Generic Hero BannerGeneric Hero Banner
Latest market news

US FTC request delays Chesapeake gas merger to 2H 2024

  • Market: Natural gas
  • 05/04/24

The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is seeking more information on US natural gas producer Chesapeake Energy's planned acquisition of rival Southwestern Energy, delaying the companies' expected consummation of the deal.

Chesapeake and Southwestern each received FTC requests for more information about the transaction on Thursday, delaying the expecting deal closing until the second half of 2024, the companies said Friday in regulatory filings.

The companies in January said they expected the $7.4bn all-stock transaction to close in the second quarter.

The deal would create the largest US gas producer by volume. Chesapeake's and Southwestern's combined output in the Haynesville and Appalachia basins in the fourth quarter was 7.9 Bcf/d (224mn m3/d) of natural gas equivalent (Bcfe/d).

Upon closing, Chesapeake and Southwestern would be the most active operators in the Haynesville shale by number of drilling rigs, according to analysts at East Delay Analytics. This would give them a strong foothold in a gas field poised for growth as a wave of LNG export terminals comes on line along the US Gulf coast in 2025 and beyond.

The current top US gas producer by volume is EQT, which boosted its production capacity to 6 Bcfe/d after acquiring the 800mn cfe/d THQ Appalachia in August. That transaction also had been delayed by a "second request" from the FTC, and the FTC has also requested more information about pending oil megadeals between Chevron and Hess and between ExxonMobil and Pioneer Natural Resources.

Under FTC chair Lina Khan, a proponent of stronger antitrust enforcement, second requests from the FTC have become more common.More than 50 US House and Senate Democrats in a March letter urged the FTC to ramp up scrutiny of oil mergers, asserting the deals "aren't just about efficiency or lowering costs" but about "buying out the competition (to) boost profits at the expense of consumers."

"Second requests" from the FTC stem from the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, which bars certain mergers and acquisitions from transpiring without detailed information first being exchanged between the involved parties, the FTC, and the antitrust division of the US Department of Justice.


Sharelinkedin-sharetwitter-sharefacebook-shareemail-share

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News
14/04/25

Shale patch on edge after tariff drama

Shale patch on edge after tariff drama

New York, 14 April (Argus) — US president Donald Trump's back and forth over tariffs that sent oil prices tumbling to a four-year low last week has sparked jitters across the shale patch, although most producers are likely to take their time to respond. The oil and gas industry, one of Trump's biggest cheerleaders and donors during his election campaign, has been taken aback by the speed and scale of the president's escalating trade wars and executives are signalling growing impatience. Meanwhile, Trump's "Drill, baby, drill" mantra is even less likely to become a reality now, after oil slid below the $65/bl level that executives surveyed by the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank last month warned was needed to profitably sink a new well. Trump's imposition of punitive tariffs on nearly every major US trading partner led to a sell-off in stock, bonds and commodity markets until he announced a 90-day pause for most nations — except China — on 9 April. While it may be too early for talk about dropping rigs and curtailing production, companies will face tough questions from analysts about their contingency plans when first-quarter results start coming through later this month. One key difference from previous downturns in 2014 and 2020 is that exploration and production (E&P) firms are in a better position this time, with less debt on their balance sheets and more modest growth plans, which may help limit the initial fallout. But higher costs owing to tariffs on steel imports could offset the efficiency savings that have kept production going in an era of restrained spending. "E&Ps are likely to mostly take a wait-and-see approach — with a high level of uncertainty about future policy — and not prematurely lay down rigs," consultancy Enverus principal analyst Andrew Dittmar says. "If prices are weak headed into 2026, that is where you are likely to see a more material reduction in drilling budgets. Feeling dominated The shale industry has welcomed Trump's "energy dominance" agenda and his promise of a permitting overhaul. But cracks are appearing in that relationship because of his stop-start policy on tariffs. "This administration better have a plan," Diamondback Energy president Kaes Van't Hof said in a social media post, in a direct appeal to energy secretary Chris Wright. Shale is the "only industry that actually built itself in the US, manufactures in the US, grew jobs in the US and improved the trade deficit — and by proxy GDP — in the US over the past decade", Van't Hof, who is due to become Diamondback chief executive later this year, said. His company became the largest pure-play producer in the prolific Permian basin of west Texas and southeast New Mexico following its $26bn takeover of Endeavor Energy Resources last year. While few public producers were planning any kind of meaningful growth this year as higher dividends and buy-backs continue to be the priority, even that could eventually find itself on the chopping block. "The corporate reality for public players means that already modest growth could be at risk if prices remain near $60/bl," Rystad Energy vice-president for North American oil and gas Matthew Bernstein says. Little in the way of growth was forecast outside the core Permian this year even before Trump rolled out his tariffs. A prolonged period of lower prices could spur a downturn in the top-performing US basin. A combination of short-term activity levels, investor distributions and production could be sacrificed in order to defend margins, according to Rystad. And producers in the Delaware sub-basin could be especially vulnerable, given the region's steep initial decline rates, high well costs and large capital return requirements, the consultancy says. By Stephen Cunningham WTI breakeven price Nymex WTI futures month 1 Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more
News

