Royal Dutch Shell plc .com Rotating Header Image

Posts Tagged ‘Tom Botts Shell’

Motiva refinery proceeding only because the company decided not to kill it

The Globe and Mail

In Texas, oil sands firms fight for their share

Pipeline extension to Gulf Coast refineries is key for Canadian producers

Shawn McCarthy

Port Arthur, Tex. Globe and Mail Update Saturday, Nov. 07, 2009

There is an air of disquiet along the Gulf Coast of the United States, an industrial strip that could have a profound influence on the future of Canada’s oil-fuelled economy.

The refineries that dot the coast represent a major new market that could fuel the expansion of Canada’s oil sands producers, as well as a major pipeline player. And indeed, on the surface, growth appears to be the order of the day. But after a brief golden age, there is a growing fear along refiners’ alley that the bubble has burst.

In the muddy fields adjacent to Motiva Enterprises LLC’s sprawling Port Arthur refinery, teams of contractors toil on stainless steel vessels and refining modules that resemble so many giant Lego pieces, all waiting for assembly in a $7-billion (U.S.) expansion of the plant.

Motiva – a joint venture between Royal Dutch Shell PLC and state-owned Saudi Aramco – is doubling its refining capacity to 600,000 barrels a day. The site will also add a coker so it can process the heavy grades of crude, such as bitumen from Canada’s oil sands, that make up a growing share of the world’s oil supply.

Because the U.S. is the only export market for Canadian crude, expanded U.S. refineries like Motiva’s are key to Alberta’s ambitions to double, or even triple, oil sands production over the next decade.

But here’s the catch. The Motiva refinery is proceeding only because the company, after weighing discouraging trends in the market, decided not to kill it.

“In general, the outlook for total refining capacity in the U.S. is downward pressure,” says Motiva’s chief executive officer, Robert Pease.

“As new capacity like ours comes on stream, there will be even greater pressure on others to close down eventually.”

The U.S. petroleum market is facing what one analysis has called a “tsunami of change.” The industry faces the unhappy combination of depressed demand, growing competition from foreign refiners and a sector-wide rationalization that will force refinery closings.

Moreover, looming regulatory changes requiring reductions in greenhouse gas emissions will drive up refiners’ costs, particularly for the energy-intensive, emissions-heavy processing of heavy crudes.

“We’re facing a lot of challenges,” Tom Botts, a senior refining executive from Shell, told a decidedly downbeat industry conference in Houston last week. “And not all of us are going to survive the coming shakeout.”

From the Canadian perspective, all this adds up to a less-than-sunny forecast. The hopes of oil sands producers such as EnCana Corp. and Shell ride on getting a larger slice of a shrinking pie – and those hopes are hobbled by the high environmental cost of oil sands crude. The producers will face downward pressure on bitumen prices as refiners look to pass added regulatory costs to their suppliers.

What’s more, Canadian producers face an array of other countries, from Brazil to Saudi Arabia, that are keen to export to the Gulf Coast, joining traditional suppliers such as Mexico and Venezuela.

Taken together, the U.S. demand and supply challenges raise questions about whether investment in the oil sands will ever reach the peaks that enthusiasts in the sector have imagined.

The refiners’ dilemma

The Port Arthur complex, located 140 kilometres east of Houston on the Intracoastal Waterway, is one of the oldest refineries in the United States, dating back to the founding of the Texas oil industry.

It was built to handle oil from the famed 1901 Spindletop gusher in nearby Beaumont, and has long been one of the workhorses of the Gulf Coast region, which boasts the world’s largest concentration of refineries, accounting for nearly half of U.S. production.

Over the years, its successive owners have invested heavily in new technology – investments to reduce operating costs, keep up with the expanding market, or to meet environmental requirements such as the elimination of sulphur from gasoline and diesel.

When Shell and Aramco approved the current expansion three years ago, North American refiners were earning fat profits and were looking to expand capacity to meet booming demand.

