Houston Chronicle reports:
Exxon Mobil again broke its own record for highest annual profits ever by a U.S. company, pulling in $45.2 billion in 2008, an 11 percent jump over 2007’s $40.6 billion.
But the Irving-based oil giant’s lower fourth-quartery profits reflected how lower demand and plummeting oil and gas prices in the last three months of 2008 amid the global recession have siphoned the industry’s record-breaking streak, which became almost routine as crude rose to all-time highs.
In the quarter, the company earned $7.8 billion, down 33 percent from $11.6 billion in the last three months of 2007 and barely half its all-time quarterly record of $14.8 billion in the third quarter last year, when oil prices were still in triple digits.
However, Rex Tillerson, Exxon’s chairman and chief executive, said capital spending rose 25 percent last year to $26.1 billion and the world’s largest publicly traded oil company will stay its disciplined course through the tough economic times.
“Exxon Mobil’s financial strength continued to support its disciplined capital investment approach in the midst of a growing global economic downturn,” Tillerson said in a statement. “Through these investments we continued to demonstrate our long-term focus throughout the business cycle.”
Chevron, which also unveiled financial results today, bucked the quarterly trend. The San Ramon, Calif.-based company’s annual income rose 28 percent to $23.9 billion from $18.7 billion in 2007, and its quarterly profit rose slightly to $4.89 billion from $4.87 billion. The quarterly increase stemmed from lower costs of raw materials used in refining that increased margins on sales of gasoline and other products, Chevron Chief Executive Officer Dave O’Reilly said.
Like Tillerson, O’Reilly emphasized the oil major’s muscle and discipline amid the recession.
“We enter 2009 with the financial strength to meet the challenges of a difficult economy and with a continued focus on cost management and capital stewardship,” he said.
Exxon’s annual results included a one-time gain of $1.6 billion from the sale of a natural gas transmission business in Germany and a charge of $460 million related to litigation stemming from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska. Excluding those items, the company still surpassed its record with annual earnings of $44 billion.
Exxon attributed its lower quarterly earnings to weaker crude prices, higher operating expenses, lower chemical volumes and impacts of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. Ike prompted shutdowns and repairs at two of Exxon’s major refineries in Baytown—the nation’s largest—and Beaumont.
Per share, including the one-time items, Exxon earned $8.69 in 2008 compared to $7.28 in 2007. In the quarter, per-share income was $1.55, down 27 percent from $2.13 in the October-December period of 2007. Revenue for the year was $477.35 billion, up from $404.5 billion. In the quarter, revenue fell to $84.7 billion from $116.6 billion.
Exxon also continued its trend of lower production. In the quarter, production fell 3 percent, largely because of lower entitlement volumes, divestments and effects of cuts by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. Excluding those effects, production fell 1 percent. Increased oil production from projects in west Africa and the North Sea more than offset field declines, but natural gas production declines surpassed increased volumes and project additions in the North Sea, Qatar and Malaysia, the company said.
Exxon also said exploration and production income fell $2.6 billion to $5.6 billion in the quarter because of lower oil prices. Refining income suffered from hurricane-related repairs and higher operating costs, but higher margins increased earnings by $147 million to $2.4 billion.
Chevron’s production also fell in the quarter, to 2.54 million barrels of oil equivalent per day from 2.6 million barrels. The company said its decline largely stemmed from shutdowns and damage caused to production facilities by the hurricanes.
Per share for the year, Chevron earned $11.67, up from $8.77. In the quarter, per-share earnings were $2.44, up from $2.32. Revenue for the year rose to $273 billion from $220.9 billion, but quarterly revenue fell to $45.2 billion from $61.4 billion.
Chevron’s exploration and production income fell to $3.15 billion from $4.8 billion, while refining and marketing earnings rose to $2 billion from $204 million in the quarter, the company said.
Showing posts with label Big Oil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big Oil. Show all posts
Friday, January 30, 2009
Monday, October 29, 2007
Court Decision (Exxon Valdez) Reaction
"We should have a collective invitation for the Exxon personnel to come kick over the rocks on our beaches down there in Cordova and see the continued and devastating effect … instead of making their decisions in a corporate boardroom somewhere in Texas.” - Gov. Sarah Palin
"Ship owners are not liable for punitive damages based upon conduct by the ship-master who disregarded the owner’s rules and policies.” - Exxon Mobil Corp.
