• 1 hour This Country Produces 39% Of The World’s Uranium
  • 2 hours Australia Can Achieve A Zero-Carbon Gas Grid By 2050
  • 4 hours Is A Russia-Cuba Energy Deal In The Works?
  • 3 days Iraq Begins To Rebuild Largest Refinery
  • 3 days Canadian Producers Struggle To Find Transport Oil Cargo
  • 3 days Venezuela’s PDVSA Makes $539M Interest Payments On Bonds
  • 3 days China's CNPC Considers Taking Over South Pars Gas Field
  • 3 days BP To Invest $200 Million In Solar
  • 3 days Tesla Opens New Showroom In NYC
  • 3 days Petrobras CEO Hints At New Partner In Oil-Rich Campos Basin
  • 3 days Venezuela Sells Oil Refinery Stake To Cuba
  • 3 days Tesla Is “Headed For A Brick Wall”
  • 4 days Norwegian Pension Fund Set to Divest From Oil Sands and Coal Ventures
  • 4 days IEA: “2018 Might Not Be Quite So Happy For OPEC Producers”
  • 4 days Goldman Bullish On Oil Markets
  • 4 days OPEC Member Nigeria To Issue Africa’s First Sovereign Green Bond
  • 4 days Nigeria To Spend $1B Of Oil Money Fighting Boko Haram
  • 4 days Syria Aims To Begin Offshore Gas Exploration In 2019
  • 4 days Australian Watchdog Blocks BP Fuel Station Acquisition
  • 4 days Colombia Boosts Oil & Gas Investment
  • 5 days Environmentalists Rev Up Anti-Keystone XL Angst Amongst Landowners
  • 5 days Venezuelan Default Swap Bonds At 19.25 Cents On The Dollar
  • 5 days Aramco On The Hunt For IPO Global Coordinators
  • 5 days ADNOC Distribution Jumps 16% At Market Debut In UAE
  • 5 days India Feels the Pinch As Oil Prices Rise
  • 5 days Aramco Announces $40 Billion Investment Program
  • 5 days Top Insurer Axa To Exit Oil Sands
  • 6 days API Reports Huge Crude Draw
  • 6 days Venezuela “Can’t Even Write A Check For $21.5M Dollars.”
  • 6 days EIA Lowers 2018 Oil Demand Growth Estimates By 40,000 Bpd
  • 6 days Trump Set To Open Atlantic Coast To Oil, Gas Drilling
  • 6 days Norway’s Oil And Gas Investment To Drop For Fourth Consecutive Year
  • 6 days Saudis Plan To Hike Gasoline Prices By 80% In January
  • 6 days Exxon To Start Reporting On Climate Change Effect
  • 7 days US Geological Survey To Reevaluate Bakken Oil Reserves
  • 7 days Brazil Cuts Local Content Requirements to Attract Oil Investors
  • 7 days Forties Pipeline Could Remain Shuttered For Weeks
  • 7 days Desjardins Ends Energy Loan Moratorium
  • 7 days ADNOC Distribution IPO Valuation Could Be Lesson For Aramco
  • 7 days Russia May Turn To Cryptocurrencies For Oil Trade
Alt Text

Saudis To Slash Oil Exports To Asia By 100,000 Bpd

Saudi Arabia’s Energy Ministry announced…

Alt Text

Is Oil About To Collapse?

WTI could be about to…

Keystone XL Needs Much Higher Oil Prices To Be Viable

Pipeline

The Keystone XL Pipeline (KXL) is a bet on much higher oil prices several years from now. It will take at least $85 oil prices to develop the new oil sand projects needed to fill the pipeline.

It is also a bet that U.S. tight oil output will continue to grow and will need heavy oil to blend for refining. Both bets are risky.

A Bet On Higher Oil Prices

KXL would add about 830,000 barrels per day (b/d) to the 1.3 million b/d already moving through the base Keystone Pipeline system completed in 3 phases between 2010 and 2014 (Figure 1) when oil prices were more than $90 per barrel.

