Energy RIL-BP to invest $10bn to quadruple natural gas output by 2020 11 Dec, 2013, 1527 hrs IST, PTI
RIL-BP who are currently producing about 11.8 million standard cubic metres per day of gas is targetin newer fields in KG-D6 block now. NEW DELHI: Global oil giant BP Plc and its partner Reliance Industries will invest US $ 5-10 billion to quadruple natural gas production by 2020. RIL-BP, who are currently producing about 11.8 million standard cubic metres per day of gas from the flagging eastern offshore KG-D6 block, is targeting newer fields in KG-D6 block and gas discoveries in neighbouring north-east coast and Cauvery basin to raise output.
"An opportunity awaits the BP/RIL joint venture to quadruple production by 2020 as we rework the fields and get into the next phase of development of already discovered resources," BP India head Sashi Mukundan said at the 12th Petro India conference here. He said RIL-BP sees more potential in the blocks that the joint venture holds. "At BP we are committed to find more oil and gas globally including India where we are focused, along with our partner, on exploration, development and production in deep waters in the East Coast.
"I do believe there is a huge potential to find more hydrocarbons in the Indian basin and our presence, investment and track record to date is a testimony to this," he said. RIL-BP, he said, are focused on unlocking the next major hub for development in the East coast of India. "Our Joint Venture alone could reveal a prize of over USD 100-150 billion for India by avoiding costly imports."
Later talking to reporters, he said the production could rise to "40 or 50 or 60 (mmscmd)" by 2020. "We have been talking about an investment of USD 5-10 billion," he said. BP, which in 2011 invested USD 7.2 billion in India, sees the new production coming from the 11 satellite discoveries in the KG-D6 block, five finds in NEC-25 and two discoveries in Cauvery block.
"What is important is that we need to have clear pricing policy (for raising output)," Mukundan said. KG-D6 has seen output drop from almost 70 mmscmd achieved in March 2010 to under 12 mmscmd currently due to water and sand ingress in wells and drop in reservoir pressure. 10 out of the 18 wells on the main D1&D3 fields have shutdown due to the same reason. RIL-BP, he said, is doing remedial work on three shut wells which will yield results in January-March quarter.
Is BP plc Set For Electrifying Earnings Growth In 2014? By Motley Fool | Mon, 9th December 2013 - 11:16 Today I am weighing up the potential risks versus the possible rewards set to define BP’s (LSE:BP) (NYSE: BP.US) growth prospects in 2014.
Gulf saga set to come to a head
For BP, the fallout surrounding the Deepwater Horizon blowout in 2010 continues to weigh heavily. The firm’s recent decision to again lift its total cumulative charge for the incident — this time by $100m, to $42.5bn — indicates the scale of expected losses when a final court decision, likely in the next few months, is made.
The multi-year Gulf of Mexico saga has had its fair share of twists and turns, from accusations of evidence destruction by the firm’s employees, through to allegations of false damage claims made by local businesses. And the potential for plenty more intrigue could exacerbate the final bill. Elsewhere, the company also faces separate lawsuits related to allegations of energy price rigging in the US and Europe, scenarios which could also result in huge financial penalties for BP.
Another significant roadblock to earnings growth in 2014 and beyond could materialise in the form of escalating weakness in the oil price. The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) anticipates the average Brent crude price — which dropped to $108.01 per barrel this year from $111.65 in 2012 — to erode further in 2014, to $103 per barrel.
The organisation cites the effect of rocketing output in the US, which is expected to surge by 1m barrels a day to 8.5m barrels. On top of the potential for worsening supply, a continuous stream of patchy data from emerging and developed markets alike also points to weak demand prospects for the coming year.
Still, City analysts expect BP to follow an expected 28% surge in earnings per share this year, to 47.5p, with an additional 15% increase in 2014 to 54.6p.
These projections leave the oil colossus dealing on a P/E rating of 8.7 for next year, comfortably locked down within bargain terrain below 10, while a price to earnings to growth (PEG) readout of 0.6 — underneath the value marker of 1 — underlines its attractive price relative to its growth prospects, on paper at least.
Get the printers rolling with this Foolish pick
But for many investors, BP’s high risk profile outweighs the potential for significant rewards, even at current low prices. The business of oil exploration and production is fraught with uncertainties over potential payloads. And for BP the effect of exploration write-offs, and continued divestments to cover legal costs, continues to crimp output, and group production dipped 2.3% during July-September to 2.2bn barrels of oil equivalent per day.
