Latest market news

Trump seeks funds for oil, gas companies: Update 2

  • : Crude oil, Natural gas, Oil products
  • 20/04/21

Updates with details throughout

President Donald Trump has ordered his administration to come up with a plan to make funding available for oil and gas companies struggling from plunging demand caused by Covid-19 containment measures.

But doing so requires cooperation of Congress — and the Democrats in the US House of Representatives for weeks have been dismissive of what they see as a bailout for the oil and gas industry.

Trump said today he has instructed US energy secretary Dan Brouillette and US treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin to "formulate a plan which will make funds available" to help protect the industry and its workers.

"We will never let the great U.S. Oil & Gas Industry down," Trump said in a post on Twitter.

Brouillette today said possible help could involve finding a way for oil and gas companies to access the lending mechanisms that the US Congress created in its recent $2.2 trillion economic rescue package.

The Senate voted today to spend another $320bn to help small businesses maintain liquidity and prevent layoffs. The House is expected to approve the measure later this week.

But there is no direct mechanism to prioritize any of the economic stimulus funds for the oil industry. "This is something that we may need to go back to Congress and ask for funding," Mnuchin said today at a White House briefing, following a meeting with Brouillette and White House officials looking to implement Trump's order.

"We want to maintain our energy independence," Mnuchin said. "We are doing everything we can — obviously it is a tough situation," he said, citing the unprecedented decline in oil futures yesterday.

Nymex WTI May crude futures yesterday plunged to -$37.63/bl. As that contract expired today, prices settled at $10.01/bl, as traders tried to exit positions that would require taking physical delivery in Cushing, Oklahoma. The much more heavily traded June contract tumbled by $8.86/bl to $11.57/bl today.

Trump last night downplayed the price crash as "a financial squeeze" that would resolve once the prompt contract rolls over. But US Commodity Futures Trading Commission chairman Health Tarbert said today that the plunge in Nymex WTI May crude futures seems to have been a function of supply and demand rather than abnormal trading.

Low storage capacity, anemic demand and the impending arrival of tankers from Saudi Arabia are putting downward pressure on crude prices.

The administration once hoped to tap the funds Congress set aside for companies deemed to be of critical importance for national security to help oil companies. But a closer reading of the legislation shows that only firms providing supplies for the Defense Department and intelligence agencies would qualify for that provision, Mnuchin said.

Brouillette said the administration wanted to honor the free market system but also to support industry during "market anomalies" from Covid-19. He said the US has now contracted to store 23mn bl of crude in the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and is working with Treasury to extend lending to producers.

Another possible funding mechanism could be a proposal to purchase unproduced crude and count it as part of the SPR.

But those funding mechanisms could put the government in the position of lending to cash-strapped producers that were struggling before prices collapsed. That funding could also fuel concerns from Democrats that the oil sector got a "bailout" while small businesses struggle to obtain loans.

US lawmakers from oil producing states have lobbied Trump to impose restrictions or tariffs on imports of oil from Saudi Arabia and Russia, as a way to protect the US industry. But Brouillette today argued against a potential ban on crude imports, noting that some US refiners prefer to import heavy, sour crude that is not available domestically to operate profitably.

Brouillette also warned state regulators considering mandates to curb oil output against coordinating their efforts.

Wayne Christian, chairman of oil and gas regulator the Texas Railroad Commission, said today he had discussed curtailments with North Dakota and Oklahoma regulators as well as officials from Alberta, Canada's oil-rich western province.

State regulators are within their right to order such cuts in their own jurisdictions, but coordinating efforts with other states veers into "murky" legal areas of federal anti-trust laws, Brouillette said. "Whether or not they can collude to set a price is a gray legal area, a pretty murky area," Brouillette said. "It is not something most Americans would want to see here in the US."

By Chris Knight and Haik Gugarats


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.

