Följ oss

Analys

Brent crude in non-USD as expensive as in 2011 to 2014

Publicerat

den

SEB - analysbrev på råvaror

SEB - Prognoser på råvaror - CommodityIn order to reach a consensus and keep the OPEC+ group united the latest proposal on the table for the upcoming meeting of OPEC+ on Friday and Saturday in Vienna is a modest increase of 300 to 600 k bl/d in 2H1. The proposal before the weekend by Saudi Arabia and Russia was an increase of 1.5 m bl/d. What is most imperative in our view is that the group is adaptive to market conditions going forward. Uncertainties on both the supply side and the demand side are significant. In the eyes of emerging markets (but also Norway) the oil price in local currency is today as high as it was when Brent traded at $110/bl from 2011 to 2014 with demand destruction naturally setting in at such a cost level. Rapidly escalating US – China trade tension is adding to global growth headwinds. With large uncertainties on the supply side the group should stay ready to increase production in order to avoid escalating pain for the consumers.

Bjarne Schieldrop, Chief analyst commodities at SEB

Bjarne Schieldrop, Chief analyst commodities

It turns out that Donald Trump’s tweets over the past months that “OPEC is at it again creating artificially high prices” are not just a whim. It is actually one of his core views going back more than 30 years. US lawmakers have tried to pass the NOPEC bill (“Non Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act”) for years. It will allow the US Government to sue OPEC for oil market manipulation. Earlier attempts to pass the bill have been blocked by President vetoes. Donald is however one of the big supporters of the bill. This bill is now rolling towards OPEC+ and the group certainly do not want to stir the pot by holding back to much oil creating too high prices.

Price action – Rebounding 2.6% ydy as OPEC+ seen to aim for modest compromise. Sinking back on trade war today

Following Friday’s 3.3% sharp sell-off on the back of Saudi Arabia’s comment that an increase in production is “inevitable” the Brent price yesterday rebounded 2.6% to $75.34/bl as the group was seen to aim for a modest compromise. An increase of 1.5 m bl/d has earlier been seen as the proposal by Russia and Saudi Arabia while the latest proposal said to be discussed is an output hike of 300 to 600 k bl/d. This helped the Brent price to rebound yesterday. This morning Brent is pulling back 0.6% to $74.9/bl following the queue of the sharp sell-off in Asian equities on fear that Donald Trump will add tariffs on an additional $200 billion worth of Chinese goods exported to the US.

Aiming for a compromise but adaption to market conditions will be key

In order to hold the OPEC+ group together and appease Iran, Iraq and Venezuela who have strongly opposed any increase in production the group now seems to aim for a compromise of a modest increase of 300 to 600 k bl/d at the upcoming meeting on Friday and Saturday this week. It has all the time been argued that any revival in production will be gradual and adapted to market conditions. To be reactive and adaptive to market conditions seems to be even more important now due to significant uncertainties for both supply and demand.

The global economy ex the US has been cooling since the start of the year and the US – China trade tension is escalating rapidly with an additional $200 billion worth of exports to the US at risk of getting tariffs. This is not good for global growth and for oil demand growth. The strengthening of the USD, especially versus emerging markets is bad both for global growth and for oil demand growth. An oil price of $75/bl seems fairly modest, neither too hot nor too cold. However, if we measure it in local currencies like the Norwegian krone the oil price now is just as high as it was during the period 2011 to 2014 when Brent crude was trading at around $110/bl. The same goes if we take JPM’s EM currency index and adjust Brent crude prices from July 2010. So in the eyes of the emerging market consumers the oil price today is just as expensive as it was during the 2011 to 2014 period. That means that demand destruction is naturally setting in at these prices for the EM’s. And, since EM’s holds the lion’s share of the world’s oil demand growth this is probably not insignificant. It is thus highly important that OPEC+ is sensitive, adaptive and reactive to oil demand conditions going forward.

The supply side is of course just as challenging to gauge as production in Venezuela is declining rapidly but could as well disrupt entirely and unpredictably. US sanctions towards Iran, a sharp decline in Nigeria’s production in June and increasing violence in Libya where the destruction of two of five crude storage tanks at Ras Lanuf“ may take years” to rebuild are all contributing to a highly unpredictable supply.

For a large share of the world’s consumers the oil price is already as high as it was during 2011 to 2014 and OPEC+ does definitely not want to risk that the oil price moves yet higher as the world economy is already facing challenges. Thus adaptivity to market conditions must be the most imperative goal of OPEC+ at the upcoming meeting this week as the goal of getting OECD inventories down to the rolling five year average has been reached. Thus aim for moderate increase in 2H18, but increase more if needed.