(Click to enlarge)

Figure 1. Location map of Keystone XL and Base Keystone pipeline systems. Source: TransCanada and Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc.

It was not until prices exceeded $70 per barrel in 2005 (December 2016 dollars) that oil sands expansion began to accelerate (Figure 2). Since then, production has almost doubled from 1.3 to 2.4 mmb/d and cumulative production has increased from 5.4 to 10 billion barrels.

(Click to enlarge)

Figure 2. Oil Sands Production Nearly Doubled After Oil Prices Exceeded $70 Per Barrel. Source: Statistics Canada and Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc.

By comparison, the Bakken and Eagle Ford tight oil plays have each produced 2.4 billion barrels. The Permian horizontal tight oil plays–Spraberry, Wolfcamp and Bone Spring–have produced less than 1 billion barrels.*



Table 1. Comparison of Oil Sands and U.S. tight oil plays. Source: Statistics Canada, EIA, Drilling Info and Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc.

In 2015, oil prices averaged only $43 per barrel. No new oil sand projects have been sanctioned since oil prices collapsed in 2014 although 3 pilot projects have been approved since prices moved into the $50 per barrel range. Approval is not the same as sanctioning and these 3 projects together would add only 35,000 b/d.

It seems unlikely that new greenfield projects will be sanctioned until oil prices move much higher (Canadian heavy oil (WCS) trades at a 25% discount to WTI). Assuming that prices stabilize in the $50 to $60 range, it is reasonable that pilots may evolve into brownfield expansion projects over the next year or two.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers estimates that annual oil sand production will grow 128,000 b/d until 2021 and then, grow more slowly at 59,000 b/d. If all of that new oil were going to KXL, it would not reach capacity for about 10 years. But other pipelines are already approved for expansion and will probably get much of the oil before KXL is completed.

TransCanada’s bet, therefore, is that oil prices will move much higher and more quickly than most forecasts anticipate and that the volumes will be there by the time that the pipeline is built.

Light Oil and Heavy Oil

U.S. tight oil plays produce ultra-light oil. Almost all of it is too light for refinery specifications. That means that it must be blended with heavy oil in order to be refined and that is why there is demand for Canadian heavy oil.

The Keystone XL Pipeline is, therefore, a bet that tight oil plays will continue for several decades. Related: Oil Prices Up On Prospect Of New Iranian Sanctions

Similarly, Canadian viscous, heavy oil must be diluted with ultra-light oil to move through pipelines. Because of that, Canada is the biggest importer of U.S. light oil.

The U.S. imports almost 3 times more oil from Canada than from Saudi Arabia (Figure 3). Imports from Canada are roughly equal to the amount from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Mexico, Colombia and Iraq combined.

(Click to enlarge)

Figure 3. The U.S. imports almost 3 times more oil from Canada than from Saudi Arabia. Source: EIA and Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc.

The average U.S. refinery is designed for 31° API gravity oil but 80% of domestic crude oil is more than 30° and 70% is more than 35° API gravity so it must be blended with heavier oil before it can be refined (Figure 4). The Keystone Pipeline carries oil that is approximately 22° API so the fit with lighter U.S. oil is perfect.

(Click to enlarge)

Figure 4. 80% of U.S. Crude Oil is greater than 30° API and 70% is greater than 35° API. Source: Drilling Info, EIA, Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc. and Crude Oil Peak.

The increasing percentage of ultra-light oil (>40° API) after 2011 shown in Figure 4 is because of the growth of tight oil plays. More than 95% of tight oil is greater than 30° API and these plays now account for more than half (52%) of U.S. output.

It is, therefore, no surprise that 98% of the oil imported by the U.S. is heavy that is, less than 35° API gravity (Figure 5). The biggest sources of heavy oil other than Canada are Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Mexico.

(Click to enlarge)

Figure 5. 98% of U.S. Imports Less Than 35° API Gravity. Source: Drilling Info, Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc. and Crude Oil Peak.