At the time, refining bottlenecks were a hallmark of the industry. Every time a plant went down or a hurricane threatened the Gulf Coast, gasoline prices and refining profits soared.

But record-high oil prices in 2008 and the ensuing recession bludgeoned demand for petroleum products. Profits evaporated, and many refiners responded this year by shelving expansion plans or even shutting down operating units.

Last March, Motiva management sat down with its Shell and Aramco shareholders to re-evaluate whether it made sense to plow $7-billion (U.S.) into a project that would refine an additional 320,000 barrels a day of crude oil.

The decision: Proceed, but at a slower pace, pushing back the startup date by two years in order to shave costs and give the market some time to recover.

The cancellation of the Motiva project would have dealt a major blow to Canadian plans.

Currently, virtually all Canadian exports go to refineries in the Midwest, whether as bitumen or upgraded synthetic crude. Some exports do make their way to the East Coast, but only small amounts are exported to the Texas-Louisiana refining hub and to the West Coast.

In order to expand production in Canada, oil companies need to either add domestic upgrading capacity – which is tremendously expensive and raises emissions concerns – or count on American refiners increasing their ability to process the raw bitumen.

As of two years ago, companies like Motiva, Valero Energy Corp., Marathon Oil Co. and ConocoPhillips Co. had all announced plans to add cokers both along the Gulf Coast and in the Midwest to process bitumen. Some have proceeded, but many projects have either been delayed or slowed down, like Motiva’s, or shelved.

The pipeline factor

The unfolding fate of the southern refinery sector is being watched closely not only by oil sands producers but also by Canada’s big pipeline companies, which are likewise banking on growth. TransCanada Corp. and Enbridge Inc. have announced a series of expansions of their network, both adding volumes into traditional Midwest markets and extending pipelines deeper into the U.S.

TransCanada is seeking approval from state regulators in the U.S. and Canada’s National Energy Board to build a pipeline extension, dubbed Keystone XL, to deliver 500,000 barrels a day of bitumen to Gulf Coast refiners.

Backing TransCanada’s plan are some of the biggest producers in the oil sands, including Shell, EnCana, ConocoPhillips and Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. TransCanada’s competitor, Enbridge, has opposed Keystone XL, saying that, for at least several years, there won’t be enough production from the oil sands to keep all the new pipeline capacity full.

In seeking to reassure the NEB and the industry that Keystone XL makes sense, TransCanada paints a glowing picture of the appetite among Gulf Coast refiners for oil sands product. The company also pointed to the prospect of Canada making up for lower imports from Mexico and Venezuela, two of the biggest suppliers of heavy oil to the Gulf Coast.

Area refiners now import about six million barrels a day of crude, including two million barrels of Mexican and Venezuelan heavy. With little pipeline access, Canada exports a mere 100,000 barrels to the region.

Production at Mexico’s largest field, Canterell, is dropping rapidly, while Venezuela is not investing in expanding production and, as a result of the predilections of president Hugo Chavez, is looking to shift exports away from the U.S.

Meanwhile, TransCanada argues that oil sands producers could easily move an additional 500,000 barrels a day to the Gulf Coast once Keystone XL is in place.

“There are tremendous opportunities for Canadian crude to access a new market,” says Paul Miller, a vice-president at TransCanada. “You have significant reserves up in the Alberta oil sands, and to the extent you need crude oil for your refinery, you look to the closest, most available and less risky supply.”

The competitors

Canadian producers have long pursued a “market share” strategy in the U.S. The idea is that driving deeper into the heart of the continent can reap new revenue even if the overall market is not growing.

EnCana is a joint venture partner with ConocoPhillips on two U.S. refineries, and is in the midst of $3.6-billion expansion of its coking capacity at Wood River, Ill.

EnCana spokesman Alan Boras says the Keystone project represents a continuation of the southern campaign.

“Canadians have been very successful at pushing their volumes south and competing on a cost basis,” Mr. Boras says. “And the challenge will be to continually have low-cost supplies – or costs competitive with those supplies that are coming in from offshore.”

