独家问答:贝克研究所 Mark P. Jones 的 Vaca Muerta 逆风

莱斯大学贝克公共政策研究所的政治学研究员 Mark P. Jones 最近向 Hart Energy 谈到了石油和天然气投资者在阿根廷瓦卡穆尔塔 (Vaca Muerta) 大型页岩油田寻找页岩油机会时所面临的一些阻力。

琼斯告诉哈特能源公司,所有大公司都希望在阿根廷立足,因为瓦卡穆尔塔是一种非常重要的资源,不容忽视。图为阿根廷内乌肯的抽油机从地下抽出原油。(来源:Shutterstock.com)

阿根廷是瓦卡穆尔塔阵型的所在地,这是美洲地区除美国以外最发达的非常规打法

根据美国能源信息署 (EIA) 的数据,南美国家的页岩气技术可采资源量估计为 802 Tcf,而中国为 1,115 Tcf。该机构补充说,阿根廷还拥有 27 桶技术可采页岩油资源。

但是,尽管拥有巨大的地下资源基础和发展蓬勃发展的液化天然气出口业务的潜力,但似乎总是在地面上酝酿的经济和政治问题仍然对国内外投资者构成巨大的阻力。

Hart Energy 高级记者 Pietro Donatello Pitts 与休斯敦莱斯大学拉美研究 Joseph D. Jamail 系主任 Mark P. Jones 进行了简短交谈,讨论了投资者在阿根廷面临的上述一些阻力。琼斯是詹姆斯·A·贝克三世公共政策研究所政治学系教授、政治学研究员兼全球事务硕士项目教务主任。

Pietro D. Pitts:尽管经济和政治存在持续的不确定性,石油和天然气公司仍然对阿根廷的 Vaca Muerta 页岩油感兴趣吗?

马克·琼斯:阿根廷是一个在石油和天然气方面具有巨大潜力的国家。因此,Vaca Muerta 的潜力怎么强调都不为过。

在监管和运输基础设施方面,以及在石化工业和液化天然气方面充分利用天然气的物流方面,将天然气(特别是天然气)推向市场一直是一个重要问题。

所有大公司都希望在阿根廷立足,因为瓦卡穆尔塔是一种非常重要的资源,不容忽视。困难在于阿根廷政府制造了地面风险,使得公司要么不愿意进行更深层次的投资,可能会导致他们拥有的固定资产容易受到隐性或显性征用,或者在没有能力将石油和天然气运往国外市场并获得实际投资回报的情况下进行投资。

PDP:阿根廷作为液化天然气出口国还缺少什么?

MPJ:他们需要两件大事。其中之一是新的天然气管道 Gasoducto Nestor Kirchner。这将对事情有很大帮助并解决孪生问题。首先,它将允许阿根廷使用国内天然气而不是进口天然气,这将节省数十亿美元的外汇。其次,在南半球夏季和北半球冬季,它将为阿根廷提供向欧洲和其他地方出口液化天然气的潜力。

“阿根廷面临的危险之一是,在某个时刻,液化天然气作为燃料的窗口将会关闭。”贝克公共政策研究所的帕克·P·琼斯(ark P. Jones)

但问题是谁来建造液化天然气工厂。[除此之外],在美国,我们从博蒙特/查尔斯湖地区一直到科珀斯克里斯蒂建造了几座液化天然气工厂,所以我们已经经历过并且[知道]这在美国需要很长时间。在美国,任何需要很长时间的事情在阿根廷这样的环境中都会花费两倍的时间。

我认为阿根廷面临的危险之一是,在某个时候,液化天然气作为燃料的窗口将会关闭。一些国家或公司可能开始不愿意投资液化天然气工厂,该工厂在两到四年内不会投入运营,并且可能在接下来的十年内基本上无法收回成本,因为您正在尝试预测天然气需求2035年在世界上。

PDP:将阿根廷天然气出口到智利,然后利用那里现有的工厂来建设液化能力的机会怎么样?