Production from Venezuela and Mexico is declining (Figure 6). Canada, Iraq and Saudi Arabia have strong production histories and are, therefore, more reliable long-term providers of heavy oil to the U.S. Canada has many advantages over other providers because of geographic proximity, supply security and price.

(Click to enlarge)

Figure 6. Mexico, Venezuela, Nigeria and Angola Have Declining Incremental Production. Source: EIA and Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc.

Venezuela has enormous reserves of heavy oil and declining production is mostly because of political and social instability. This could change but it is more likely that Venezuela’s problems will continue. Mexico’s production decline is more systemic because the country has not made a significant new discovery since 1980.

A Bet on Tight Oil

So far, so good for the Keystone XL Pipeline but what about the longevity of the tight oil plays?

Production from the Bakken and Eagle Ford plays is in marked decline and Permian tight oil production growth has slowed (Figure 7). This is despite record high numbers of producing wells in all 3 plays.

(Click to enlarge)

Figure 7. Bakken and Eagle Ford production are declining and Permian basin tight oil production growth has slowed. Source: Drilling Info, Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc. and Crude Oil Peak.

The Bakken and Eagle Ford plays have probably peaked based on remaining core area locations, generally poorer performance from recently drilled wells compared to older wells, and current rig activity. Assuming that oil prices recover to the $70 range in coming years, production should increase as more marginal locations become economically viable–just not to peak levels reached in 2015.

The Permian basin, on the other hand, should continue to grow for several years for all of the reasons that the Bakken and Eagle Ford will not. There are substantial areas in the Permian core that have not been fully developed. Well performance continues to improve and the horizontal rig count has increased 70% since mid-August to 243.

Most forecasts are optimistic about tight oil output. The EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2017 anticipates that tight oil production will decline in 2017 but recover to 2015 peak levels by 2019 (Figure 8). WTI oil prices are expected to be $64 per barrel then and slowly increase to $80 by 2025. Tight oil production will rise to 6 mmb/d by 2026.

(Click to enlarge)

Figure 8. EIA Forecast: Tight Oil Will Not Recover to 2015 Levels Until 2019 and Then Increase to 6 mmb/d by 2026. Source: EIA AEO 2017 and Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc.

Although the forecast seems reasonable, it assumes that 2016 was the oil-price floor and that prices will continue to increase. It also suggests that prices will not reach the $70 threshold for new oil sand projects for 5 years. Other forecasts like HSBC are more aggressive and anticipate mid-$70 WTI prices as early as 2018.

The Big Long

If the last few years since the oil-price collapse have taught us anything it is that prices are unlikely to move in one direction. Nor are they likely to conform to mainstream analyst views.

Markets have been driven partly by an expectation that prices must inevitably return to levels of at least $70 to $80 per barrel sooner than later. This belief has endured despite a persistent global supply surplus and outsized inventories. The long-anticipated OPEC deus ex machina was lowered onto the stage in late 2016 and markets responded enthusiastically. Yet WTI prices have not crossed $55 per barrel so far.

It is difficult to find supply-demand fundamentals support even for the limited price rally that began with the OPEC announcement. There may already be an expectation premium of $10-12 per barrel built into current prices. Yet markets don't always follow fundamentals in the short term although they return to them eventually. Related: The Oil War Is Only Just Getting Started

U.S. ultra-light oil production is a central component of the global supply dilemma. Permian basin companies are adding rigs like the boom days of 2011 to 2014 have already returned. When tight oil output is high, some fraction can neither be refined nor exported and simply adds to inventories. This occurs despite the best efforts of Canadian oil sand producers to bring as much heavy oil to the party as they can.

Oil consumption remains relatively weak in the U.S. This is disturbing against the backdrop of surging tight oil rig counts.

Consumption increased with very low oil prices in 2015 and early 2016 but not to the levels before the Financial Collapse of 2007-2008 (Figure 9). Most of the increase was from greater gasoline use and more refined products exports. Modestly increasing prices in 2016 dampened consumption suggesting that demand is highly price-sensitive.

