capacity. Volker Schultz, Essar Oil’s boss in Britain, reckons that another 1m b/d needs to go. But that is not his only concern. Efforts in Britain to introduce a carbon floor-price will put its refineries at a disadvantage to European ones, and European environmental legislation will make the whole continent’s refineries even less competitive. It must seem to the industry as if it has a large hole in its tank and a small patch to fix it.

 

For safe and healthy communities…