Global bio-bunker demand to pick up, US left behind


24/10/04
24/10/04

Global bio-bunker demand to pick up, US left behind

New York, 4 October (Argus) — Tightening vessel carbon intensity indicator (CII) scores and looming 2025 FuelEU marine regulation are expected to raise biodiesel demand for bunkering, but non-competitive US prices should continue to weigh down on US bio-bunker demand. Houston B30, a blend of used cooking methyl ester (Ucome) and very low-sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO), in September averaged at $821/t, a $45/t premium to B30 sold in Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerp, and a $55/t premium to B24 sold in the west Mediterranean hub of Gibraltar and Algeciras (see chart) . Houston B30 was also priced at $115/t and $61/t premium to B24 sold in Singapore and Guangzhou, China, respectively. The price premium would continue to incentivize ship owners with global, ocean-going fleets to pick Asia first for their biodiesel bunker purchases, followed by northwest Europe and western Mediterranean. US demand for biodiesel for bunkering would continue to stagnate unless the US passes a legislation allowing Renewable Identification Number (RIN) credit under the US Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program be used by ocean-going vessels fueling with biodiesel in US ports. The legislation could level US' price playing field. Two bipartisan bills were put forward in support of renewable fuel for ocean-going vessels, one in the US Senate this year and one in the US House of Representatives last year, but they are currently dead in the water. Conventional marine fuels are priced cheaper than biodiesel and green varieties of LNG, ammonia, methanol, and hydrogen. But tightening International Maritime Organization (IMO) and EU regulations are forcing the hand of ship operators to consider green fuels to avoid hefty penalties and having their vessels suspended from trading. Ship owners whose vessels are outfitted with LNG-burning engines, are poised to have the lowest marine fuel expense heading into 2025, as fossil LNG is currently ship owners' cheapest low-carbon fuel option. But retrofitting a vessel to burn LNG could range from $5-$35mn, depending on the size of the vessel. Biodiesel, a plug-and-play fuel that does not require a vessel retrofit, is the second cheapest low-carbon fuel option after fossil LNG. IMO's CII regulation came into force in January 2023 and requires vessels over 5,000 gt to report their carbon intensity, which is then scored from A to E. The scoring levels are lowered yearly by about 2pc, so even a vessel with no change in CII could drop from C to D in one year. If a vessel receives a D score three years in a row or E score in the previous year, the vessel owner must submit a corrective actions plan. E scoring vessels could be prohibited from entering some ports' territorial waters, but this penalty is yet to be imposed on any E vessels. In 2023, the IMO reported that 40pc of the vessels scored A or B, 27pc scored C, 19pc scored D or E and 14pc were unresponsive. The EU's FuelEU maritime regulation will require ship operators traveling in, out and within EU territorial waters to gradually reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity on a lifecycle basis, starting with a 2pc reduction in 2025, 6pc in 2030 and so on until getting to an 80pc drop, compared with 2020 base year levels. It imposes a penalty of €2,400/t ($2,629/t) of VLSFO equivalent energy for vessel fleets exceeding its GHG limits. By Stefka Wechsler Biodiesel blends* Houston less global ports $/t Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Mideast crisis puts Iran’s energy facilities at risk