Ch1: The oil price for emerging markets is just as high today as it was in 2011 to 2014
Thus demand destruction is naturally setting in at such a price level with weakness in demand as a result

The oil price for emerging markets is just as high today as it was in 2011 to 2014

Ch2: OPEC+ produced 2 m bl/d less in May than it did in October 2016

On average since the start of 2017 the group has delivered net cuts of 1.5 m bl/d and slightly less than the pledged 1.7 m bl/d

OPEC+ produced 2 m bl/d less in May than it did in October 2016

Ch3: But deliberate cuts were only 1.55 m bl/d while involuntary cuts amounted to 1.3 m bl/d

But deliberate cuts were only 1.55 m bl/d while involuntary cuts amounted to 1.3 m bl/d

Fortsätt läsa
Annons
Klicka för att kommentera

Skriv ett svar

Din e-postadress kommer inte publiceras. Obligatoriska fält är märkta *

Analys

Brent gains on positive China data and new attacks on Russian oil processing

Publicerat

den

SEB - analysbrev på råvaror

Positive China data and further attacks on Russian oil processing facilities lifts Brent yet higher. Brent crude gained 4.1% last week with a close on Friday 15 March at USD 85.3/b. Continued declines in US inventories, a bullish oil market outlook from the IEA and damages on Russia’s Rosneft Ryazan oil processing plant by Ukrainian drones helped Brent crude to break above the USD 85/b level. This morning Brent is adding another 0.4% to USD 85.7/b driven by a range of additional attacks on Russian refineries over the weekend and positive Chinese macro data also showing Chinese apparent oil demand  up 6.1% YoY for Jan+Feb.

Bjarne Schieldrop, Chief analyst commodities at SEB
Bjarne Schieldrop, Chief analyst commodities, SEB

Brent crude is getting a steady tailwind from declining US oil inventories. Steady and continued declines in US inventories since the start of the year has been nudging the oil price steadily higher but there has clearly been some resistance around the USD 85/bl level. US inventories continued that decline in data also last week with commercial crude and product stocks down 4.7 m b. Total US stocks including SPR declined 4.1 m b to 1580 m b which is now only 2 m b above the low point on 30 December 2022 at 1578 m b. These persistent declines in US oil inventories is a clear reflection of the global market in deficit where demand is sufficiently strong, cuts by OPEC+ are sufficiently deep while US shale oil production is close to muted with hardly any growth projected from Q4-23 to Q4-24.

Bullish report from IEA last week indicates that further inventory declines is to be expected. The monthly report from IEA last week gave an additional boost to this picture as it lifted projected oil demand for 2024 by 0.2 m b/d, reduced non-OPEC production by 0.2 m b/d and thus increased its estimated call-on-OPEC by 0.4 m b/d for 2024. The world will need steadily more oil from OPEC every quarter to Q3-24 and by Q4-24 the world will need 0.8 m b/d more from the group than it did in Q4-23. That is great news for OPEC+. There is no way that they’ll move away from current strategy of ”Price over volume” with this backdrop. The report from IEA last week is indicating that the gradual declines in US inventories we have seen so far this year will likely continue. And such a trend will give continued support for oil prices in the coming quarters. Oil price projections are lifted in response to this and last out is Morgan Stanley which raises its Q3-24 Brent forecast by US 10/b to USD 90/b.

SEB’s Brent crude forecast for 2024 is USD 85/b (average year) which implies that we’ll likely see both USD 70/b as well as USD 100/b some times during the year.

Attacks on Russian oil processing will mostly impact refining margins and crude grade premiums as crude supply is unlikely to be disrupted. The Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian oil infrastructure has surprised the market as many of them are deep within Russia. Facilities in Russia’s Samara region which is more than 1,000 km away from the Ukrainian border were attacked on Saturday. Oil processing plants and oil refineries are highly complex structures. If damaged by drones they can potentially be out of operation for extended periods. Plain oil transportation systems are much simpler and easier and faster to repair. The essence here is that we’ll likely not lose any oil supply while we might lose oil refining capacity due to these attacks. Most of the impact from these attacks should thus be on refining margins and not so much on crude oil prices. But when diesel cracks, gasoil cracks and gasoline cracks goes up then typically also light sweet crude prices goes up. As such there is a spillover effect from damages to Russian oil refineries to Brent crude oil prices even if we don’t lose a single drop of Russian crude oil production and supply.

Total US crude and product stocks incl. SPR has been ticking lower and lower so far this year and are now only 2 m b/d above the low-point in late December 2022. This is a solid indication that the global oil market is running a deficit.