BP: Gulf Spill Claim Paid to Escort Service Oil Firm Steps Up Campaign to Fight Payments for Deepwater Horizon Disaster
By Tom Fowler BP Says Escort Service Got Gulf Spill Payment
BP stepped up an attack on the court-appointed Deepwater Horizon claims administrator responsible for payments to business affected by the 2010 rig disaster, saying he improperly approved a $173,000 payout to an adult escort service.
Not every judge in the Fifth Circuit court has a similar background, and contentious cases can go to what is called an “en banc” review by eight or more judges, which could overrule the decisions of the three-judge panel. Still, as BP fights the case over whether it was grossly negligent in the disaster at the district court in New Orleans under Judge Carl Barbier, it knows it can appeal any decision and hope to receive more favourable treatment in the higher court. The liabilities facing BP as a result of the disaster are still very large and uncertain, and will take years to be fully resolved. The sceptical reaction in BP’s share price, which has gone sideways this week, is understandable. Nevertheless, the company is at least inching in the right direction. . . .  BP’s legal actions and potential liabilities ● Settlement for private sector claims – BP agreed a deal last year to compensate businesses and individuals, but has been arguing over how the settlement is interpreted. Has estimated the cost at more than $9.2bn, and much more than that if court rulings go against it. ● Clean Water Act penalties – Will be set by US court in New Orleans, up to a possible maximum of about $18bn. Will be much lower if BP is judged not to have acted with gross negligence. ● Environmental and economic damages – Will also follow the case in New Orleans. BP is facing environmental damages for harm done to coastal region, and economic claims from states and local authorities that lost tax revenue. Likely to be increased by punitive damages if gross negligence is found. There are also claims from other companies involved in the spill and businesses not covered by the settlement. ● Action against the EPA – BP is taking on the Environmental Protection Agency in an attempt to overturn the ban on benefiting from government contracts. ● Shareholder action – Investors allege that they were misled by BP about its safety, and have brought a case scheduled to come to trial next year.
Lily Fu Claffee, the US chamber’s general counsel, described the contract ban, which affects BP’s parent company and 21 of its subsidiaries, as “sweeping and unprecedented”. She added: “The EPA’s remarkable over-reach in this instance, if dpermitted to stand, will inject tremendous uncertainty in government contracting, to the detriment of the public and the contracting community alike.” While that support for BP suggests it is being recognised again as a regular member of the business community, the case over contracts is of secondary significance in terms of financial impact. BP’s fuel supply contracts with the US defence department were worth about $2bn per year in revenues, and would have had relatively slender margins. The really important case for the company is the civil action over billions of dollars in damages and penalties now being fought out through the US courts in New Orleans. Here, too, BP has had good news this week. On Monday, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit appeals court backed BP’s request for an injunction to suspend compensation payments to businesses that had not suffered any losses as a result of the spill. Those payments, made because of what BP argues is a misinterpretation of the settlement for businesses and individuals affected by the spill that it agreed with claimants’ lawyers last year, threatened to send the cost of compensation soaring to perhaps double the $7.8bn that the company initially estimated. BP has been raising the temperature over those payments with a series of adverts in US newspapers, including one revealing that an escort agency has received more than $173,000 under the settlement. The question of the interpretation used by Patrick Juneau, the court-appointed compensation claims administrator is not yet resolved. Plaintiffs’ lawyers say he has interpreted the settlement correctly, and accuse BP of trying to back off a commitment it signed up to willingly last year. That argument will be fought out in the appeals court, and may ultimately make its way to the Supreme Court, but BP has at least for the time being been able to stop the flow of cash going out to what it sees as unjustified claimants. The Fifth Circuit’s backing for BP has also sent a signal about the company’s future prospects in that court, which has been described by its critics as “the most corporation-friendly” or “the most conservative” in the US. Edith Clement, the appeals judge who has delivered the most strongly-worded opinion in support of BP, has been criticised for sitting on the board of the Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment, a free-market environmental think-tank, and was seen as a strong contender for appointment to the Supreme Court by George W Bush. Not every judge in the Fifth Circuit court has a similar background, and contentious cases can go to what is called an “en banc&
