Blogroll


January 2007
M T W T F S S
« Dec   Feb »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Data Warehouse


Meta:



Most Recent Posts

Other Links Donncha

January 24, 2007

INDIA: Oil refining is viable by pre-empting tariff jumping | # | P&E — MaT @ 9:05 am

by Jaideep Mishra

A clutch of international oil majors is reportedly seeking equity stakes in upcoming refinery projects in India. Oil refineries are large, capital-intensive projects, and the foreign direct investment on offer ought clearly to be welcomed.

But while we okay the project proposals in a giffy, we surely need to promptly do away with the extant high effective tariff protection for oil refining. Otherwise, the high effective tariff walls for refined petroleum products would simply imply tariff jumping on the part of global oil majors seeking high unearned rents!

News reports say Saudi Aramco is in talks to pick up stake in Indian Oil’s Paradip refinery. Aramco is also seeking equity in HPCL’s Vizag refinery, as indeed is Total of France. Further, in oil refineries across the land, in Mangalore, Bina, Bhathinda and elsewhere, international majors seem keen to acquire a substantial piece of the investment cake. In fact, the high effective tariffs on oil products is perverse incentive to do so.

After all, the duty regime jacks up gross refinery margins across the board and hikes costs in the oil economy and beyond. In terms of policy initiatives, what is required is that we do away summarily with the duty differential between crude and products. Otherwise, we would be saddled with wholly high-cost oil assets.

A word about refinery economics. The fact is that the value-added in oil refining is quite minimal, of no more than 10%. So even a nominal duty differential between crude and products implies huge tariff protection for the value-added. This is quite unlike most other industries, where there is generally considerable value-addition downstream. Yet for long years, we have had a policy of high effective tariff protection for oil products purportedly to boost refinery projects. This has meant high duty differential between crude and refined products, and effective tariffs on products that have generally been over 50%! And even in recent years, we have opted to have such a high-cost duty structure even as tariffs generally have been reduced.

The recent expert committee on pricing and taxation of petroleum products, headed by Dr C Rangarajan, estimated the tariff protection for oil products at 40%.

Given the panoply of policy distortions in our oil sector, such as the effective ring-fencing of retail sales, the actual tariff levels would almost certainly have been much higher. In a voluminous industry like oil, such high tariffs are a glaring anomaly and guaranteed to give rise to needlessly high-cost refinery output.

Thankfully, of late, the duties on petro-products have been pruned. While the import duty on crude is pegged at 5%, that for products like diesel and petrol have been reduced, slightly, to 7.5%, from 10%.

But despite the reduction in the duty differential last year, effective tariff protection for products remains upwards of 20% given the lowly value-addition in oil refining. The point is, compared to the prevailing tariff rates in the rest of the economy, the effective duty levels for petro-goods remains much too high.

What is urgently required is that we remove the duty differential between crude and products once and for all. The logistics and sheer scale economies in shipping oil ought to be protection enough. A zero duty differential between crude and products would bring down untoward rents and stem gross refinery margins as well. And it would remove the perverse incentive to buy into Indian refinery assets to rake in rents propped up by policy fiat.

In a high-growth economy, oil refineries would be perfectly viable without policy prop-ups and sundry other sweeteners. Indian refiners can eminently do without high tariff protection on products. Instead, the watchword needs to be efficiency and sustained process innovation.

Beyond ungainly high tariffs, the overall economic viability and efficiency of an oil refinery depends on the interaction of three key factors: the choice of crude oil used, the complexity of refining installations—refinery configuration—and the desired type and quality of products refined. Additionally, refinery utilisation rates and environmental considerations also do affect refinery economics.

For example, using more expensive crude oil (‘sweeter’, lighter) requires less refinery upgrading but supplies of light, sweet crude are at a premium and the differential in prices between lighter and more heavier crudes is seen to be increasing. Using cheaper heavier crude oil means more investment in refinery processes, sure.

