By David Blackmon (Senior Contributor, Forbes)
As I wrote earlier this month, the future of the nascent oil and gas industry in the South American nation of Guyana is standing on shaky ground amid the ongoing controversy related to this year’s national elections. The situation only grew worse this week as US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urged Guyanese President David Granger to “step aside” and respect the results of the election that took place on March 2 and has remained unresolved for more than four months now.
At the same time, Secretary Pompeo also announced that the United States
would place “visa restrictions on individuals responsible for or
complicit in undermining democracy in Guyana.” It is clear that the
American Government believes those individuals include President Granger
and members of his A Partnership for National Unity coalition that
continues to rule the country despite election results that appear to
indicate that the opposing People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) was
the actual winner.
As reported by the Trinidad Saturday Express, former Trinidad Energy
Minister Kevin Ramnarine is now warning that the nation’s oil industry
and economy are at risk, especially if the US follows its usual pattern
of gradual escalation of sanctions. “As we have seen with Venezuela, the
United States’ application of sanctions usually follows a gradual and
incremental pattern. This might, therefore, be the first wave of
sanctions. Should the US see no improvement in the situation in Guyana,
the sanctions might be ramped up to include economic sanctions such as
sanctions on shipping, on senior Guyanese Government officials doing
business with American companies and on the payments of goods and
services for the oil industry,” he said.
Many billions of dollars of potential economic impact from the
development of the nation’s rich offshore oil and gas assets stand at
risk. Indeed, according to a new report from Rystad Energy, the delays
in permitting caused by this ongoing election dispute have already cost
the people of Guyana millions and lowered the net present value (NPV) of
the entire development.
Rystad ran four different scenarios in its analysis, assuming further
permitting delays ranging from 3 months to 24 months in duration. The
firm finds that delays that have taken place to this point have already
removed more than 50 million barrels of oil that could have been
produced by 2030, along with a loss of $300 million. Their various
scenarios show that the country will lose an additional 10 to 75 million
barrels, depending on the length of further delays.
The firm projects a current NPV to the Government of the offshore
development – most of which would be operated by a consortium led by
ExxonMobil XOM -1.7 per cent, with partners Hess Corp HES -1.6 per cent
and CNOOC – through 2028 of $4.4 billion. However, another 12-month
delay in permitting would reduce that number by $1.6 billion, a huge
loss of wealth to a nation of just 800,000 people.
Ramnarine understands the severity of this situation: “I am certain that
what is happening in Guyana is of concern to ExxonMobil and Hess given
that they are American companies. This makes the situation in Guyana
even more complicated. Prior to these sanctions, ExxonMobil said the
political impasse was responsible for the slippage in the start-up of
the Payara project which is the third development project by ExxonMobil
in Guyana following on Liza 1 and Liza 2,” he said.
As I pointed out in that July 2 piece, Guyana is in competition with
other high-potential projects around the world for the massive capital
investments these companies and other developers must deploy to find and
produce these oil and gas resources. For companies like ExxonMobil,
stability and predictability are big considerations when determining
where to deploy their capital dollars, since those factors have a
tremendous impact on the anticipated rate of return on those
investments.
Right now, Guyana is losing stability and predictability – two precious
assets for any Government wishing to benefit from minerals development
by international operators – due to this ongoing election controversy.
The intervention by the United States in the form of sanctions that are
likely to escalate only serves to exacerbate that situation.
Whether he wants it or not, the duty to work to restore stability for
the Government falls to President Granger. The international community
appears to believe that his coalition did in fact lose the March
election. If that is the case, he should do what Secretary Pompeo
advises and step aside for the good of his country and the future of its
economy. (Forbes)