The VoLo Foundation. 2 C Scenario Analysis - Oil & Gas Industry. Andrew Stevenson May 2018

Transcription

1 The VoLo Foundation 2 C Scenario Analysis - Oil & Gas Industry Andrew Stevenson May

2 Climate change poses one of the most substantial but least analyzed long-term investment risks. $2016 Billions $5,000 $4,500 $4,000 $3,500 $3,000 $2,500 $2,000 $1,500 $1,000 $500 $ Cumulative Natural Loss Events (source Munich Re, NOAA) US Natural Loss Events Global Insured Natural Loss Events Global Natural Loss Events Goldman Sachs Research

3 5 Macro Level Financial Risks Oil and Gas Industry

4 Climate-Related Risk Factors 1. Demand Under a 2 C Scenario, oil and natural gas demand will need to slow relative to business as usual. 120 Global Liquids Demand 90 Natural Gas Demand Million Barrel per Day Million Barrels per Day BOE EIA Sustainable Development Scenario (SDS) EIA New Policy Scenario (NPS) EIA Sustainable Development Scenario (SDS) EIA New Policy Scenario (NPS)

5 Climate-Related Risk Factors 2. Cash Flows Lower demand could create both a volumetric and price based risk to future cash flows. Net Cash Flows for 50 Largest Private Oil & Gas Companies $350 $300 $250 $200 $150 $100 $50 $0 -$50 -$ Billion BAU 2C Low Risk Case 2C High Risk Case Source: VoLo Foundation estimates, IEA WEO 2017, Wood Mackenzie Upstream Data Tool Q4 2017

6 Climate-Related Risk Factors 3. Asset Values Reductions in net cash flows would lower estimates for the value of assets on balance sheets. $2,500 Net Present Value of Assets for the 50 Largest Private Oil and Gas Companies $2,000 Billions $1,500 $1,000 $500 $0 BAU 2C Low Risk Case 2C High Risk Case Source: VoLo Foundation estimates, IEA WEO 2017, Wood Mackenzie Upstream Data Tool Q4 2017

7 Climate-Related Risk Factors 4. Debt Repayment Slowing output and cash flows would likely lower debt coverage ratios, especially for debt beyond Debt Profile of the 50 Largest Private Oil and Gas Companies $350 $300 $250 $200 Billions $150 $100 $50 $0 -$50 -$ Debt Maturing BAU 2C Low Risk Case 2C High Risk Case Source: VoLo Foundation estimates, IEA WEO 2017, Wood Mackenzie Upstream Data Tool Q4 2017, Bloomberg

8 Climate-Related Risk Factors 5. Sovereign State-owned oil company decline rates are roughly equal to the IEA s C supply gap. Million Barrels per Day Global Oil Production Million Barrels per Day Supply Gap in Global Oil Production Oil IEA NPS Oil IEA 2 C Capital-assised decline of existing production Capital-assisted decline rate of 5 largest State-owned Oil Companies Supply Gap between Capital-assisted production and IEA SDS

9 Company Level Risks Oil and Gas Industry

10 A possible approach to quantifying climate-related financial risk The VoLo Foundation uses a three step process to measure exposure to climate-related financial risk Step 1 - Create a business as usual (BAU) profile Step 2 - Create a Sustainable Development Scenario (2 C) profile Step 3 - Compare asset values under the BAU and 2 C Scenarios

11 Step 1 Create a Business as Usual (BAU) Company Profile The Business as Usual (BAU) company profile includes estimates for oil and gas production, spending, cash flows and the net present value (NPV) of all upstream projects under the IEA s New Policy Scenario (NPS). As an example, under the IEA s NPS business as usual scenario, Exxon Mobil was forecast to produce 41.6trln BOE of liquids and gas through 2064, generating total net cash flows of $619bln with an NPV of $162bln. Boe/d 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Net Production Gas Liquids Millions $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $- Net Cash Flows Source: Wood Mackenzie Upstream Data Tool Q Source: Wood Mackenzie Upstream Data Tool Q4 2017

12 Step 2 Create a 2 C scenario Company Profile The 2 C profile includes estimates for oil and gas production, spending, cash flows and the (NPV) of projects based on lower oil and gas demand consistent with the IEA s 2 C Sustainable Development Scenario (SDS). 100% Percentage of New Policy Scenario Production 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% Liquids Demand Natural Gas Demand Source: WEO 2017