But the overall returns and payback can be substantially attractive with the right sourcing of crude and with proper refinery configuration. Additionally, the quality specifications of the final products are also increasingly important as environmental requirements become more stringent.
INDIA TIMES

MAS SOBRE ESTA NOTICIA

 

uacct = “UA-1175019-1”; urchinTracker(); uacct = “UA-1186233-1”; urchinTracker();
uacct = “UA-1175019-1”;
urchinTracker();
Imagen 7

www.BajaeNergyBLOG.com

································································

INDIA, Reliance Energy’s 2 projects hit road block | # | P&E — MaT @ 9:03 am

Reliance Energy’s Transmission projects appears to have hit a bit of roadblock. Two projects-a joint venture with PowerGrid for the Parbati-Koldam transmission line and the Western Region System Strengthening Scheme II-could well be delayed.

Reliance Energy Transmission, a subsidiary of Reliance Energy, won the bid for the Western Region System Strengthening Scheme II through a international tariff based competitive bid in November last year. The private transmission developer is yet to receive the letter of selection from the central transmission utility, PowerGrid (PGCIL). The letter of selection was due by the end of December. Sources said that the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission has written to PGCIL asking it to issue the letter so as to ensure that the project is commissioned in time. RETL will have to apply to the central regulator for a license by mid-April. The project is to be commissioned by March 2010. When contacted by ET, PowerGrid officials said that the letter would be issue after due diligence was completed. As per the time schedule, the evaluation of transmission service charge and buy-out proposals followed by the issue of the letter of selection should have been completed by December-end.

Reliance Energy’s joint venture with Power Grid Corporation has been on hold since January last year. The Rs 738.3-crore joint venture would construct two transmission lines connecting the 800 mw Parbati hydroelectric project being developed by NHPC and the 800 mw Koldam hydroelectric project being developed by NTPC. Reliance Energy was to have a 74% stake in the JV. Though the two companies were to ink a joint venture agreement early last year, but the JV is yet to get off the ground. The shareholder’s agreement and other documentation leading to the formation of the joint venture company should have been issued within 45 days of the letter of selection, however that has not happened.

According to Reliance Energy officials, there have been as many as ten postponements. Sources said that the delay was on account of certain issues relating to government policy.

INDIA TIMES

MAS SOBRE ESTA NOTICIA

 

uacct = “UA-1175019-1”; urchinTracker(); uacct = “UA-1186233-1”; urchinTracker();
uacct = “UA-1175019-1”;
urchinTracker();
Imagen 7

www.BajaeNergyBLOG.com

·································································

Tata Group to build power station in Zambia | # | P&E — MaT @ 9:00 am

Tata group on Wednesday signed an agreement with Zambia’s state-run power utility to build a hydroelectric station in the southern African nation where demand for electricity has outstripped supply.

The 120-megawatt plant, will be constructed over two years and cost $150 million, said Rodney Sisaala, managing director of Zambia’s Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO). It will be jointly financed by ZESCO and India’s giant conglomerate, the Tata Group, which has interests in steel, mining, cars and computers.

"The two companies will form a special purpose vehicle company to carry out this development," Sisaala told reporters. He said Zambia’s demand for electricity had shot up dramatically in recent years, adding that the country would require additional capacity by 2008 to meet the projected deficit.

"The main drivers of this demand are the growing mining, industrial and agriculture sectors. Old mines are being recapitalised and new ones are being opened," Sisaala said.

ZESCO already has a load-shedding programme for residential customers in order to save the power being generated for commercial users. The entire southern African region, from which Zambia imports electricity when faced with a deficit, will be in need of additional capacity by 2008, Sisaala said.

INDIA TIMES

 

uacct = “UA-1175019-1”; urchinTracker(); uacct = “UA-1186233-1”; urchinTracker();
uacct = “UA-1175019-1”;
urchinTracker();
Imagen 7

www.BajaeNergyBLOG.com

···············································································


Lukashenko Seeks Fuel Alternatives

Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenko criticized Russia for a series of energy deals that have sharply raised prices and cut revenues for Belarus, vowing in a defiant speech Tuesday to find oil from other sources.

