As posted in January, most analysts predicted that Chevron and Hess would prevail. Now that the arbitration panel has ruled, Chevron’s acquisition of Hess can be completed.
The position of Exxon and its partner, Chinese govt owned CNOOC, never made much sense given that Chevron was not buying the Stabroek share, they were buying the company that holds that share.
Not much attention has been paid to the importance of Chevron’s acquisition of Hess’s Gulf of America assets. The combined company will be the 3rd largest GoM oil producer (behind Shell and bp) and the second largest gas producer (behind only Shell). Hess acquired 20 GoA leases in Sale 261, ranking first in total high bids ($88 million) among all participants.
Reuters and others report that zinc from a new Chevron well has contaminated oil production destined for an Exxon refinery via Shell’s Mars Pipeline System. Because contaminated crude may cause maintenance issues and reduces the quality of refined products, Exxon will not accept crude from the Mars system until the zinc issue has been resolved.
The Mars system delivers about 575,000 bopd raising concerns about supplies to Gulf Coast refineries. But fear not, DOE authorized the delivery of up to 1 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to the Exxon’s Baton Rouge refinery.
(Ironically, yesterday’s post pointed to the importance of the SPR and questioned the decision to drastically reduce crude oil purchases. This zinc incident is likely to be minor, and Exxon will repay the SPR in kind. However, more serious regional, domestic, and international events could call for much greater SPR withdrawals.)
The above map shows Chevron platforms that connect with the Mars system at Port Fourchon.
Speculation/commentary:
The well/platform responsible for the zinc contamination has not been identified. Given that production is ramping up at Chevron’s Anchor facility, a new well on that platform may be the source of the zinc. Other Chevron platforms that connect to the Mars system are indicated in the diagram above.
Given that zinc in crude oil is rare, a well completion fluid containing zinc bromide may be the culprit.
Note the integration of offshore production streams, and the involvement of 3 industry super-majors. These companies are highly competitive, as evidenced by the Chevron-Exxon Stabroek dispute, but are also cooperative in producing, transporting, and refining oil and gas. However, they and other majors are restricted (rather illogically) from bidding jointly for leases.
Exxon senior vice president Neil Chapman said he was confident that a three-member arbitration panel would rule in Exxon’s favor and determine it had a right-of-first-refusal to purchase Hess’ stake in a Guyana oil joint venture operated by Exxon.
Hess: “We remain confident that the arbitration will confirm the Stabroek right of first refusal does not apply to the merger.”
“In baseball, ties famously go to the baserunner, but in county government it’s forced a legal fight in the courts.”
“The oil company Sable Offshore is insisting that when the County Board of Supervisors voted 2-2 on whether or not to allow another oil company, Exxon, to transfer its permits to Sable, the tie goes to Sable.”
“Accordingly, Sable — much in the limelight recently — just filed a lawsuit against the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors in federal court to make that point. Joining Sable in this dispute is ExxonMobil, the oil giant that sold Sable its three offshore platforms, its 120-mile pipeline, and its onshore oil storage and processing facilities known as the Santa Ynez Unit two years ago.”
Because the Planning Commission had voted 3-1 to allow the transfer, Sable argues that the 2-2 Supervisors vote upholds the Planning Commission decision.
Never a dull moment in the Santa Ynez Unit restart doneybrook. More on the tie vote here and here.
On May 26 in London a three-judge International Chamber of Commerce panel will finally begin considering the Exxon claim that the Stabroek joint operating agreement grants them the right-of-first-refusal in Chevron’s acquisition of Hess’s 30% share of the massive field (>11 billion boe) offshore Guyana.
Exxon’s rather unlikely ally in this case is state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp. How did CNOOC get a stake in Stabroek and why is their position on the Hess acquisition hypocritical?
CNOOC became a 25% Stabroek partner by acquiring Canadian Nexen in 2013. Their Nexen acquisition, which included Canadian, US, and international assets, was only reluctantly approved by the Canadian and U.S. governments, and probably would not be approved today.
CNOOC’s Stabroek acquisition is thus very similar to Chevron’s. In both cases, the entire company, not just the Stabroek asset, was acquired.
The Stabroek acquisition has proven to be most fortuitous for CNOOC, not only because of the oil and gas resources, but also through the deepwater development expertise that has been gained. Now CNOOC is trying to further leverage their Stabroek position by joining Exxon in challenging the Chevron acquisition.
It would be great if the arbitration proceedings were streamed, but that will not be the case. It also appears unlikely that media will be allowed to attend or that transcripts will be made available.
As previously noted, I would have liked the Guyanese government to be more assertive in this dispute. Stabroek is Guyana’s offshore gem, their most important economic asset. This lengthy dispute has to affect partner teamwork and communication. From safety, environmental, and production standpoints, do you want feuding partners managing such an important national asset?
Attached is a recent Sable Offshore presentation for investors. Notably, Sable is now projecting to resume Santa Ynez Unit production in Q2 2025 (see slide below). John Smith thinks this is unrealistic, and I have to agree.
It’s tough for an offshore producer to succeed in California, but Sable is making a strong effort. Exxon must agree, because they have extended Sable’s first production deadline to 3/1/2026, which reflects a more plausible Q1 2026 restart. Additional extensions seem likely if necessary given that Exxon’s other options aren’t very attractive.
The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors tie vote on the transfer of permits from Exxon to Sable has both sides declaring victory! (And I thought I was the only one who was confused!)
“During Wednesday’s meeting of the county Planning Commission, Lisa Plowman, director of Planning & Development, expressed uncertainty about the future of the permits and said the split vote meant that the board took no action.
“We are in the process of (…) determining what that actually means in the long run for Sable and the opponents,” Plowman said.”
“The county has not in recent memory had a tie vote under this section. The county is looking into what happens next.”
Sables’ take: “Sable is pleased the appeals failed and the Planning Commission’s approval of the Santa Ynez Unit permit transfer to Sable stands. We look forward to continuing to work with the county to finalize the permit transfer and to safely restarting production as soon as possible.”
Environmental Defense Center’s take: “We applaud the Board of Supervisors’ decision to NOT transfer permits to Sable to operate a defective pipeline and dangerous processing facilities on our shores.”
Just when you thought this couldn’t get more complicated!😖😣
SANTA BARBARA, Calif. — A controversial oil project on California’s Central Coast remains unresolved after the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors deadlocked 2-2 on a vote regarding a permit transfer for a pipeline linked to the 2015 Refugio oil spill. The stalemate means Sable Offshore Corp.’s application remains pending without approval or denial, leaving the next steps up to the company.
“They still have a pending application with no action taken on it,” said Kelsey Gerckens Buttitta, public information officer with Santa Barbara County. “It hasn’t been approved or denied. It’s now up to Sable to decide what to do next.”
The Board voted 2-2 to uphold the approval of the transfer of permits from Exxon to Sable. The tie vote meant the appeal of the previous approval failed.
Interestingly, one of the Supervisors reportedly slammed the California Coastal Commission for being politically motivated and abusing the law.
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 