MPJ:这是一种选择,但[尽管]你不冒液化天然气工厂被征用的风险,但困难在于天然气被关闭的风险,这就是智利人在 2000 年代末经历的情况。智利人以来自阿根廷的廉价天然气为基础建立了整个能源矩阵,然后阿根廷人缓慢但坚定地关闭了所有天然气。


有关的:

拉丁美洲丰富的投资机会


PDP:那么即使你们确实在智利进行了投资,仍然存在很大的风险吗?

MPJ:是的,因为最终您仍然依赖阿根廷天然气。假设我在智利建了那个天然气厂,阿根廷人不能征用,所以它不能是明确的征用,但他们可以含蓄地说,“是的,我们会卖给你天然气,但我们只是将以 15 美元/MMbtu 的价格出售给您。” 因此,令人担心的是你不能相信任何合同,我认为阿根廷液化天然气工厂建设的唯一方式与管道建设的方式相同,那就是由政府建设。

PDP:如果我们必须依赖似乎总是面临金融和经济逆风的阿根廷政府,那么长期液化天然气出口选择可能永远不会实现,对吗?

MPJ:是的,尤其是因为我们即将进入一个令人着迷的时期,即使政府不认为他们可以在阿根廷下一个冬天或春天之前让天然气管道内斯托基什内尔投入运行,在选举之前,他们可能会在某个时候停止。为什么要把钱或稀缺的硬通货花在一条只会让你的继任者受益的管道上,而你的继任者很可能是像奥拉西奥·罗德里格斯·拉雷塔、帕特里夏·布尔里奇或毛里西奥·马克里这样的反对派政客?

因此,这就是该国可能进一步落后于八球的地方,因为在管道方面不会取得任何真正的进展,只有当新政府掌权时,我们才能重新关注它,但意味着重做所有合同,然后你又损失了几年。即使如此,在管道真正投入运行之前,您也无法真正开始考虑建造液化天然气工厂。

PDP:那么,阿根廷短期内仍没有真正承诺出口液化天然气吗?

MPJ:不,我认为阿根廷作为一个国家担心的是,在某个时候全球对天然气的需求将开始直线下降。在不远的将来,它们可能会达到一个阶段,即不再有液化天然气市场,因为足够多的国家已经转向可再生能源,因此,二叠纪和其他现有来源满足了天然气市场的需求。大部分。

原文链接/hartenergy

Exclusive Q&A: Vaca Muerta Headwinds with Baker Institute’s Mark P. Jones

The Rice University Baker Institute for Public Policy’s Political Science Fellow Mark P. Jones recently spoke to Hart Energy about some of the headwinds confronting oil and gas investors eyeing shale opportunities in Argentina’s massive Vaca Muerta formation.

All the major companies want to keep a foot in Argentina because the Vaca Muerta is simply too important a resource to not have a presence in, Jones told Hart Energy. Pictured is an oil pumpjack pumping crude out of the ground in Neuquen, Argentina. (Source: Shutterstock.com)

Argentina is home to the Vaca Muerta formation, the most developed unconventional play in the Americas outside the U.S.

The South American country’s technically recoverable shale gas resources are estimated at 802 Tcf while China has 1,115 Tcf, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). Argentina also boasts a technically recoverable shale oil resource of 27 Bbbl, the U.S.-based agency added.

But, despite this massive subsurface resource base and potential to develop a thriving LNG export business, economic and political issues seemingly always brewing above ground remain as formidable headwinds for foreign and domestic investors.

Hart Energy Senior Reporter Pietro Donatello Pitts spoke briefly with Mark P. Jones, the Joseph D. Jamail Chair in Latin American Studies at Rice University in Houston, about some of the above headwinds investors confront in Argentina. Jones is a professor in the Department of Political Science, the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy’s Political Science Fellow and the faculty director of the Master of Global Affairs Program.

Pietro D. Pitts: Are oil and gas companies still interested in Argentina’s Vaca Muerta shale play despite the ongoing economic and political uncertainties?

Mark P. Jones: Argentina is a country that in oil and natural gas has tremendous potential. So, it’s tough to overstate the potential that the Vaca Muerta has.

