Page added on February 5, 2015
A Deloitte MarketPoint analysis suggested large-field projects, each producing more than 25,000 b/d, could bring on 1.835 million b/d in oil supply this year of which 635,000 b/d would be from members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and the rest from non-OPEC productions.
In 2014, new non-OPEC large-field projects collectively brought on 2.3 million b/d in new supply. These efforts spanned diverse geographies and production methods, ranging from Brazil’s offshore projects in the Roncador, Parque, Iracema, and Sapinhoa fields to Mars B in the Gulf of Mexico, and to Russian and Canadian oil sands projects.
Notably, these 2014 supply additions excluded the numerous US shale oil fields being developed. OPEC also contributed to the expanding large-field supply picture, adding another 1.4 million b/d of new oil production capacity in 2014, Deloitte said.
Researchers forecast that large-field projects to bring on a total 1.835 million b/d in new supply this year already are well under way and are unlikely to be halted, even in the current low-price environment.
Taking this momentum into account, the analysis for 2016 forecast large-field production additions of 2.676-3.434 million b/d from non-OPEC producers and 759,000 b/d from OPEC members.
For the past 2 years, US tight-oil production has grown at a rate of about 1 million b/d/year. This growth is expected to continue in 2015, but at a slower rate.
While the recent drop in crude prices has squeezed the budgets of shale producers, some reportedly have been able to lower their operating costs to below $40/bbl through efficiency gains and better economics in the “sweet spots” of the shale plays.
As a result, production growth is expected to continue in the short term despite low prices, albeit more slowly than in previous years. While there is no consensus on the extent to which growth will slow, many analysts expect declines of 300,000-500,000 b/d off the 2014 pace.
Peter Robertson, Deloitte LLP independent senior adviser for oil and gas and a former vice-chairman of Chevron Corp., told reporters during a Feb. 4 Deloitte briefing that it’s important to note the world experiences a 4-5% production loss per year just from normal depletion.
“So the added production has to equal this amount if we are to stay even with no additional growth,” Robertson said. “I think we’ve seen the bottom” of low oil prices. “We could revisit that but I think the question is not how low but rather how long.”
2016 forecasts
Based on current data, Deloitte researchers suggest oil demand could rise faster than supplies starting in 2016.
“Low prices over the next few years will likely inhibit investment in new projects—especially those in the early stages of discussion or in the engineering and design phases. It should also bolster demand, due to price elasticity, much faster than otherwise would be the case,” Deloitte said in its MarketPoint analysis.
The Deloitte MarketPoint price forecast is only one possibility among a multitude of potential outcomes, researchers noted, saying changes in the oil demand response and the trajectory of tight oil production growth would greatly change the outcome.
“With only negligible shifts in demand or production in the next 12 to 18 months, the average price could likely be lower, and the recovery would likely be U-shaped, reinforcing the price signal to shale producers to decrease production,” researchers said.
Forces that could potentially make upside price scenarios more likely “include any number of black swan events affecting supply or the perception of supply scarcity,” Deloitte said. “However, since oil markets are highly cyclical, they tend to overshoot or undershoot most long-term outlooks.”
John England, Deloitte LLP vice-chairman and leader of Deloitte’s oil and gas practice, said the current price environment has, or soon will, curb many development plans.
Robertson said he believes the rate of production growth will slow significantly in the US. He sees tight oil producers being the quickest within industry to actually slow production. Robertson believes a US tight oil production curtailment could be reflected in the market within months.
Consequently when oil prices stabilize, the tight oil producers also will be the ones able to most quickly increase production again, he said.
Rick Carr, Deloitte LLP principal and leader of Deloitte’s oil and gas operations, said crude oil futures prices on the New York Mercantile Exchange are not going to rebound to very high prices, such as $100/bbl, anytime soon.
Producers will be working to reduce costs and to change their cost structure, he said.
“They are going to have to learn to operate differently,” Carr said. “There is going to be a reset to the true costs in the North American shale market.”
For instance, independents that may have been willing to pay higher costs for unconventional drilling and completion activities in the past are no longer going to be willing to do that but instead will be asking service companies to help cut costs, he said.
9 Comments on "Deloitte studies oil supply growth for 2015-16"
Plantagenet on Thu, 5th Feb 2015 6:36 pm
The last thing we need in the middle of oil glut is still more projects coming on line and producing oil.
Davy on Thu, 5th Feb 2015 6:59 pm
The problem with this article it assumes the economy will not experience increasing demand destruction. All indicators are mainstreet is contracting. There is faux growth in the digital markets but that does not burn oil to produce physical products.
Pops on Fri, 6th Feb 2015 11:10 am
The other problem is that it seems to ignore the fact that while bringing on 2mmb/d sounds impressive it overlooks the 3-4mmd/d of natural decline.
GregT on Fri, 6th Feb 2015 11:45 am
If economies continue to fall like dominoes, the ‘oil glut’ could last indefinitely. All of the oil in the world will do absolutely no good, if economies can’t afford to pay for it.
How many more undulations left in the PO plateau before we have $10/bbl oil, while those of us that still can, ride our bicycles to our new jobs in the vegetable gardens?
Pops on Fri, 6th Feb 2015 1:35 pm
Lots and Lots of fat to render before $10.
The oil price will stay just over the edge of affordability until it renders that lard down to gristle.
LOL
GregT on Fri, 6th Feb 2015 2:18 pm
It seems to me that the fat is being rendered more quickly with each and every undulation. Time will tell how much there is left to render after this one.
marmico on Fri, 6th Feb 2015 2:19 pm
What’s with this “affordability” term that is bandied about? It is subjective which means it means whatever someone wants it to mean which means that it is meaningless.
Let’s attempt to make the term objective and compute how many gallons of gasoline Joe Sixpack or Jane Chardonnay can purchase with one hour of work. Voila. You get a FRED Chart with the last data point being 9.9 gallons. The average in the 25 year period ending in January 2015 is 8.7 gallons. Now, how many gallons per hour worked is affordable?
GregT on Fri, 6th Feb 2015 3:04 pm
“What’s with this “affordability” term that is bandied about?”
One in 6 Americans are on food assistance programs because food is no longer “affordable” for them. If not for government handouts, they would go hungry. This is not meaningless for 17% of the population of the United States of America, only for economists in training that can’t see beyond “meaningless” numbers written on pieces of glued together ground up cellulose.
Also marm, your FRED charts are meaningless for the average Joes and Janes, because they are averages. The numbers are skewed by the growing disparity between the rich and the poor.
Davy on Fri, 6th Feb 2015 4:00 pm
Marmmie, sometimes you have to let go of the Fred charts and see life for what it is not what yours and their selective numbers want life to be. The paradox of economic understanding currently is not to trust the numbers. Right is wrong and wrong is right. Got that Grasshopper.