Brunei LNG undergoes unplanned downtime


14/04/25
News
14/04/25

Brunei LNG undergoes unplanned downtime

Singapore, 14 April (Argus) — Brunei's 7.2mn t/yr Brunei LNG export terminal experienced an operational upset on 11 April, but there were no reported injuries or damages to its assets, the firm said in a notice. "Normalisation process is currently in progress," the firm added. Visible flaring and black smoke from the plant may be observed during this time, but the situation is under control and poses no risk to the surrounding community or environment, the firm reported. Brunei LNG cancelled its tender offering a cargo on a fob basis for loading on 22 June , likely as a result of the operational upset. The tender was initially due to close on 17 April. It is still uncertain when the export terminal will resume normal operations. By Joey Chan Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

US tariffs cast a shadow on global gas market


11/04/25
News
11/04/25

US tariffs cast a shadow on global gas market

Steel can make up nearly a third of an LNG terminal's pricetag, so the new levies could push up costs and push back start-up dates, writes Xiaoyi Deng London, 11 April (Argus) — US president Donald Trump's volatile tariff policy and some of the countermeasures already announced by large trade partners are unlikely to cause any direct disruption to global gas markets. But they will have a direct impact on future US liquefaction capacity. And the indirect effects on gas supply and demand could be huge, stemming from a weaker macroeconomic outlook, fuel substitution and inflationary pressures on infrastructure development. US LNG developers hailed Trump's return to office, after complaining that his predecessor complicated the issuance of additional export licences. But Trump's imposition of 25pc tariffs on all foreign-sourced steel and aluminum, from 12 March, will increase infrastructure costs in the US' upstream and midstream sectors. These present an immediate risk for US LNG developers, particularly for the five projects under construction and the six others expected to reach final investment decisions (FIDs) this year. Metals account for up to 30pc of the cost of an LNG export plant. A terminal can cost $5bn-25bn to build, depending on its size, with steel used for pipelines, tanks and other structural frameworks. Facilities can be built using some domestically produced metal, but higher prices for this might lead to construction and FID delays for the country's planned liquefaction projects. US tariffs' primary effect on the domestic gas market stems from duties levied on non-energy goods used by the oil and gas industry, including steel and specialised pipeline components such as valves and compressors, which are imported. The US remains a net natural gas importer from Canada , but these flows are unlikely to be affected by trade tariffs, given the lack of alternative supply sources available to some northern US states. Tariff baiting Trump's latest tariff round , unveiled on 2 April, involves a a minimum 10pc on all foreign imports from 5 April,with much higher tariffs on selected countries that briefly came into force on 9 April, before Trump bowed to panic in financial markets and announced a 90-day pause. China is the key exception. It has announced retaliatory tariffs that could disrupt US energy exports, resulting in an escalation that leaves the overall levy at 145pc in the US and 125pc in China. China had already stopped importing US LNG earlier this year. But disruption to trade between the world's two largest economies may weigh heavily on manufacturing activity in China, in turn reducing industrial gas demand. And the ripple effects of disruption to US LPG exports to China may alter fuel-switching economics in the region and beyond. Most other countries in Asia-Pacific have opted not to follow China's lead by retaliating. The Japanese government intends to negotiate a better tariff deal and is considering investing in the US' proposed 20mn t/yr Alaska LNG export project as part of wider efforts to reduce its trade surplus with the US. Countries in Asia-Pacific have been hit with some of the highest of Trump's targeted duties. The EU is keeping retaliatory measures on the table, but these are unlikely to involve US LNG. Europe has become much more reliant on LNG imports after losing the bulk of its Russian pipeline supply, and imposing tariffs on energy imports would only reignite inflationary pressures that European countries have tried to curb over the past three years. The bloc says it is ready to negotiate on possibly increasing its US LNG imports to reduce its trade surplus and would axe tariffs on industrial imports if the US agrees to do the same. But Trump says this is not enough, citing the EU's upcoming Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism as one of the "unfair trade practices" that justifies a tariff response. US LNG project pipeline mn t/yr Project Capacity Expected start/FID Under construction Plaquemines 19.2 2025 Corpus Christi stage 3 12.0 2025 Golden Pass 18.1 2026 Rio Grande 17.6 2027 Port Arthur 13.5 2027 Waiting for final investment decision Delfin FLNG 1 13.2 mid-2025 Texas LNG 4.0 2025 Calcasieu Pass 2 28.0 mid-2025 Corpus Christi train 8-9 3.3 2025 Louisiana LNG 16.5 mid-2025 Cameron train 4 6.8 mid-2025 Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Q&A: IMO GHG scheme in EU ETS could be 'challenging'