The two previously close allies have seen relations plummet in recent months amid a clash over Russian natural gas and oil supplies.

Lukashenko, who has relied on cheap Russian energy to fuel his country’s centrally controlled economy, grudgingly agreed to pay more than twice the previous price for gas this year—and even more in coming years.

And two weeks ago, Russia forced Belarus to back down in a dispute over oil supplies and transit fees, forcing a deal that will reduce the profits Belarus makes by refining Russian oil and selling the products. The dispute briefly disrupted oil supplies to Europe.

Speaking during a visit to an oil refinery in Novopolotsk, northeast of the capital Minsk, Lukashenko complained about the oil and the gas deals, saying they were "extremely disadvantageous," and that the country could see up to $3.5 billion in losses.

He said the country intended to import oil through ports in neighboring Baltic countries using an upgraded pipeline to Novopolotsk; the government has said the upgrade could cost $15 million to $30 million.

He also said Russia should pay transshipping oil and gas supplies to Europe.

"We should demand that they pay us—without fuss or ambition—along the principles of international law," he said. "Russia has its own unique resource: hydrocarbons. Our strategic resource is our geopolitical position. We should use this just like Russia uses its resources."
The Moscow Times

Gazprom Denies Borrowing $10Bln to Finance Sakhalin-2

Gas monopoly Gazprom said reports that it was seeking a $10 billion loan to buy half the Sakhalin-2 project and assets of bankrupt firm Yukos were "wrong."

Interfax news agency on Tuesday quoted a banking source as saying Gazprom was holding talks with bank organizers and could give a mandate within one month.

"This report is wrong," a Gazprom spokesman said.

Gazprom agreed last month to buy into the Sakhalin-2 project by paying $7.45 billion to existing shareholders Royal Dutch Shell, Mitsui and Mitsubishi.

The firm also said it would look into buying some gas and oil assets of bankrupt oil firm Yukos. Yukos’ bankruptcy receiver is expected to begin auctioning assets within months.

Gazprom was forced to increase its borrowing by one-third in 2006 to 118.9 billion rubles ($4.5 billion) after it bought minority stakes in the country’s second-largest gas producer, Novatek, and Moscow city utility Mosenergo.

Gazprom said it planned to stick to its long-term target to borrow no more than 90 billion rubles from 2007 to 2009, despite failing to deliver on its pledge in the past few years. Many analysts doubt the plan to cap borrowing is feasible after the Sakhalin-2 deal, which is due to close in the first half of this year.

RAO UES Takes Coal Companies to China | # | P&E — MaT @ 12:28 am

by Ekaterina Grishkovets, Maria Cherkasova

RAO Unified Energy Systems of Russia plans to raise two thirds of the $18 billion necessary for the large-scale project of electricity export to China with the help of private investors. RAO UES will allow them to acquire up to 25 percent of shares of Eastern Energy Company created specially for Chinese project. Some coal companies are already interested in participating.

RAO UES is considering today the issue of creating a new structure, Eastern Energy Company, which will be completely owned by RAO. The new company’s capital stock is to be 50 million rubles.

The first stage of Chinese project implies exporting about 4.5 billion kWh to north-east of China from 2008-2009 on. Several coal stations are to be constructed by 2012 with the total capacity of 7,200 MW. The total of electricity export to China should reach 20 billion kWh annually by 2015, which is three times more than the current RAO’s export.

Construction costs at the second stage are estimated at $5.2 billion, at the third one – at $13 billion, the major part (about $12 billion) will be attracted from private investors, who will receive up to 25 percent in Eastern Energy Company. Coal-supplying companies, such as Siberian Coal Energy Company (SUEK), Russian Coal, and Yakutugol, will be invited to take part in financing the project. The funds will be attracted on project-lending basis.

Afterwards, the share of private investors in Eastern Energy Company might increase. The company is to emerge from RAO in the process of its reorganization. It means that 52 percent of its stock will be handed over to Federal Network Company (FSK). After the transition period is over, FSK has to sell the company.