13 Step 2 Create a 2 C scenario Company Profile Under a 2 C Low Risk scenario, which uses the same Base Case oil and gas price curves used in the BAU profile, Exxon Mobil is estimated to produce 36.6trln BOE of oil and gas generating $521bln in net cash flows with a net present value of $147bln. Under the 2 C High Risk Case, which uses Low Price oil and gas assumptions, production would also be estimated at 36.6bln BOE of oil and gas generating $189bln in net cash flows with a net present value of $52bln. 6,000 5,000 4,000 Net Production $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 Net Cash Flows kboe/d 3,000 2,000 1,000 Millions $10,000 $5,000 $- $(5,000) $(10,000) Gas 2C Liquid 2C BAU 6C BAU Case 2C Low Risk Case 2C High Risk Case Source: IEA WEO 2017, Wood Mackenzie Upstream Data Tool Q4 2017, VoLo Foundation estimates Source: IEA WEO 2017, Wood Mackenzie Upstream Data Tool Q4 2017, VoLo Foundation estimates

14 Step 3 Compare asset values under BAU and 2 C scenarios Lastly, the net present value of assets (NPV) under the BAU Case and the 2 C Low Risk cases profile are compared using a Climate Risk Ratio which is calculated as follows for Exxon Mobil: Climate Risk Ratio Calculation Exxon Mobil Company Climate Risk Ratio = Total Asset Value - NPV of Assets under 2C Low Risk Scenario / NPV of Assets under BAU Scenario Exxon Mobil 9.35% = 100% - $147.21bln / $162.37bln A 9.35% Climate Risk Ratio implies that around 9% of Exxon Mobil s assets could potentially be at risk under oil and natural gas demand conditions consistent with the IEA s 2 C Scenario case.

15 Rankings and Scorecards Oil and Gas Industry

16 Climate-related Financial Risk Rankings The Climate Risk Ratio is used to rank companies from least to most exposed to climate-related financial risk. Climate Risk Ranking Company Climate Risk Ratio 1 Origin Energy 3.15% 2 Ecopetrol 3.56% 3 Santos 3.66% 4 INPEX Corporation 5.39% 5 KOGAS 5.44% 6 Eni 6.65% 7 Woodside Petroleum Investo 6.70% 8 Repsol 6.92% 9 OMV 7.03% 10 Private Investors 7.14% 11 Encana Corporation 7.18% 12 Total 7.28% 13 Cabot Oil & Gas 7.46% 14 Shell 7.68% 15 Murphy Oil 7.74% 16 BHP Billiton 7.91% 17 BP 8.20% 18 Chevron 8.21% 19 Statoil 8.44% 20 Range Resources Corp 8.70% 21 Kosmos Energy 8.72% 22 Southwestern Energy 8.87% 23 LUKOIL 8.94% 24 Conoco Phillips 9.06% 25 Exxon Mobil 9.35% Climate Risk Ranking Company Climate Risk Ratio 26 Gazprom 9.41% 27 Petrobras 9.92% 28 Apache 10.03% 29 JAPEX 10.15% 30 Oil India 10.56% 31 Noble Energy 10.59% 32 Hess Corporation 10.59% 33 Marathon Oil 10.69% 34 Glencore 10.70% 35 Rosneftegaz 10.83% 36 Husky Energy 10.84% 37 Anadarko 11.07% 38 Tullow Oil 11.09% 39 EOG Resources 11.22% 40 Devon Energy 11.27% 41 Chesapeake Energy 11.31% 42 Occidental Petroleum 11.62% 43 Suncor Energy 12.08% 44 Newfield Exploration 12.50% 45 Canadian Natural Resources 12.57% 46 Cenovus Energy 13.41% 47 Continental Resources 14.09% 48 California Resources 14.22% 49 Pioneer Natural Resources 14.45% 50 Denbury Resources 15.86%