But there are limits to a strategy predicated on taking a greater share of a stagnant market, says economist Peter Tertzakian of Calgary-based ARC Financial Corp.

“They can count on it to a point, but they need to be very cautious,” Mr. Tertzakian says. “The challenge is going to arise when the potential for displacement stops – in other words, when Venezuela’s and Mexico’s production levels out or even start to rise again.”

Motiva’s Mr. Pease says the Gulf Coast is the “logical” market for Canadian crude. But he also acknowledges that, as a buyer of crude, he has a vested interested in seeing as much supply in the market as possible, to drive down prices.

And there will be plenty of competition from other producers as Canada looks to increase its share of the market. In fact, Motiva configured its Port Arthur expansion specifically to process growing volumes of heavy oil from Saudi Arabia and Brazil.

At the moment, the Saudis have shut down much of their heavy oil production as part of the effort by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to defend prices in a weakened global economy.

But as the recovery takes hold, the kingdom will ratchet up production of its heavy crude, with the Gulf Coast and growing Asian markets vying as key export destinations.

In keeping with Washington’s rhetoric about America’s unhealthy addiction to Middle East oil, Canadian suppliers like to tout the oil sands as a secure source for U.S. customers.

But Mr. Pease plays down those political considerations, saying commercial factors will determine where Motiva buys its crude. “We have no better supplier than Saudi Arabia,” he says regarding his shareholder. “Their ability to hit what they say they’re going to hit, deliver when they say they’re going to deliver, is unmatched.”

Meanwhile, Brazil’s state-controlled Petrobras SA is planning to increase production by two million barrels a day by 2020 as it develops its offshore discoveries. While much of that production is targeted for domestic refineries, some will also be shipped to the U.S.

As well, analysts say it would be a mistake to count out Mexico and Venezuela. While both countries face supply challenges, the Gulf Coast market is simply too important for them to abandon without a fight.

A ‘tsunami of change’

Despite all the unfavourable portents, Canadian producers believe two trends favour their expansion plans in the U.S.: Rising demand in emerging markets will draw off imports from traditional American suppliers, and the global industry will find it difficult to increase the overall supply base.

In fact, those two factors help explain why crude prices rebounded smartly from their recessionary lows hit earlier this year.

But oil sands producers face risks as their U.S. refining customers cope with weak petroleum demand and the environmental costs that could drive down the value of the heavy crudes.

A recent report from Deloitte & Touche’s energy practice warned of a “tsunami of change [that is] bearing down on the refining industry.”

“What had been a profitable industry running at respectable operating rates will see higher costs, steadily declining demand and excess capacity,” Deloitte partner Roger Ihne says.

U.S. demand for gasoline may well have peaked in 2005. While overall consumptions of products like gasoline, diesel and jet fuel should recover from recessionary lows, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) forecasts virtually no growth between now and 2020.

American motorists are expected to cut their gasoline consumption by 8 per cent between 2006 and 2018, and by 13 per cent by 2030, the agency forecasts.

Combine that lower demand with rising production from offshore drilling in the American area of the Gulf of Mexico, and the EIA foresees a sharp drop in U.S. crude imports. From the peak of imports in 2006, the agency says demand for foreign crude will fall by more than two million barrels a day by 2018, and by an additional one million barrels a day by 2030.

Even now, as a result of weak demand and facility expansions of the past few years, U.S. refiners are running at about 82 per cent of capacity. The number is projected to drop further in the next decade after being above 90 per cent for much of the previous one.

As a result, the industry expects a rationalization that could reduce its demand for crude by 1.5 million barrels a day from the current 17.5 million barrels. And the less-competitive, higher-cost refineries will close, Mr. Ihne predicts.

The profit squeeze has already bit refiners in Canada. Earlier this year, Irving Oil Ltd. cancelled its planned expansion in Saint John, N.B., while Shell announced it is considering the closing of its Montreal East refinery, which processes 130,000 barrels a day of imported crude.

The forecast decline in demand suggests the industry is on the wrong side of a number of demographic and public-policy trends.

