Since I last wrote about the Shale Gas Revolution and its
implications late in 2011, there have been many more important
developments, as well as some new trends.
New Shell GTL Plant in Louisiana
The most important, and most recent, news is that
Royal Dutch Shell
) is apparently in the preliminary stages of feasibility and design
work on a potentially huge, $10 billion, 2 million gallon per day
(approximately 50,000 barrels per day) Gas-to-Liquids (GTL)
facility in Louisiana, using abundant natural gas feedstock.
This development is important for several reasons:
Validation of Future Gas Abundance
First, it validates the long-range forecast of persistently high
volumes of economical natural gas. Since the plant would not
enter production until 2014 at the earliest, a gigantic,
experienced GTL and gas producer must be confident that natural gas
prices will remain a relative bargain, and that this will continue
for a long time into the life of the plant.
GTL Remains Attractive
Second, despite being burned by the cost-overruns at its large
Pearl GTL plant in Qatar, Shell still sees attractive returns in
such a plant. This is an important demonstration for other
market participants, some of whom may decide to emulate
) of South Africa already indicated a few months ago that it would
build a large GTL plant in Louisiana.
Third, the plant is in good export position -- it will not be
located inland to take advantage of the very cheapest natural gas
prices in the heart of major shale gas plays, but close to
tidewater for easy shipping of diesel and other liquids to Latin
America and Europe.
GTL More Attractive than LNG
Fourth, it is very telling that Shell did not decide to work on
building a Liquified Natural Gas, 'LNG,' facility to export gas
from its own shale or offshore production. While natural gas
prices in Europe and elsewhere in the world are much higher than
those in North America, the energy-equivalent prices of diesel and
other petroleum products are at even more of a premium versus raw
While it may be cheaper to build gas liquifaction and
re-gassification plants, their economics may not be able to
overcome the huge price differential of products versus raw gas for
a long time to come. This could mean that new LNG plants for
Kitimat, British Columbia, and Valdez or Anchorage, Alaska, and,
more fancifully, Halifax, Nova Scotia, may not be built -- in favor
of GTL plants.
The implications of that last point are potentially profound.
The more natural gas that gets converted to liquids for export in
North America -- rather than exported to East Asia, Europe, and
elsewhere -- means natural gas that will not be sent into the world
markets to reduce natural gas prices in those markets.
Hence, relatively high prices may persist there, maintaining the
already major incentives to drill for gas and associated liquids in
other propitious shale formations. In the U.K., Poland, and
Ukraine, drilling is active, and showing some impressive results,
although not much actual production thus far.
Also, as Europe is densely populated, there are industrial and
environmental issues that can delay full and rapid exploitation
such as has occurred in North America.
EU Nations Wish to Avoid Dependence on Russia
There is a big strategic, and also commercial reason that European
nations will likely become more enthusiastic drillers: the
wish to reduce an unhealthy reliance on one major supplier:
Russia. The Ukraine and other European countries have had
more than one cutoff of supply from pricing and payment disputes,
and in mid-winter, too. No customer is comfortable in having
only one supplier, and Russia also has a record of being a
difficult and untrustworthy trading and investment partner, as
) can attest.
Environmental Trends Favor Gas Over Coal, Nuclear
Another reason that shale gas exploration will likely receive a
warmer reception in Europe in the future is their longer-term
environmental goals, which have not been -- and in practice cannot
be -- satisfied by renewable energy initiatives and
incentives. The governments of Germany, France, the U.K., and
other European nations wish to downplay or eventually eliminate
electricity production from coal plants, and from nuclear
generators, too. The only rapid, cheap and readily available
other sort of energy will be shale gas, unless they wish to become
further dependent on Russia, Central Asia or the Middle East.
Pipelines and Drilling In Europe to Expand
While the new pipeline in the Baltic that bypasses Ukraine -- and
another one from the Caspian that bypasses both Ukraine and Russia
en route to Europe -- ameliorate some of those dependency problems,
the long-term outlook for shale gas and liquids in Europe remains
rosy. While it may not make much difference to the major oil
companies' stock performance, it will help those of the oil and gas
service companies, especially the hydraulic fracturing, 'fracking,'
specialists. These companies will also benefit from new exploration
China Active in Shale, Abroad and Domestically
China has made investments in North American oil and gas producers,
in an effort to acquire expertise in shale formation exploration
and exploitation. Apparently, their state-controlled
companies have begun some drilling in their own country, but the
true extent of their success is not known. It seems likely
that it will take several years to increase production to a level
where they can substitute gas for coal in power stations.
Coal has been the source of terrible air pollution in China and is
a major health risk.
The Chinese government is changing its energy policy to emphasize
gas exploration and development to reduce its reliance on
coal. There should be opportunities for North American
companies, but the probability for technology leakage is
great. What it could mean over the longer term is that the
potential for very large exports of LNG to China may be muted, as
they may produce much of what they consume.
However, some Chinese companies -- or the government -- could
decide that they wish to go the GTL route; substitution of imports
of crude by local production of diesel could do a lot to reduce
unfavorable trade and funds flows, and make more business sense,
too -- again, given the differential between the cost of GTL
products versus those refined from crude oil. China no longer
has a significant trade surplus, other than with the U.S.
There are a couple of other wild cards, but they will take some
years to play out:
Japan Important in LNG, General Global Gas Demand
The first is Japan. While the Fukushima nuclear reactor
disaster seems to have set the populace and the government on a
path against the atom, some sober second thoughts might prevail
when the costs of changing to gas for electricity generation are
re-examined. The sunk costs of existing nuclear generators make the
marginal cash costs seem compelling against the large capital costs
entirely new generating facilities will require.
Russia Could Take Much of Japanese Market
Assuming that they will continue on the LNG road, Japan may find
itself in a complicated situation. As European gas production
increases, Russian Far East production may get backed up and
bottlenecked, in the way that Canadian and Bakken gas production is
currently. Russia is already proposing to China new pipelines
to bring their excess gas to northeastern cities.
Russia has not yet advanced any pipeline proposals to Japan, but
it could make a lot of sense to both parties. If that occurs,
then there could be substantial gas-on-gas competition that will
benefit the customer -- and be unpleasant for North American LNG
exporters, increasing the attractiveness of building GTL plants
versus LNG ones on the West Coast.
BP PLC (
(Part Two of this article can be found
): Free Stock Analysis Report
CHEVRON CORP (
): Free Stock Analysis Report
ROYAL DTCH SH-A (RDS.A): Free Stock Analysis
SASOL LTD -ADR (
): Free Stock Analysis Report
To read this article on Zacks.com click here.