Rosneft in Hurry to Build Refinery at Pacific Ocean | # | P&E — MaT @ 12:23 am

by Natalya Skorlygina

Omskneftekhimproekt prepared for Rosneft a declaration with preliminary characteristics for building an oil refinery at the terminal point of the East Siberia-Pacific Pipeline. Three sites are considered for the refinery. Regardless of Rosneft’s choice, the investment into the project is estimated at about $6 billion. However, the state company has not yet been officially commissioned with carrying the project out.

Omskneftekhimproekt handed over to Rosneft on January 15 the declaration of intentions concerning building an oil refinery at the terminal point of the East Siberia-Pacific Pipeline (VSTO). The project is to build a factory with the capacity of 20 million metric tons.

However, the project is not confined to just one factory. A new terminal will be built for the new refinery. Experts say the terminal’s cost depends on various factors, including the choice of berthing structure, and thus estimate it between $160 million and $420 million.

Transneft head Semen Vainshtok was the first to speak of building the oil refinery at the VSTO’s terminal, back in November 2005. Rosneft CEO Sergei Bogdanchikov announced in March 2006 that his company is considering building oil refinery. In April, Russian President Vladimir Putin asked the Cabinet to develop measures of support for building the refinery on Russian territory. However, the company has not yet been appointed the project’s chief executive. Meanwhile, other oil companies, including LUKOIL, want to take part in the project.

If Rosneft is to cover all costs on its own, it will have to invest about $6.5 billion into the project. Rosneft intends to invest $2.9 billion into the reconstruction of its refineries by 2011. Thus, the company will have to put about $10 billion into developing its refineries in the coming five years.

BloGalaxia  Imagen 7

www.BajaeNergyBLOG.com

······························································

Rosneft to Go into International Indexes | # | P&E — MaT @ 12:08 am

by Nikolai Dzis-Voinarovsky

Rosneft shares may become included into MSCI indexes. MSCI Barra index agency is now discussing with investors whether they can include Rosneft into the new Enhanced Standard Index. It is expected to happen in late 2007. However, analysts say the Russian company’s share in the new index will be insignificant.

MSCI Barra decided to split the current index for developing markets MSCI EM into two—Enhanced Standard Index and Enhanced Small Cap Index. The agency suggests to include such Russian companies as Rosneft (Standard), and Mechel, Vimm-Bill-Dann, Uralsvyazinform, Volgatelekom, Sibirtelekom (Small Cap).

Despite the market’s expectations, Rosneft shares were not included into MSCI index in 2006. MSCI Barra promised to publish the final method of estimating new indexes no later than March 31.

Many investors take into account MSCI indexes, and some investment funds even buy shares in same proportions as those shares are in indexes. Including a company’s stock into the index might lead to rapid quotations growth in the short-term future, and to influx of funds in the long-term perspective. The demand for Rosneft’s shares might grow by $100 million (that is about 1 percent of its free-float). However, the price may go up even more drastically, for many investors were not buying Rosneft’s shares before, and the company’s inclusion into the index will be a positive signal.

Large investors are likely to turn their attention completely to Enhanced Standard Index. Thus, they might somewhat ignore the companies that fell into Enhanced Small Cap Index category after MSCI EM index was split. However, analysts believe the drop in quotations of those companies will be just short-term, since many funds invest not only into blue chips but also into small cap companies.

 

 

Putin Flaunts His Energy Chain | # | P&E — MaT @ 12:04 am

by Andrei Kolesnikov
The Russian President Vladimir Putin accepted the credentials of new ambassadors to Russia from seven different countries, including Israel, Botswana, and North Korea. Kommersant special correspondent Andrei Kolesnikov has the details.

The ceremony at which new ambassadors to Russia present their credentials to the Russian president is one of the brightest holidays in the gray Kremlin routine. The shiny happy feeling is easily preserved because not one of the guests gets to say anything: all they do is present their letter of credentials to Vladimir Putin, who quickly hands it off to his assistant.