24/10/04
24/10/04

Mideast crisis puts Iran’s energy facilities at risk

Dubai, 4 October (Argus) — Iran's large-scale missile attack against Israel on 1 October pushed the Mideast Gulf region another step closer to all-out war, with Israel vowing to retaliate hard for what it saw as "a severe and dangerous escalation." But unlike previous exchanges, which have largely targeted military assets, critical energy infrastructure including oil facilities appear this time to be in Israel's crosshairs. President Joe Biden on 3 October said the US and Israel are discussing possible strikes on Iranian oil facilities as part of consultations on a response. The Biden administration would not provide any details and the only objection it has voiced publicly is against the prospect of an Israeli strike on sites associated with Iran's nuclear programme. The escalating conflict in the region, which began with a surprise cross-border attack by Gaza-based Hamas militants on Israel almost one year ago, has had a limited impact on oil prices, because the effect on physical supply has been almost non-existent despite the scale of the fighting and destruction in Gaza, northern Israel and southern Lebanon. Attacks by Iran-backed Houthi militants in Yemen on oil tankers in the Red Sea rerouted some oil trade without affecting global supply. That could change if Israel makes good on its threat to directly target Iranian oil infrastructure and, especially, if Iran retaliates — as it did in 2019 to a US attempt to cut off its exports — with indiscriminate attacks on oil tankers and infrastructure in the Mideast Gulf. But the extent of the effect on global supply and price will ultimately depend on Israel's intentions, and what kind of facilities are hit. "If the objective is to hurt the country economically, then the most obvious target would be Iran's oil export terminals," said Vortexa senior oil risk analyst Armen Azizian. Despite US sanctions, Iran continues to be a major crude producer — the third biggest in Opec — and a notable exporter. Oil exports averaged around 1.55mn-1.6mn b/d in the first half of this year, rising to 1.65mn-1.7mn b/d in July-August. Early indications suggest September exports were higher still. Iran has several terminals from where it exports its crude and condensate, all on its Mideast Gulf coast. But one, on Kharg Island, dwarves all others in terms of importance. "About 90-95pc of Iran's oil exports typically come out of Kharg, with the other 5-10pc coming out of considerably smaller terminals, such as Soroush, Sirri or Lavan," Azizian said. "Hitting one of those smaller streams wouldn't impact Iran too much, operationally. But if they decide to take Kharg offline, we're talking about a hit of around 1.5mn b/d to its export capacity." Knock-on effects When Iran was struggling to sell its oil because of sanctions the US imposed in 2018, it had upwards of 60mn-70mn bl in floating storage. But these have fallen to just shy of 40mn bl, which would only sustain exports of about 1.3mn b/d for a month, Azizian noted. Iran has onshore storage, but many of the biggest tanks are at Kharg, which could be at risk of damage should the terminal be targeted. An attack on Kharg Island would strike at the heart of the Iranian economy, given how big a chunk of Iran's foreign exchange revenues come from the sale of its oil. Nearly all Iran's exports are absorbed by refiners in China's Shandong province. But the effect of potentially removing 1.5mn b/d from global supply would be felt far beyond Iran and China, as global markets would be forced to adapt. Crude futures moved higher this week on the prospect of Israeli strikes against Iran. The Biden administration for the past year has worked to keep the conflict from escalating, in part because of the potential knock-on effects on oil prices — a key consideration in the US election campaign where Biden's vice-president, Kamala Harris, is facing former president Donald Trump. If the confrontation results in an Iranian outage, avoiding a price rise would require a co-ordinated move by the US and other large consumers and, possibly, by the wider Opec+ group, to ensure supplies can be brought to the market. Opec+ is holding back close to 6mn b/d of production under a series of formal and voluntary cuts, which it could bring back sooner than currently planned. But doing so in response to an attack on Iran could stoke tensions within Opec and between Iran and its Mideast Gulf Arab neighbours, which improved relations with Tehran in recent years. The US would be hard pressed to again guarantee the security of key oil infrastructure facilities across the region. The tepid initial US response to a 2019 attack on Saudi state-controlled Aramco's Abqaiq complex and to a 2022 attack on UAE energy facilities prompted regional producers to consider Washington's military security guarantee as falling short. Kpler senior oil analyst Homayoun Falakshahi sees the the probability of an attack on Kharg Island as low, given China's relations with Israel and Iran. "I imagine China will put as much pressure on Israel not to target Iran's exports," Falakshahi said. Refining plans Alternatively, Israel could opt to target one or more of Iran's 10 oil refineries or condensate splitters that are largely concentrated in the west of the country. Discussion at an industry conference in Fujairah this week about a possible Israeli retaliation centred on Iran's largest refinery, the recently expanded 630,000 b/d capacity Abadan in Khuzestan province. Targeting Abadan was seen as a less provocative move, while still providing a warning to Tehran that energy installations are ‘in play' and hitting Iran's domestic products supply. A hit to Abadan would be significant, but not impossible to navigate for Iran, according to Falakshahi, who notes it produces mostly fuel oil, a product primarily consumed domestically with some exported to Fujairah in the UAE, China and Singapore, among other destinations. Abadan produces other products such as gasoline, which Iran has recently had to begin importing again to meet demand, but output is only enough to meet around 12-13pc of consumption. "It will primarily impact the local market, but little else," Falakshahi said. "But not to the same extent as if, say, the 360,000 b/d Persian Gulf Star condensate splitter was targeted, as that alone delivers enough to meet around 20-25pc of local gasoline demand." Gasoline is a politically-sensitive issue in Iran, with even minor changes in the price of the road fuel sometimes sparking charged demonstrations and riots. More than 200 people were killed in riots in November 2019 triggered by a sudden cut to subsidies that resulted in a sharp increase in gasoline prices. Israel has so far not given any public hints as to when it plans to retaliate or how. But with tensions in the region already at the highest they have been for some years, Iran will be on high alert, and upping security where it can. A trading source told Argus that Iran's state-owned NIOC has in recent days moved many of its empty tankers away from Kharg Island. By Nader Itayim Iran’s oil refineries and terminals Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US tops expectations with 254,000 jobs in Sep