Total US crude and product stocks incl. SPR
Source: SEB graph and calculations, Blbrg data

Total commercial crude and product stocks (excl. SPR) has been ticking lower and lower so far this year. This has helped to nudge oil prices steadily higher. 

Total commercial crude and product stocks (excl. SPR)
Source: SEB graph and calculations, Blbrg data

Brent crude looks very fairly priced at around USD 85/b versus current US commercial oil inventories

Brent crude looks very fairly priced at around USD 85/b versus current US commercial oil inventories
Source: SEB graph and calculations, Blbrg data

Call-on-OPEC by IEA: World will need more and more oil from OPEC through the year. In Q4-24 the world will need 0.8 m b/d more oil from OPEC in Q4-24 than in Q4-23.  

World will need more and more oil from OPEC through the year.
Source: SEB graph, IEA data

ARA refining margins have moved up so far this year => Refineries want to process more crude oil and thus they want to buy more crude oil.

ARA refining margins
Source: SEB calculations and graph, Blbrg data
Fortsätt läsa

Analys

When affordable gas and expensive carbon puts coal in the corner

Publicerat

den

SEB - analysbrev på råvaror

Coal and nat gas prices are increasingly quite normal versus real average prices from 2010 to 2019 during which TTF nat gas averaged EUR 27/MWh and ARA coal prices averaged USD 108/ton in real-terms. In the current environment of ”normal” coal and nat gas prices we now see a darkening picture for coal fired power generation where coal is becoming less and less competitive over the coming 2-3 years with cost of coal fired generation is trading more and more out-of-the money versus both forward power prices and the cost of nat gas + CO2. Coal fired power generation will however still be needed many places where there is no local substitution and limited grid access to other locations with other types of power supply. These coal fired power-hubs will then become high-power-cost-hubs. And that may become a challenge for the local power consumers in these locations.

Bjarne Schieldrop, Chief analyst commodities at SEB
Bjarne Schieldrop, Chief analyst commodities, SEB

When affordable gas and expensive carbon puts coal in the corner. The power sector accounts for some 50% of emissions in the EU ETS system in a mix of coal and nat gas burn for power. The sector is also highly dynamic, adaptive and actively trading. This sector has been and still is the primary battleground in the EU ETS where a fight between high CO2 intensity coal versus lower CO2 intensity nat gas is playing out.

Coal fired power is dominant over nat gas power when the carbon market is loose and the EUA price is low. The years 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 were typical example-years of this. Coal fired power was then in-the-money for around 7000 hours (one year = 8760 hours) in Germany. Nat gas fired power was however only in the money for about 2500 hours per year and was predominantly functioning as peak-load supply.

Then the carbon market was tightened by politicians with ”back-loading” and the MSR mechanism which drove the EUA price up to EUR 20/ton in 2019 and to EUR 60/ton in 2021. Nat gas fired power and coal fired power were then both in-the-money for almost 5000 hours per year from 2016 to 2023. The EUA price was in the middle-ground in the fight between the two. In 2023 however, nat gas was in-the-money for 4000 hours while coal was only in-the-money for 3000 hours. For coal that is a dramatic change from the 2012-2015 period when it was in the money for 7000 hours per year.

And it is getting worse and worse for coal fired generation when we look forward. That is of course the political/environmental plan as well. It is still painful of course for coal power.

On a forward basis the cost of Coal+EUA is increasingly way, way above the forward German power prices. Coal is basically out-of-the money for more and more hours every year going forward. It may be temporary, but it fits the overall political/environmental plan and also the increasing penetration of renewable energy which will push aside more and more fossil power as we move forward. 

But coal power cannot easily and quickly be shut down all over the place in preference to cheaper nat gas based power. Coal fired power will be the primary source of power in many places with no local alternative and limited grid capacity to other sources of power elsewhere.

The consequence is that those places where coal fired power generation cannot be easily substituted and closed down will be ”high power price hubs”. If we imagine physical power prices as a topological map, geographically across Germany then the locations where coal fired power is needed will rise up like power price hill-tops amid a sea of lower power prices set by cheaper nat gas + CO2 or power prices depressed by high penetration of renewable energy.

Coal fired power generation used to be a cheap and safe power bet. Those forced to rely on coal fired power will however in the coming years face higher and higher, local power costs both in absolute terms and in relative terms to other non-coal-based power locations.

Coal fired power in Germany is increasingly very expensive both versus the cost of nat gas + CO2 and versus forward German power prices. Auch, it will hurt more and more for coal fired power producers and more and more for consumers needing to buy it.

