Transcript Document

OUTLOOK FOR FPSO ORDERS OVER
THE NEXT FIVE YEARS
Presentation by Jim McCaul at the
Global FPSO Forum 25 September 2014
Pros and Cons of FPSOs
PRO
CON
•
Has field storage and can be used in remote
locations – self contained
•
Subsea tiebacks create higher well
maintenance costs
•
Can operate on shallow or ultra-deepwater
fields -- now in 20 to 2900 meters water
•
Thin resale market for FPSOs – e.g., OSX 1 & 2
•
Less weight sensitive than other types of FPSs
•
•
Cost and delay surprises when converting
tankers to FPSOs
Deck area allows flexibility in process plant
layout
•
•
Quick disconnect turrets enable emergency
relocation
Redeploying an FPSO not as easy as it may
appear -- e.g. Enquest Producer
•
Leasing is common practice -- transfers some
risk from field operator to contractor
•
Can be modified/redeployed following field
depletion
Source: BWO
Ownership of FPSOs as of September 2014
In Service Available
On Order
Total
Field
Operators
87
4
21
112
Leasing
Contractors
74
13
16
103
Total
161
17
37
215
Owners of FPSOs as of September 2014
(Includes all units in service, on order and available)
Owner
Type
In Service Available
On Order
Total
12
4
1
28
15
15
14
13
11
9
9
7
5
5
5
5
Top FPSO Owners -- 5 or More Units
Petrobras
SBM
BW Offshore
CNOOC
Modec
Teekay
Bumi Armada
Total
ExxonMobil
Bluewater
BP
Chevron
Shell
FO
LC
LC
FO
LC
LC
LC
FO
FO
LC
FO
FO
FO
15
10
13
12
10
8
5
6
7
4
3
5
5
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
2
4
3
1
Number of FPSOs Ordered
Over the Past Ten Years
2014 Sept-Dec projection
2014 Jan-Aug actual
25
16
Redeploy
First Time
18
13 13
11
9
14
11 12
5
04 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
FPSO Projects in the Planning Stage as of Sept 2014
(data in brackets are total number of FPSOs in multiple unit projects)
EPC Contract
Stage
Brazil
Africa SEA
Within next 18
mts
4
5
Within 18 to 48
mts
18 (23)
12
4 to 10 yrs out
18 (38)
Total
40 (65)
GOM N. Europe Medit SWAME Other Total
2
1
1
8
4
10
2
22
9
2
5
1
39
17
8
16
4
13
3 (6)
3 (6)
3
60 (68)
4
61(81)
7
134 (162)
Examples of FPSO Projects in the Planning Stage
Project
Region
Country
Field
Operator
Water
Depth
(meters)
Production
Start
Possible
Likely
Contracting
Strategy
Likely
Mooring
System
Projects Likely to Move to Contracting Within the Next 18 Months
Sankofa/Gye
Nyame
AFRICA
Ghana
ENI
1000
2017/20
Lease
Bream
NE
Norway
Premier
~100
2018
Lease
ET
IT (shipshape)
S (cylindrical)
Ayatsil/Tekel
GOM
Mexico
Pemex
120
2017/18
Lease
IT
Projects Likely to Move to Contracting Within the Next 18 to 48 Months
Kudu
Espadarte
Module III
AFRICA
Namibia
Tullow
170
2018/20
Lease
S
BRAZ
Brazil
Petrobras
750
2020
Lease
S
Perth
NE
UK
Parkmead
121
2018/20
Lease
IT
Projects Likely to Move to Contracting 4 to 10 Years Out
Nsiko
Park of the
Cheeses
AFRICA
Nigeria
Chevron
1768
2020/25
Own
ET or S
BRAZ
Brazil
Petrobras
1200
2020/30
Lease
S
Ubah
SEA
Malaysia
Shell
1430
2020/25
Own
ET
Business Drivers that will Determine
Future FPSO Investment Tempo
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Future growth in global oil/gas demand
Future need to find new sources of oil/gas
Perceived risk of conventional supply disruption
Future oil/gas price expectations
Competitiveness of deepwater as a source of future supply
Relative financial return from deepwater investment
Capex budgets of oil companies
Availability of adequate drilling equipment for deepwater E&D
Constraints in the supply chain
Cost escalation in deepwater development
Access to financing of deepwater equipment
Major environmental incident involving deepwater production
Thank You
Information on our new floating
production report is available at
www.worldenergyreports.com