11/04/25
News
11/04/25

Q&A: IMO GHG scheme in EU ETS could be 'challenging'

London, 11 April (Argus) — Delegates have approved the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism proposal at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting. Argus Media spoke to ministerial adviser and Finland's head representative at the IMO delegation talks, Anita Irmeli, on the sidelines of the London MEPC meeting. What is your initial reaction to the text? We are happy and satisfied about the content of the agreed text, so far. But we need to be careful. This week, all member states were able to vote. But in October, when adaption will take place, only those states which are parties to Marpol Annex VI will be able to vote if indeed a vote is called for, and that changes the situation a little bit. Here when we were voting, a minority was enough — 40 votes. But if or when we vote in October, then we need two thirds of those party to Marpol Annex VI to be in favour of the text. Will enthusiasm for the decision today remain by October? I'm pretty sure it will. But you never know what will happen between now and and the next six months. What is the effect of the decision on FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS? Both FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS have a review clause. This review clause states that if we are ambitious enough at the IMO, then the EU can review or amend the regulation. So of course, it is very important that we first consider if the approved Marpol amendments are ambitious enough to meet EU standards. Only after that evaluation, which won't be until well after October, can we consider these possible changes. Do you think the EU will be able to adopt these the text as it stands today? My personal view is that we can perhaps incorporate this text under FuelEU Maritime, but it may be more challenging for the EU ETS, where shipping is now included. What was the impact of US President Donald Trump's letter on the proceedings? EU states were not impacted, but it's difficult to say what the impact was on other states. By Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

IMO approves two-tier GHG pricing mechanism


11/04/25
News
11/04/25

IMO approves two-tier GHG pricing mechanism

London, 11 April (Argus) — Delegates have approved the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism proposal at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting, pending an adoption vote at the next MEPC in October. The proposal passed by a majority vote, with 63 nations in favor including EU states, the UK, China and India, and 16 members opposed, including Mideast Gulf states, Russia, and Venezuela. The US was absent from the MEPC 83 meeting, and 24 member states abstained. The proposal was accompanied by an amendment to implement the regulation, which was approved for circulation ahead of an anticipated adoption at the October MEPC. Approval was not unanimous, which is rare. If adoption is approved in October at a vote that will require a two-thirds majority, the maritime industry will become the first transport sector to implement internationally mandated targets to reduce GHG emissions. The text says ships must initially reduce their fuel intensity by a "base target" of 4pc in 2028 ( see table ) against 93.3 gCO2e/MJ, the latter representing the average GHG fuel intensity value of international shipping in 2008. This gradually tightens to 30pc by 2035. The text defines a "direct compliance target", that starts at 17pc for 2028 and grows to 43pc by 2035. The pricing mechanism establishes a levy for excessive emissions at $380 per tonne of CO2 equivalent (tCO2e) for ships compliant with the minimum 'base' target, called Tier 2. For ships in Tier 1 — those compliant with the base target but that still have emission levels higher than the direct compliance target — the price was set at $100/tCO2e. Over-compliant vessels will receive 'surplus units' equal to their positive compliance balance, expressed in tCO2e, valid for two years after emission. Ships then will be able to use the surplus units in the following reporting periods; transfer to other vessels as a credit; or voluntarily cancel as a mitigation contribution. IMO secretary general Arsenio Dominguez said while it would have been more preferable to have a unanimous outcome, this outcome is a good result nonetheless. "We work on consensus, not unanimity," he said. "We demonstrated that we will continue to work as an organization despite the concerns." Looking at the MEPC session in October, Dominguez said: "Different member states have different positions, and there is time for us to remain in the process and address those concerns, including those that were against and those that were expecting more." Dominguez said the regulation is set to come into force in 2027, with first revenues collected in 2028 of an estimated $11bn-13bn. Dominguez also said there is a clause within the regulation that ensures a review at least every five years. By Hussein Al-Khalisy, Natália Coelho, and Gabriel Tassi Lara IMO GHG reduction targets Year Base Target Direct Compliance Target 2028 4% 17% 2029 6% 19% 2030 8% 21% 2031 12% 25% 2032 17% 30% 2033 21% 34% 2034 26% 39% 2035 30% 43% Source: IMO Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Generic Hero Banner

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more