(Click to enlarge)

Figure 9. Consumption fell >2 mmb/d after 2005 but recovered 1 mmb/d with increased refined product exports, lower oil prices & increased gasoline use. Source: EIA and Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc.

This does not represent peak demand. All credible forecast anticipate oil-demand growth over the next decade or so, albeit at a slower rate. Instead, it reflects an economy weakened by excessive debt and changes in Federal Reserve Bank monetary policy after mid-2014.

These rather gloomy observations may explain TransCanada's motivation to complete the Keystone XL Pipeline now. I'm talking about a long bet on oil prices.

Future supply constraints will become greater the longer new E&P project investments are deferred. At the same time, the decline of production from developed fields will be more pronounced. Improved production efficiency will further accelerate reserve depletion. Meanwhile, new field discoveries are at the lowest level in decades and the average reserve size of those discoveries has gotten smaller.

Oil prices will increase dramatically at some time in the next several years. That should lead to the next oil boom and the Keystone XL Pipeline will be there to provide heavy oil to U.S. tight oil plays.

There is little doubt that a supply crunch lurks in the future. The risk for the Keystone XL Pipeline is that much higher prices will collapse the global economy before new projects can fill the pipeline and pay out the investment.

*EIA’s Drilling Productivity Report estimate of 4.8 billion barrels includes all conventional production in the counties in which the tight oil plays are located

Matt Mushalik contributed to the research on light oil.

By Art Berman for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:




Back to homepage


Leave a comment
  • Joe on February 06 2017 said:
    Build it and they will come. Good article Art. Just the presence of the pipeline will provide a major incentive to kick start more oilsands production. These projects take years to develop and typically go ahead with only a vague guarantee of future prices. The pipeline is more impoortant than the present price when deciding to pull the trigger on the next phase.
  • zipsprite on February 06 2017 said:
    Excellent article. The only criticism I have to offer is there seems to be no accounting for the effect that electric cars will have on oil demand. I believe they will be adopted much more quickly and much more widely than is currently believed by experts. The advantages (which are increasing at a rapid pace- battery price and range improvement for example) will soon overwhelm petroleum based vehicles. The oil companies certainly don't believe this when they project oil consumption well north of 100MB/day and rising through the middle of the century. They are in for a rude awakening.
  • EdBCN on February 06 2017 said:
    How big a deal is it for oil consumption that a lot of the places that use oil or distillates to generate electricity are very quickly and aggressively adopting renewable energy? Places like Hawaii, a lot of islands in general, and the Persian gulf countries. I read recently about how the utility on Kauai has contracted for solar plus battery backup for half the cost of their petrol generated power. That seems like match, set and game for a lot of oil generated power. But not much oil is used for electricity, is it?
  • Rob on February 07 2017 said:
    Arthur seems to paint a picture where heavy Canadian bitumen are needed to offset light sweet oil from the US shale plays.

    However, that light, sweet oil we produce from the Bakken and the Permian can do just fine by themselves. They distill beautifully into mainly gasoline.

    The heavy bitumen from the Canadian tar sands on the other end are scraping the bottom of the barrel : distill to mostly pet-coke and heavy fuel oil, and require a massive amount of methane to extract and even be called liquid.

    Not to mention the environmental impacts of this ultra-heavy crap for the people downstream of the Atabasca river delta, the people along the pipeline, the people in the refinery areas in the Gulf, and the impact of increased carbon emissions on the rest of us.
  • Joe on February 09 2017 said:
    Rob, you are behind on refining technology. The pipeline spec bitumen which consists of bitumen mixed with condensate yields jet fuel, diesel and gasoline with the appropriate refining technology. Yes, bitumen needs heat heat to mobilize it but the light oil in the USA needs fracking, pumping huge amounts of fresh water, and plenty of diesel to power the frac pumpers. I favor both oil sands bitumen and frac derived light oil. There are buyers for all of it.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News