Higher pump prices will likely encourage consumers to switch to smaller vehicles, according to the EIA. An aging population will also drive less.

A cap-and-trade killer?

Meanwhile, federal regulations in both the U.S. and Canada will force greater fuel efficiency and more use of biofuels.

And looming on the horizon is the refiners’ greatest fear: cap-and-trade regulations that would increase the costs of refining by forcing companies to pay for every tonne of carbon dioxide they emit. The regulations would drive up fuel costs, further dampening demand.

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed cap-and-trade legislation and a similar bill is now being debated in the Senate. But even if the bill fails to pass, the Environmental Protection Agency has vowed to regulate emissions.

Mr. Ihne calculates that refiners could see $8 per barrel added to their costs, a burden that would virtually wipe out their current profit margins.

The Canadian industry is particularly vulnerable because the refining process for oil sands bitumen is so energy-intensive, producing more emissions per barrel than light or medium-grade crudes.

Motiva’s Mr. Pease says his company has included as many energy-saving and emission-reducing technologies as possible in the Port Arthur expansion. He acknowledges, however, that refining heavier-grade crudes, like Canadian bitumen, would be more costly under the expected regulations.

“The emissions costs will go into what we are willing to pay,” he says. “You would expect emission limitations to put downward pressure on the value of heavy sours [like Canadian bitumen].”

U.S. refiners worry that the cap-and-trade legislation will lead to a greater reliance on imported gasoline and diesel from countries like Brazil, India and Saudi Arabia. Those emerging economies are refusing to impose emission caps on their industries, giving their expanding refinery sectors a cost advantage over American refiners.

India’s Reliance Industries Ltd. has just completed a 600,000-barrel-a-day refinery that is aimed exclusively at export markets. The Indian company has purchased sizable storage terminals in the U.S. and is clearly focusing on the American market.

“We feel this is a game changer in the worldwide refining industry,” Reliance’s president of corporate development, Mat Malladi told an industry audience in Houston.

Such moves could further reduce American refiners’ demand for Canadian crude.

But what of other markets? In recent years, Canadian producers have shown little interest in gaining access to fast-growing Asian markets through a pipeline to the West Coast, preferring to expand their presence in the U.S.

That appears to be changing. Enbridge is pursuing such an option with its $4.5-billion Northern Gateway project, a 1,170-kilometre pipeline that would deliver 525,000 barrels a day of oil sands crude to a terminal in Kitimat, B.C.

The industry failed to support Enbridge’s first run at the Gateway project three years ago, but there is more support for the current bid. However, critics – including first nations on the coast – have raised objections over the potential environmental impact from oil spills and tanker traffic.

Without such access to overseas market, Canada’s oil sands producers will face a future where their prosperity depends wholly on a risk-filled American market.

“There needs to be recognition of that, and a wake-up call,” Mr. Tertzakian says. “We need to diversify into growth markets if we’ve made the conscious decision to develop these resources and export them.”

SOURCE ARTICLE

An insiders view of Shell Exec Tom Botts: Below is the crap we receive from our ‘leader’

From our archives 2 February 2006…

FROM A SHELL INSIDER

Hello Alfred

Below is the crap we receive from our ‘leader’. It continues to baffle me that these politicians keep finding hollow words for their messages that never change. This cowboy from Wyoming expects a few things to be different this year (see bullet points at the bottom). This means in his eyes:

- We are NOT honest to each other.

- We do NOT learn quickly from mistakes

- There are gaps in the Operating Model (actually his personal invention)

- We do not simplify things and try to make shortcuts

All these statements are actually correct!!

Good to hear this from the ‘leader’ who is very good at scaring the hell out of his underlings and who simply will quench any opinion (and the bringer of that opinion) which does not lead to more bonus for himself. He is the prime example of how NOT to make a learning organisation.

A true learning organisation must be especially honest to itself. Bad news must travel fast without killing the messenger. And people must have fun. The rest will then follow automatically.