Coal fired power in Germany is increasingly very expensive
Source: SEB calculations and graph, Blbrg data

And if we graph in the most efficient nat gas power plants, CCGTs, then nat gas + CO2 is today mostly at the money for the nearest three years while coal + CO2 is way above both forward power prices and forward nat gas + CO2 costs. 

EUR/MWh
Source: SEB calculations and graph, Blbrg data

Number of hours in the year (normal year = 8760 hrs) when the cost of coal + CO2 and nat gas + CO2 in the German spot power market (hour by hour) historically has been in the money. Coal power used to run 7000 hours per year in 2012-2016, Baseload. Coal in Germany was only in-th-money for 3000 hours in 2023. That is versus the average, hourly system prices in Germany. But local, physical prices will likely have been higher where coal is concentrated and where there is no local substitution for coal in the short to medium term. Coal power will run more hours in those areas and local, physical prices need to be higher there to support the higher cost of coal + CO2.

Number of hours in the year
Source: SEB calculations and graph, Blbrg data
Fortsätt läsa

Analys

War-premium back on the agenda?

Publicerat

den

SEB - analysbrev på råvaror

During yesterday’s trading session, Brent Crude made significant gains, marking the largest increase in global oil prices in approximately five weeks. The front-month contract is presently trading at USD 84.3 per barrel, reflecting a robust increase of USD 2.55 per barrel (above 3%) compared to Monday morning’s opening price.

Ole R. Hvalbye, Analyst Commodities, SEB
Ole R. Hvalbye, Analyst Commodities, SEB

Furthermore, US crude inventories, excluding those held in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), experienced a notable decline for the first time in seven weeks. This decline suggests a heightened global demand for crude oil, which has played a pivotal role in driving up prices (further details below).

Additionally, of considerable significance is Ukraine’s unexpected success in executing precise drone strikes targeting key Russian oil infrastructure. Yesterday, Ukrainian drone strikes triggered a fire at Rosneft’s Ryazan plant, which has a daily production capacity of 340,000 barrels near Moscow. This facility is a significant provider of motor fuels for the capital region and stands as one of Russia’s largest crude-processing facilities. Notably, this incident marks the third Ukrainian drone attack on Russian refineries this week, following similar incidents at the Novoshakhtinsk and Norsi refineries.

Ukrainian strikes in Russian territories ”appear to aim at disrupting, if not influencing, the Russian elections,” Putin stated in an interview with the RIA Novosti news service released Wednesday. He added, ”Another objective seems to be securing leverage for potential negotiation purposes.”

i.e., we believe the statements suggest that Ukrainian strikes in Russian regions are perceived by Putin as strategic moves with dual purposes. Firstly, they are seen as attempts to disrupt or influence the upcoming elections in Russia, potentially destabilizing the political landscape or casting doubt on the legitimacy of the electoral process. Secondly, they are interpreted as efforts to gain leverage in possible negotiation scenarios, implying that Ukraine seeks to strengthen its bargaining position by demonstrating its capability to inflict economic and strategic damage on Russia.

From a market perspective, it’s crucial to highlight the escalating conflict between Ukraine and Russia, which poses a significant threat to global energy markets. Russia’s role as a major oil and gas supplier is paramount, and any disruptions in its energy infrastructure could lead to widespread supply shortages and price volatility worldwide. The recent drone strikes are a clear reminder that geopolitical tensions continue to impact global oil markets. The fading ”war-premium” should now be factored in more significantly, indicating a need to brace for increased volatility ahead.


An overall significant drawdown of US inventories. In the U.S., commercial crude oil inventories, excluding those in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, dropped by 1.5 million barrels from the prior week to 447.0 million barrels, about 3% below the five-year average. Total motor gasoline inventories fell by 5.7 million barrels, also about 3% below the five-year average. Distillate fuel inventories rose by 0.9 million barrels, approximately 7% below the five-year average. Propane/propylene inventories increased by 0.7 million barrels, marking an 8% rise compared to the five-year average.

Overall commercial petroleum inventories decreased by 4.7 million barrels. Over the past four weeks, total products supplied averaged 19.9 million barrels per day, up by 1.0% from the same period last year. Motor gasoline product supplied averaged 8.7 million barrels per day, down by 1.3% from the same period last year. Distillate fuel product supplied averaged 3.7 million barrels per day over the past four weeks, up by 0.5% from the same period last year. Jet fuel product supplied increased by 2.0% compared to the same four-week period last year.

Fortsätt läsa

Populära