The ambassadors assembled yesterday in the Kremlin Palace came from Argentina, Bulgaria, Botswana, the Dominican Republic, Israel, North Korea, and France. Each ambassador had his or her own particular style of interacting with the Russian president. Could they be reflective of the attitudes of their parent countries towards their new host? Judge for yourself:

North Korean Ambassador Kim Yong-jae bustled quickly up the red carpet to Mr. Putin’s side, where he humbly handed over his credentials with his bead bowed. Presumably, this is the position to which North Korean diplomats have to become accustomed if they ever aspire to be appointed ambassador to Russia.

The Bulgarian ambassador, Plamen Ivanov-Grozdanov, was so nervous at being photographed with Vladimir Putin that he accidentally jostled aside Russian Defense Minister Sergei Lavrov from his position at the president’s right hand. Mr. Lavrov, unfazed, elbowed him right back. Not hard – just enough to make his point.

For her part, either Israeli Ambassador Anna Azari dropped something almost like a curtsy as she approached to shake Mr. Putin’s hand, or her knees buckled under his gaze. It was hard to tell.

French Ambassador Stanislas Lefebvre de la Boulaye was gifted with an unexpected pleasantry: as the ambassador handed his credentials to the president, Mr. Putin was distinctly heard to say "bonjour."

No such offering was made to the ambassador from Botswana. Incidentally, Botswana does have something to crow about: in the recently published economic freedom rankings of countries around the world, Botswana is in the second group of twenty countries from the top of the list. Russia is also in the second group of twenty – but from the bottom.

The ambassador from the Dominican Republic appeared to be so struck by the sight of the assembled Russian journalists in suits that, in the picture of him shaking hands with the president, he is staring not at Mr. Putin but at the journalists. Undeterred, Mr. Putin congratulated him on the opening of his country’s diplomatic mission to Russia and assured him that the work that they have before them will be "not only full of important things, but interesting as well."

Mr. Putin’s speech at the ceremony was strikingly topical, and he often departed from his prepared text to address the ambassadors directly. After admonishing them to adhere to the principles of "collective" and "right" action, he unexpectedly turned to the topic of energy security: "It is clear that real energy security is attainable only if all participants in the energy chain fulfill their responsibilities," he said. "In this regard, I mean all kinds of energy: oil, gas, and nuclear. For our part…we are taking steps to structure all of our relationships in the energy sphere according to a transparent market framework, no matter what the political situation may be in any of these countries."

Clearly, Mr. Putin could not wait until his meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Sochi this weekend – where it would have been more appropriate – to reference the topic of Belarus and its recalcitrant president, Alexander Lukashenko, with whom Russia has recently locked horns over gas and oil supplies

"In normal trade and economic relationships," continued the president, "including those in the energy sphere, the same general conditions of international trade should apply to everyone. Everyone should be on an equal footing when it comes to solving problems in the energy sphere, including the issue of access to modern technology."

Even from far away, it could be seen that the North Korean ambassador had nodded slightly at these words.

"For the next decade, Russia will be a reliable supplier of energy resources on the world market. We intend to do everything required of us to fulfill all of our obligations in full," he said, and the French ambassador seemed to visibly relax.

Mr. Putin even had some kind words for Israel: "In the future, we intend to build friendly relations with Israel, keeping in mind that a significant number of Israel’s citizens are immigrants from the former Soviet Union. We will also strive to cooperate in bringing peace and stability to the Near East." He did not explain how it will be possible for Russia to simultaneously contribute to peace and stability in the region and build good relations with Israel.

Finally, Mr. Putin expressed "satisfaction with the dynamic of dialog with the Dominican Republic" and noted the "overlap or closeness of [Russia’s] position with that of the Republic of Botswana on key international problems": i.e., the Iranian nuclear problem, Russian-Georgian relations, and the mysterious death of Alexander Litvinenko. If truth be told, did he expect anything different from Botswana?