24/10/04
24/10/04

US tops expectations with 254,000 jobs in Sep

Houston, 4 October (Argus) — The US added more jobs than expected in September and the unemployment rate ticked down, signs the labor market is strengthening heading into the US presidential election. US nonfarm payrolls rose by 254,000 workers last month, and the jobless rate fell to 4.1pc, the Labor Department reported Friday. Gains in August were revised up by 17,000 to 159,000 and those in July were revised up by 55,000 to 144,000. September's job gains were much higher than the 140,000 estimated by economists in a Trading Economics survey. Job gains blew past expectations in the same month the Federal Reserve began cutting interest rates for the first time since 2020, citing concerns that a weakening labor market might pull down the overall economy. Odds of a quarter point rate cut at the next Fed meeting in November rose to 91pc today from about 68pc Thursday, according to fed funds futures markets, while odds of a half-point cut fell to 9pc. The Fed last month penciled in 50 basis points of cuts in the remainder of this year. Job gains were higher than the average monthly gains of 203,000 over the prior 12 months, the Labor Department reported. Employment continued to move higher in food services and drinking establishments, health care, government, social assistance and construction. The labor market was little affected by Hurricane Francine, which made landfall in Louisiana on 11 September, during the reference periods for the surveys that contribute to the report. Gains in restaurants and drinking places rose by 69,000 jobs, much higher than the average 14,000 added over the prior 12 months. Health care added 45,000 jobs, below the monthly average of 57,000. Government added 31,000 compared with monthly averages of 45,000. Social assistance added 27,000. Construction added 25,000, near the monthly average. Manufacturing lost 7,000 jobs, most of them in the auto industry. The unemployment rate fell from 4.2pc in August, still higher than the five-decade low of 3.4pc posted in early 2023. Average hourly earnings rose by 4pc in the 12 months through September, up from 3.8pc through August. By Bob Willis Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Ocean Petro Gulf to operate Jafza bitumen terminal


24/10/04
24/10/04

Ocean Petro Gulf to operate Jafza bitumen terminal

Mumbai, 4 October (Argus) — Dubai-based trading firm Ocean Petro Gulf (OPG) has leased an oil products and bitumen storage facility terminal in the Jebel Ali Free Zone (Jafza) from energy logistics firm Tristar, and will be the operator, according to market sources. OPG is planning to expand by building a 10,000t bitumen storage facility at the terminal in the near term. OPG has agreed with Tristar to construct the bitumen storage tank on expectations of rising demand in that location. The terminal was previously owned by Shell and was acquired by Tristar in mid-2022. The terminal has been leased out to OPG as of October under a long-term operator arrangement, but the duration of the lease was undisclosed. The terminal currently has a bitumen storage capacity of 11,000t, and can import and export about 350,000 t/yr of oil products. The operatorship agreement also includes an integrated 90,000 t/yr polymer modified bitumen (PMB) plant, drums filling facility and an emulsion plant. The terminal also has a bitumen and PMB testing facility. By Sathya Narayanan Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

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