But surrounding oneself with sycophants, being very angry when bad news surfaces, destroying the messengers of the bad news and then publishing crap like the stuff below, is like in the old Kremlin days. They said something and did something else. We all know what happened to them.

I am so glad your website is open for sharing this with others.

A disgruntled shell employee.

LEAKED SHELL INTERNAL DOCUMENT DATED 30 JANUARY 2006

Message from Tom on 2005 Performance and Looking Ahead
30-Jan-2006
Tom Botts, Executive Vice President – Europe

Colleagues,

First, let me wish each of you a happy and safe New Year. I hope most of you were able to take some time off, relax, and spend time with family and friends. EP Europe is now in its third year—it’s hard to believe. I want to tell you I am very proud of the progress we have made on many fronts. At the same time, I also fully recognise the many challenges we still have in front of us to really make EPE Europe ‘be all it can be’. The key point for me is we are delivering very strong financial returns to the Group and our plateau production forecasts for the future extend further in time than ever before. In short, we are a cash engine for the Group and there is still a long future ahead of us.

Clearly the lowlights of 2005 are the four fatalities. We are making every effort possible to gain and embed all the learnings from these tragedies. Performance against our business targets was mixed. We generally did well on gas production, project delivery, providing growth opportunities, environmental performance, and recruiting new graduate and experienced people. We missed our targets on liquids production, opex, and of course have struggled getting the Corrib project back on track. Details of Group and EPE performance and the Business Performance Factor will be outlined in early February with the Q4 Business Results.

Looking ahead, we must shoot to meet or beat our EP Roadmap targets as outlined in the 2005 EPE Business Plan. Given the critical role we play in the Group, we must focus – month on month – on delivering our part. Our first priority remains safety. Thereafter the Roadmap targets of reserves, production, growth, project delivery, operational excellence and cost. All this is underpinned by using our professional skills and talents to their best effect. Those skills are our strength in EPE and they have really impressed me over the past 3 years. But we need to continue to help our people develop and contribute more effectively.

I know that last part is most important. If we don’t get that right, we can’t achieve what we’ve set out to do. Along those lines, I have sent a letter to your home address outlining the upcoming EPE Connecting Days which builds on the enhanced engagement we started at the ELN conference in Groningen in November. The EPE Connecting Days aim to bring together the entire EPE community to collectively review where we have come from, where we are going, and how we can make EPE better. My ELT colleagues and I look forward to seeing you all there!

Lastly, a word on what I expect to be different this year. Starting with myself and my Leadership Team, we will:

Have more honest talk and listening – bring issues into the room
Highlight successes, learn quickly from mistakes, and move on
Address the gaps in the operating model so we can maximise business value
Make the most of the EPE Connecting days to reengage the organization.
Find ways to simplify things, one step at a time

We are making progress and putting in place a sustainable foundation and legacy. As Jeroen said in his year end message, none of us joined Shell to be second best. If we stay on course, I know we will be a winning team!

Tom

Message from Tom on 2005 Performance and Looking Ahead
30-Jan-2006
Tom Botts, Executive Vice President – Europe

Shell Stanlow workers offered for sale like slaves in public auction

Ed O’Keeffe Photography

By John Donovan

On 18 August, The Sunday Times published an article: “Essar bids for British oil refinery in Shell auction“. It revealed that “Essar, the Indian energy, steel and shipping group, has made a bid for Royal Dutch Shell’s Stanlow refinery at Ellesmere Port…”

After being contacted by Shell insiders and supplied with internal email correspondence, it has become plain to us that the “auction” provides another classic example of Shell senior management disdain for Shell employees: in this case 800 people.

Self-explanatory extracts from one Shell Stanlow insider who has contacted us…

“I must congratulate you on the depth of information provided on your website… It would appear that Shell are about to shaft their on shore employees in the same manner as your article on the disgraceful treatment of its North Sea oil workers and also its African staff. If the leak of information had not occurred I am sure that Shell would not have informed its staff until a sale had been made.”