"We have had 6,000 victims who have passed away who have never seen any real justice. The spill tore the social fabric out of this community.” - Tim Joyce, Cordova mayor
"I just can’t image the Supreme Court letting Exxon walk away from this thing, but they very well may and what a sad day it will be.” - Roland Maw, executive director of United Cook Inlet Drift Association, a commercial fishing group
"Ship owners are not liable for punitive damages based upon conduct by the ship-master who disregarded the owner’s rules and policies.” - Exxon Mobil Corp.
"We have had 6,000 victims who have passed away who have never seen any real justice. The spill tore the social fabric out of this community.” - Tim Joyce, Cordova mayor
"I just can’t image the Supreme Court letting Exxon walk away from this thing, but they very well may and what a sad day it will be.” - Roland Maw, executive director of United Cook Inlet Drift Association, a commercial fishing group
Thursday, October 04, 2007
More Proof Bush & Congress Working Together To Steal Iraq's Oil
Kurds Reach New Oil Deals, Straining Ties With Baghdad
The NY Times:
The Kurdish regional government has reached four new oil-exploration deals, further straining relations with many Iraqi leaders in Baghdad, who want to maintain a more centralized control over the country’s enormous oil reserves.
The new deals are the latest in an effort by the Kurds to build their own oil industry while national oil legislation languishes in Parliament. A similar agreement reached last month with the Hunt Oil Company of Dallas was criticized as illegal by the Iraqi oil minister, Hussain al-Shahristani.
Kurdish officials, who have said they want to bring about a major increase in oil production, say the deals are consistent with the Iraqi Constitution.
But many in Parliament object to the Kurdish interpretation, and it is unclear how the Kurds’ own regional oil law, passed in August, will conform with whatever might ultimately be approved by the central government.
Many Sunni Arab leaders object to the production-sharing agreements being negotiated by the Kurds, which call for companies to invest large sums for finding and producing oil and to be awarded a portion of the profits generated by the new fields.
Any federal oil law would have to take account of Kurdish and Shiite concerns that provincial governments be given substantial autonomy to carry out their own development plans and of the desire of Sunni Arabs for strong central control to assure that they receive a fair share of the revenues, even though there is little oil in their provinces.
So far, these problems have proved insurmountable, and the oil law, one of President Bush’s benchmarks of progress in Iraq, has stalled.
The Kurds’ new contracts were signed with Heritage Oil Corp., a publicly traded Canadian concern, and Perenco S.A., a privately held French company. Two other deals with “experienced international companies” are to be announced soon. The total initial amount invested is expected to be $500 million, the regional government said.
If the exploration leads to oil production, Kurdish officials said that in rough terms the deals call for the companies to recover their costs and split profits, with 15 percent going to the companies and 85 percent to the government. A Kurdish official said it would take three to five years before any production could start.
In Baghdad, a spokesman for the Iraqi Oil Ministry denounced the new oil-exploration contracts and warned companies not to sign deals without the blessing of the national government.
“Any contracts signed before the approval of the oil law will be ignored or considered illegal,” said the spokesman, Assim Jihad.
A senior State Department official in Baghdad has also criticized the oil contracts as having “needlessly elevated tensions” between the Kurds and Baghdad.
A Kurdish official defended the deals, saying that the revenue would be shared with all Iraqi regions and that delays in signing exploration pacts only postponed the delivery of much needed cash to the treasury. “We can start now to look for exploration, and by the time we need the money the cash flow will be coming into the country,” the official said.
A Western executive involved in negotiations with the Kurds said the regional government seemed to be trying to “create a fait accompli” by signing so many deals with foreign companies that the central government eventually had to accept the provisions sought by the Kurds in any final version of the oil law.
An official at another oil company said the burst of deals reflected the Kurds’ concerns that their oil development was delayed during the time of Saddam Hussein and that they lagged in production compared with Shiite-dominated southern Iraq.
“I just think they know instinctively that they are behind the curve, and they have to move or they will never get their resources out of the ground,” said this official, who was not authorized to speak publicly. “The Kurds might be playing catch-up in the petroleum business, but they are doing a good job.”