BP finds friends at US federal appeals court By Ed Crooks in New York After years during which BP appeared to be without a friend in the world, the company has at last this week been able to muster some support. The British government, prominent American business groups and – most importantly – a US federal appeals court, have all spoken out in the company’s defence. More ON THIS TOPIC BP wins reprieve on oil spill payouts BP wins spill compensation appeal BP had tools to end spill sooner, court told BP staff ‘not prepared for blowout’ IN OIL & GAS Shell ditches plans for US gas plant Oil majors near deal to cut Iraq targets UK backs BP in dispute with US government Energy reform takes shape in Mexico It is too soon to say the end is in sight for BP’s long legal war over the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster. The final cost of the spill in the Gulf of Mexico still seems certain to exceed the $42.5bn that the company has set aside so far. However, the interventions could help BP avoid some of the worst potential consequences it faces. They have also shown how the company is gradually rebuilding its standing in the US. The UK government’s statement, in a court submission known as an “amicus brief”, was the most eye-catching because David Cameron’s government has so far mostly kept its representations to the Obama administration in support of BP behind the scenes. In the court filing, the UK made its first public warning that jobs and pensions are at stake. The US court for the southern district of Texas, which is hearing BP’s attempt to overturn a ban on it winning contracts from the federal government, may not find the views of Her Majesty’s Government particularly persuasive. “It’s relatively unusual for a district court to give much weight to an amicus brief,” says Daniel Jacobs, a former US Department of Justice lawyer now at American University, “and I don’t see a compelling reason for the court to do so here.” However, the statement may have more influence in Washington. The UK has now made a clear statement that the future of BP is an important national interest, and future decisions by the US government will be judged in that light. In depth
Latest news on the litigation in the US to resolve damages and apportion blame for the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster In another joint amicus brief in the same case, American business lobby groups, including the US Chamber of Commerce, the American Petroleum Institute and the National Association of Manufacturers, turned their fire on the Environmental Protection Agency, the US regulator that has imposed the ban on government contracts. The business groups said they were “significantly concerned about the statutory over-reach EPA exhibited in this case”. Lily Fu Claffee, the US chamber’s general counsel, described the contract ban, which a
VirgilHilts: you would think so. Probably just solicitors, yet again !
Reuters) - A U.S. federal judge has refused to allow investors to proceed as a group in a lawsuit accusing BP Plc (BP.L) of fraud by misleading them - before and after the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill - about the company's ability to respond to an accident.
U.S. District Judge Keith Ellison in Houston denied a request on Friday to certify a class action of holders of BP's American depository shares (ADSs) who were allegedly injured by the energy giant.
"Plaintiffs have failed to discharge their burden to establish that damages in this case can be measured on a class-wide basis consistent with their theories of liability," Ellison wrote.
The judge said his decision was based largely on a U.S. Supreme Court ruling from March holding that a class action against Comcast Corp (CMCSA.O) was improperly certified.
Ellison said the Supreme Court decision "has appreciably changed the landscape for class certification."
But he said he would allow the plaintiffs another chance to argue that their case should move forward as a class action, giving them 30 days to file a new motion.
Geoff Morrell, a spokesman for BP, said the ruling "confirms BP's view, as noted in our brief and at oral argument, that plaintiffs failed to establish that this case is appropriate for class treatment."
Steven Toll, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, said the investors "definitely do intend to refile the motion to address the court's concerns about the Comcast ruling."
Friday's decision follows a February 2012 ruling dismissing claims by purchasers of ordinary BP shares on the basis of an earlier 2010 Supreme Court ruling limiting the ability of holders of foreign securities to bring cases in U.S. courts.
The plaintiffs are led by the New York State Common Retirement Fund and four Ohio public pension funds.
They sued BP after the April 20, 2010, explosion of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig, which killed 11 people and resulted in the largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history. The investors said BP's shares dropped in value around 40 percent in the weeks after the incident.
The plaintiffs had asked Ellison to certify a class of investors who bought ADSs between November 8, 2007, and May 28, 2010. They also asked for subclass to be certified covering purchasers of ADSs from March 4, 2009, to April 20, 2010.
BP continues to face other litigation stemming from the Deepwater Horizon incident, which has resulted in the company taking $42.5 billion in charges to date.
In January, BP pleaded guilty to 14 criminal counts over conduct leading up to and after the disaster as part of a $4 billion settlement with the U.S. Justice Department.
The case is In re: BP Plc Securities Litigation, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas, No. 10-md-02185.
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NETbuilder and Interactive Data.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk!
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.