We have confirmation from another Stanlow insider source that The Sunday Times article resulted from a leak and that the Stanlow workforce had no prior notice of any such announcement.

This is again confirmed in one of the related leaked Shell internal emails in our possession which reveal the depth of disgust at the turn of events.

The following is an extract from an email sent on 11 August by Lennert Klement of A/S Dansk Shell to senior Shell executives including Tom Botts, Shell’s Downstream Executive Vice President for Global Manufacturing and Hugh Mitchell, Chief Human Resources & Corporate Officer (and member of the Royal Dutch Shell Plc Executive Committee).

We are extremely upset that the above announcement was leaked to the press without any prior warning to the SEF and in particular to the delegates of the Manufacturing Work Group. It is despicable that the Stanlow workforce should hear about their future in the manner that this has occurred. What has happened to Honesty, Integrity and Trust, this is ” Shell Language ” often used by Management, it is with regret that none of this was apparent.

Klement is Chair of Shell European Forum National Trade Union Representative.  The email was also sent to Dr. Agnus Cassens, Bjorn Lindberg, and Lia Belilos, all senior managers at Shell.

Comment from a Stanlow insider source:

“The main concerns of the Shell staff who will be impacted by a sale is the loss of their final salary pensions that have been built up over many years of service but will be adversely affected by not reaching full service due to the sale and the fact that all staff who do not currently have a window open cannot apply for other jobs within Shell and hence remain Shell employees but will be ring fenced and sold as commodities to the new owners.

The intrigue, sense of betrayal and concern over employees being traded like cattle, perhaps to an even more callous owner, is reminiscent of the outcry in December 2007 when Shell decided to outsource 3,200 Shell IT employees.

Extracts from comment received from a Shell IT insider in December 2007:

The most frustrating thing about all this is that Shell employees are getting traded like commodities. We are expected to join the outsourcer without knowing what we will be paid or how we will be compensated, or worse yet, how we will be treated! They talk about how we are getting ‘treated fairly’ but it is anything but.

The feeling of working for many years and giving to a company, to all of sudden be encouraged to join an outsourcer has a feeling of betrayal to it. I do realize that things could be much worse. They are VERY heavily persuading us to join the outsourcing partners. We signed up to work for Shell, not an outsourcer, and there are no guarantees of the unknown. Who knows what will happen once we’re handed over to another company.

In the case of the Stanlow Refinery auction, the workforce could soon found themselves working for the Libyan National Oil Company controlled by the Libyan dictator Muammar al-Gaddafi, the man ultimately responsible for UK terrorist outrages, including the Pan-Am flight 103 bombing.  What a prospect.

RELATED ARTICLES

My prayers for Shell Stanlow employees

Future of oil refinery in doubt as Shell considers sale of Stanlow (The Guardian)

Oil giant considers Stanlow sale (BBC News)

Stanlow will stay open, says Shell (Manchester Evening News)

“Shell says it will only sell the refinery as a going concern, and if such a deal cannot be found it will retain the site.”

Leaked Shell Emails Discuss Despicable Treatment of Stanlow Refinery Workforce

Hugh Mitchell, Shell’s Chief Human Resources & Corporate Officer and member of the Royal Dutch Shell Plc Executive Committee

By John Donovan

We are in possession of current Shell internal emails involving senior Royal Dutch Shell executives, including Tom Botts Shell’s Downstream Executive Vice President for Global Manufacturing and Hugh Mitchell, Chief Human Resources & Corporate Officer (and member of the Royal Dutch Shell Plc Executive Committee).

The emails reveal disgust at how the proposed sale of the Shell Stanlow Refinery was leaked to the press and refer to the “despicable” treatment of the Stanlow workforce.

Once again, Shell employees are being sold like slaves in a public auction. Last time it was 3,000 Shell IT staff.

An article containing detailed information will be published on royaldutchshellplc.com later today.

It will contain comment from Shell insider sources whose identities will of course remain secret.

It must be dawning on Shell employees around the globe that they are working for a particularly ruthless and callous senior management, which views employees as mere commodities.