17 Climate-related Financial Risk Scorecards All 50 companies reviewed are given a climate risk scorecard to allow investors to compare profiles. Exxon Mobil Chevron Business as Usual (BAU) Assessment 1 2 Climate Agreement Low Risk Case 2 2 Climate Agreement High Risk Case 3 Business as Usual (BAU) Assessment 1 2 Climate Agreement Low Risk Case 2 2 Climate Agreement High Risk Case 3 Production (kboe) Gas 20,417,556 18,443,819 18,443,819 Liquids 21,247,573 18,154,171 18,154,171 Total 41,665,130 36,597,990 36,597,990 Cash Flow (bln) Total Net Cashflow 4 $ $ $ Net Present Value (NPV) 5 $ $ $52.69 Climate Risk Ratio = 1 - (NPV 2 / NPV BAU) 9.35% 67.55% Climate Risk Ranking 6 25/50 1. Estimates based on Wood Mackenzie estimates for currently commercial projects over the period from to Assumes oil and gas output is reduced over time in line with the IEA s 2C Scenario (2C production/bau production) using Wood Mackenzie's BAU price curve 3. Assumes oil and gas output is reduced over time in line with the IEA s 2C Scenario (2C production/bau production) using Wood Mackenzie Low Price Curve 4. Net Cash Flow = (Net Revenue Royalty Payments Capex Opex Government Take) 5. Calculated using a 10% discount rate 6. Ranking is from lowest to highest exposure Net Production Net Cash Flow Production (kboe) Gas 12,376,464 11,230,446 11,230,446 Liquids 15,649,324 13,431,879 13,431,879 Total 28,025,788 24,662,325 24,662,325 Cash Flow (bln) Total Net Cashflow 4 $ $ $ Net Present Value (NPV) 5 $ $ $80.96 Climate Risk Ratio = 1 - (NPV 2 / NPV BAU) 8.21% 51.45% Climate Risk Ranking 6 18/50 1. Estimates based on Wood Mackenzie estimates for currently commercial projects over the period from to Assumes oil and gas output is reduced over time in line with the IEA s 2C Scenario (2C production/bau production) using Wood Mackenzie's BAU price curve 3. Assumes oil and gas output is reduced over time in line with the IEA s 2C Scenario (2C production/bau production) using Wood Mackenzie Low Price Curve 4. Net Cash Flow = (Net Revenue Royalty Payments Capex Opex Government Take) 5. Calculated using a 10% discount rate 6. Ranking is from lowest to highest exposure Net Production Net Cash Flow 6,000 $30, $30,000 5,000 $25, $25,000 kboe/d 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 Millions $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $- $(5,000) kboe/d Millions $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $ $(10,000) $(5,000) Gas Apache 2C Net WI production Liquid 2C Liquid 2C BAU Debt Maturing 2C Low Risk Case 6C BAU Case 2C High Risk Case Gas 2C Liquid 2C BAU Apache Net WI production Liquid 2C Debt Maturing 2C Low Risk Case 6C BAU Case 2C High Risk Case

18 GHG Emissions Ratings Oil and Gas Industry

19 GHG Emissions of Fossil Fuels More work still needs to be done to understand the emission-based quality of each company s production. Kg CO2 per Barrel GHG Emissions per Barrel of Oil Produced (source Climate Oil Index, Wood Mackenzie Upstream Data Tool, VoLo Foundation estimates) Average GHG Emissons per Barrel Percentage of Total Oil Production % 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Percent of Total Oil Produced used in Estimate Kg CO2 per Barrel U.S. Texas Eagle Ford Volatile Total GHG Emissions per Barrel of Oil (source Climate-Oil Index) Nigeria Agbami United Arab Emirates Murban Canada Hibernia Mexico Chuc Russia Romashkinskoye Angola Girassol Libya Waha Russia Chayvo Angola Takula UK Forties Blend Norway Oseberg Iraq Kirkuk Iran Marun Nigeria Escravos Beach Iraq Zubair Nigeria Bonny Canada Cold Lake CSS Dilbit U.S. California Midway Sunset

20 Key Macro Takeaways 1. Clear, consistent, and comparable metrics can be developed to measure climate-related financial risk. 2. Keeping temperatures from rising more than 2 C may expose oil and gas companies to a number of financial risks related to demand, price, cash flows, asset values, debt repayment, and sovereignty rights. 3. Companies that assume that natural decline rates will allow them to continue to fully develop their asset bases even under a 2 C case may not be fully considering how SOEs will response if demand declines. 4. While most of the oil and gas industry s $1trln of debt is short-dated and manageable, companies with debt obligations that extend beyond 2040 are more likely to exposed to climate-related financial risk. 5. More work still needs to be done on the data front to incorporate GHG estimates into climate-risk models.