The problem of getting the natural gas in particular to market has always been above ground in terms of regulatory and transportation infrastructure, as well as having the logistics to take full advantage of the gas in terms of the petrochemical industry and LNG.

All the major companies want to keep a foot in Argentina because the Vaca Muerta is simply too important a resource to not have a presence in. The difficulty has simply been the Argentine government creating aboveground risks such that companies either are reluctant to make deeper investments that might cause them to have fixed assets that make them vulnerable to an implicit or explicit expropriation or to make investments where they don't have the ability to get their oil and gas to a foreign market where they can get a real return on their investment.

PDP: What’s missing for Argentina to move forward as an LNG exporter?

MPJ: They need two big things. One is the new gas pipeline, the Gasoducto Néstor Kirchner. That will help things quite a bit and resolve the twin problems. First, it will allow Argentina to use domestic gas instead of importing it, which will save billions in terms of foreign currency. Second, during the austral summer and boreal winter, it will provide Argentina with the potential to export LNG to Europe and elsewhere.

“One of the dangers for Argentina is that at some point the window on LNG is going to close as a fuel.”—Mark P. Jones, Baker Institute for Public Policy

Although the problem with that is who’s going to build the LNG plant. [Apart from that], in the U.S., we’ve built several LNG plants from the Beaumont/Lake Charles area down to Corpus Christi, so we have experienced and [know] it takes a long time here in the United States. And anything that takes a long time in the United States can take double that amount of time in an environment like Argentina.

I think one of the dangers for Argentina is that at some point the window on LNG is going to close as a fuel. You may start to have some countries or companies be reluctant to make an investment in an LNG plant that won't become operational for two to four years and may not essentially pay for itself for another ten years because you're trying to predict gas demand in the world in 2035.

PDP: What about the opportunity to export Argentine gas to Chile and then use the existing plants there to build out liquefaction capacity?

MPJ: That’s an option but the difficulty there [even though] you don't run the risk of your LNG plant being expropriated is the risk of the gas being turned off and that's what the Chileans experienced during the late 2000s. The Chileans built their entire energy matrix based on cheap natural gas from Argentina and then the Argentines slowly but surely turned off all the gas.


RELATED:

Latin America's Abundance of Investment Opportunities


PDP: So even if you did make the investments in Chile, there’s still a lot of risk?

MPJ: Yes, as you’re just still depending on Argentine gas at the end of the day. Let’s say I built that gas plant in Chile, the Argentines can’t expropriate so it can’t be an explicit expropriation, but implicitly they can say, "Yes we’ll sell you gas, but we’re only going to sell it to you at a price say for instance of $15/MMbtu." So, the fear is you can’t trust any contracts and the only way I think the LNG plant in Argentina gets built is the same way the pipeline gets built and that is by the government.

PDP: If we have to rely on the Argentine government, which is seemingly always confronting financial and economic headwinds, the long-term LNG exporting options it’s something that might never materialize, right?

MPJ: Right, especially because we're about to hit the bewitching period where—even with the Gasoducto Néstor Kirchner—[whereby] if the government doesn’t think they can get it operational by the next Argentine winter or the spring before the election then at some point they may just pull the plug. Why spend money or scarce hard currency on a pipeline that’s only going to benefit your successor, which is likely going to be an opposition politician like Horacio Rodríguez Larreta, Patricia Bullrich or Mauricio Macri?

So, that’s where the country could get even further behind the eight ball because no real progress would be made regarding the pipeline and it’s only when the new government takes control that we’re able to focus back on it but that means redoing all the contracts and then you’ve lost another couple of years. Even then you can’t even really start to think about building an LNG plant until you actually have that pipeline operational.

PDP: So, LNG exports from Argentina are still not really promised any time soon?

MPJ: No, and I think the fear for Argentina as a country is that at some point the global demand for gas is going to start to plummet. And they may hit a point in the not-too-distant future where there is no LNG market anymore because a sufficient number of countries have gone to renewables and, as a result, the gas market is satisfied by the Permian and other existing sources for the most part.