If it wasn't all about oil (the war), and if Iraq was truly sovereign, and if Washington (Bush and Congress, which includes Hillary) wasn't conspiring to pressure Iraq's parliament into giving up its oil fields to western multinational oil corporations, Congress and Bush would be calling for laws and sanctions against corporations and nations doing these deals with the Kurds because it undermines U.S. efforts to stabilize the Iraq occupation and fails to recognize the central government of Iraq.
When our own State Department criticizes the deals as having "needlessly elevated tensions" between the Kurds and Baghdad, how serious then is Bush about wanting peace and stability in Iraq? Bush is not, nor has he ever been, interested in a stabilized Iraq; it would mean the end of the occupation.
The NY Times:
The Kurdish regional government has reached four new oil-exploration deals, further straining relations with many Iraqi leaders in Baghdad, who want to maintain a more centralized control over the country’s enormous oil reserves.
The new deals are the latest in an effort by the Kurds to build their own oil industry while national oil legislation languishes in Parliament. A similar agreement reached last month with the Hunt Oil Company of Dallas was criticized as illegal by the Iraqi oil minister, Hussain al-Shahristani.
Kurdish officials, who have said they want to bring about a major increase in oil production, say the deals are consistent with the Iraqi Constitution.
But many in Parliament object to the Kurdish interpretation, and it is unclear how the Kurds’ own regional oil law, passed in August, will conform with whatever might ultimately be approved by the central government.
Many Sunni Arab leaders object to the production-sharing agreements being negotiated by the Kurds, which call for companies to invest large sums for finding and producing oil and to be awarded a portion of the profits generated by the new fields.
Any federal oil law would have to take account of Kurdish and Shiite concerns that provincial governments be given substantial autonomy to carry out their own development plans and of the desire of Sunni Arabs for strong central control to assure that they receive a fair share of the revenues, even though there is little oil in their provinces.
So far, these problems have proved insurmountable, and the oil law, one of President Bush’s benchmarks of progress in Iraq, has stalled.
The Kurds’ new contracts were signed with Heritage Oil Corp., a publicly traded Canadian concern, and Perenco S.A., a privately held French company. Two other deals with “experienced international companies” are to be announced soon. The total initial amount invested is expected to be $500 million, the regional government said.
If the exploration leads to oil production, Kurdish officials said that in rough terms the deals call for the companies to recover their costs and split profits, with 15 percent going to the companies and 85 percent to the government. A Kurdish official said it would take three to five years before any production could start.
In Baghdad, a spokesman for the Iraqi Oil Ministry denounced the new oil-exploration contracts and warned companies not to sign deals without the blessing of the national government.
“Any contracts signed before the approval of the oil law will be ignored or considered illegal,” said the spokesman, Assim Jihad.
A senior State Department official in Baghdad has also criticized the oil contracts as having “needlessly elevated tensions” between the Kurds and Baghdad.
A Kurdish official defended the deals, saying that the revenue would be shared with all Iraqi regions and that delays in signing exploration pacts only postponed the delivery of much needed cash to the treasury. “We can start now to look for exploration, and by the time we need the money the cash flow will be coming into the country,” the official said.
A Western executive involved in negotiations with the Kurds said the regional government seemed to be trying to “create a fait accompli” by signing so many deals with foreign companies that the central government eventually had to accept the provisions sought by the Kurds in any final version of the oil law.
An official at another oil company said the burst of deals reflected the Kurds’ concerns that their oil development was delayed during the time of Saddam Hussein and that they lagged in production compared with Shiite-dominated southern Iraq.
“I just think they know instinctively that they are behind the curve, and they have to move or they will never get their resources out of the ground,” said this official, who was not authorized to speak publicly. “The Kurds might be playing catch-up in the petroleum business, but they are doing a good job.”
If it wasn't all about oil (the war), and if Iraq was truly sovereign, and if Washington (Bush and Congress, which includes Hillary) wasn't conspiring to pressure Iraq's parliament into giving up its oil fields to western multinational oil corporations, Congress and Bush would be calling for laws and sanctions against corporations and nations doing these deals with the Kurds because it undermines U.S. efforts to stabilize the Iraq occupation and fails to recognize the central government of Iraq.
When our own State Department criticizes the deals as having "needlessly elevated tensions" between the Kurds and Baghdad, how serious then is Bush about wanting peace and stability in Iraq? Bush is not, nor has he ever been, interested in a stabilized Iraq; it would mean the end of the occupation.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Iraq: It's Still All About The Oil
Western Oil Group Eyes Assets in Iraq
Financial Times reports:
The most buried, least reported aspect of the war in Iraq, and what's behind Bush's and the war supporters in Congress refusal to bring the troops home. As usual, follow the money.
Who is willing to hang in with Bush until the changing of the guard on January 20, 2009? Big Oil has already bought those people: In the 2006 elections, 82% of oil-and-gas money went to Republican candidates. In the 2006 election cycle, these were the top oil and gas contributors to Federal candidates and parties. These were the Senate candidates who received their money. These were all the members of the House who received their money.
Big Oil (& Gas) doesn't have a Republican to back for the White House yet, but Rudolph Giuliani and Mitt Romney have received most Big Oil's financial support. Hillary Clinton's support for the war (as well as Obama's and the other Democrats running for the Democratic Presidential nomination who would keep troops in Iraq) leaves the door open for Big Oil money to flow into her campaign coffers. If you think that's far-fetched, just remember that Hillary Clinton is the pharmaceutical industry's second favorite candidate to give money to after Mitt Romney.
Financial Times reports:
A large western oil company has offered $700m for oil assets in Iraqi Kurdistan owned by DNO, the small Norwegian oil company. The offer signals that international oil companies are willing to put significant amounts of money into Iraq in spite of the security problems and lack of a legal framework.
DNO refused to name the company, but industry executives speculated that Royal Dutch Shell was a possible bidder. Shell on Wednesday refused to comment.
DNO said it had received an "unsolicited expression of interest from a reputable financial adviser on behalf of a large international oil company", but had rejected the offer.
Helge Eide, DNO's chief executive, said in an interview with the Financial Times that the company would focus instead on maximising the value of its Iraqi assets. "There is more and more interest in Iraq, and we have a unique position there," Mr Eide said.
The offer values DNO's proven and probable Iraqi oil reserves at about $11.9 a barrel, according to analysts' estimates. DNO shares surged 11 per cent to NKr10.77 in Oslo.
DNO, which is quoted on the Oslo stock exchange, discovered the Tawke oilfield in late 2005, after signing a production-sharing agreement in June 2004 with the Kurdish regional government, a semi-autonomous area of northern Iraq.
In June, it became the first foreign oil company to pump crude oil in Iraq since the nationalisation of the country's hydrocarbons industry 35 years ago, albeit on a very small scale.
The company is delivering its production from the Tawke oil field to the domestic market in Iraq at a rate of about 6,000 barrels a day.
Mr Eide said that DNO hoped to be able to begin exports in November, once it had secured approval from the Kurdistan regional government to connect to a pipeline that could carry oil to Turkey.
Shell is seen as one of the oil majors that is most positive about doing business in Iraq.
In 2005, Shell signed an agreement with Baghdad to study the northern Kirkuk oilfield. The area is the subject of a dispute between the Kurdish authorities and the Iraqi central government.
Shell has worked for the Iraqi oil ministry analysing the data on the oilfield.
A number of other international oil companies have signed similar co-operation agreements, or are training Iraqi petroleum engineers.
BP, Statoil, Total, Eni and Repsol YPF are understood not to be behind the bid to DNO.
Industry executives said it was unlikely that a US-based company would have made the offer. ExxonMobil and Chevron refused to comment on specific Iraqi projects.
The most buried, least reported aspect of the war in Iraq, and what's behind Bush's and the war supporters in Congress refusal to bring the troops home. As usual, follow the money.
Who is willing to hang in with Bush until the changing of the guard on January 20, 2009? Big Oil has already bought those people: In the 2006 elections, 82% of oil-and-gas money went to Republican candidates. In the 2006 election cycle, these were the top oil and gas contributors to Federal candidates and parties. These were the Senate candidates who received their money. These were all the members of the House who received their money.
Big Oil (& Gas) doesn't have a Republican to back for the White House yet, but Rudolph Giuliani and Mitt Romney have received most Big Oil's financial support. Hillary Clinton's support for the war (as well as Obama's and the other Democrats running for the Democratic Presidential nomination who would keep troops in Iraq) leaves the door open for Big Oil money to flow into her campaign coffers. If you think that's far-fetched, just remember that Hillary Clinton is the pharmaceutical industry's second favorite candidate to give money to after Mitt Romney.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)