Transcript Wells Fargo - Energy Summit
ENERGY SUMMIT
CHAD CALVERT, MANAGER GOVERNMENT RELATIONS WESTERN U.S.
June 10, 2014
2
Forward-looking Statements and Non-GAAP Measures
This presentation contains certain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the federal securities law. Words such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “expects,” “intends,” “will,” “should,” “may,” and similar expressions may be used to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are not statements of historical fact and reflect Noble Energy’s current views about future events. They include estimates of oil and natural gas reserves and resources, estimates of future production, assumptions regarding future oil and natural gas pricing, planned drilling activity, future results of operations, projected cash flow and liquidity, business strategy and other plans and objectives for future operations. No assurances can be given that the forward-looking statements contained in this presentation will occur as projected, and actual results may differ materially from those projected. Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates and assumptions that involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. These risks include, without limitation, the volatility in commodity prices for crude oil and natural gas, the presence or recoverability of estimated reserves, the ability to replace reserves, environmental risks, drilling and operating risks, exploration and development risks, competition, government regulation or other actions, the ability of management to execute its plans to meet its goals and other risks inherent in Noble Energy’s business that are discussed in its most recent Form 10-K and in other reports on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These reports are also available from Noble Energy’s offices or website, http://www.nobleenergyinc.com
. Forward-looking statements are based on the estimates and opinions of management at the time the statements are made. Noble Energy does not assume any obligation to update forward-looking statements should circumstances or management's estimates or opinions change.
This presentation also contains certain historical and forward-looking non-GAAP measures of financial performance that management believes are good tools for internal use and the investment community in evaluating Noble Energy’s overall financial performance. These non-GAAP measures are broadly used to value and compare companies in the crude oil and natural gas industry. Please also see Noble Energy’s website at http://www.nobleenergyinc.com
under “Investors” for reconciliations of the differences between any historical non-GAAP measures used in this presentation and the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures. The GAAP measures most comparable to the forward-looking non-GAAP financial measures are not accessible on a forward-looking basis and reconciling information is not available without unreasonable effort.
The Securities and Exchange Commission requires oil and gas companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose proved reserves that a company has demonstrated by actual production or conclusive formation tests to be economically and legally producible under existing economic and operating conditions. The SEC permits the optional disclosure of probable and possible reserves, however, we have not disclosed our probable and possible reserves in our filings with the SEC. We use certain terms in this presentation, such as “net risked resources” and “gross mean resources.” These estimates are by their nature more speculative than estimates of proved, probable and possible reserves and accordingly are subject to substantially greater risk of being actually realized. The SEC guidelines strictly prohibit us from including these estimates in filings with the SEC. Investors are urged to consider closely the disclosures and risk factors in our most recent Form 10-K and in other reports on file with the SEC, available from Noble Energy’s offices or website, http://www.nobleenergyinc.com
.
Oil and Natural Gas is Critical to Colorado’s Economy
3
111,000 jobs and $6.5B in wages in Colorado in 2012 $30 billion in value added to the Colorado economy 64 Million Barrels of Oil Produced in 2013 $1.6 Billion in 2012 State & Local Taxes helped fund:
Public Education – over $500 Million Health Care Roads and Infrastructure Community Programs
Household Energy Costs in Colorado are 23% less than the U.S. Average
Primarily due to historically lower natural gas prices
Colorado Annual Oil Production
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 All Other Counties Weld County
Source: EIA, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, CU Leeds School of Business
Colorado Politics: Driven by Front Range Voters
● ● ● ●
• 67% of 5.2 million State Population • 60% of 3.4 million State Registered Voters
●
Local Bans/Moratoria County Moratorium
5
State-Wide Ballot Measures in November 2014
3 ballot measures adverse to energy development titled and available for signature gathering
• • • #75 – Rights to local government and the environment (Wilmeng) #89 – Environmental Rights and local control over development (Polis) #88 – Mandatory 2000’ statewide setback (Polis)
Counter Ballot Initiatives Also Filed
• #121 – Oil and gas tax revenue denied if development banned (Sonnenberg/McNulty) • • #137 – Fiscal impact statement required in Submission Clause (Hamill/Deibel) #122/123 – State primacy over regulating oil and gas development defined (Pye/Williams)
Eligibility –
Supreme Court review completed on all initiatives June 30. 86,105 valid signatures required to be submitted to Secretary of State by August 4th to be eligible to appear on the ballot in November 2014.
6
Polling Shows Support for Industry
57% 52% 35% 43% 8% 6%
Support Unsure Oppose
Use of fracking Near where you live and work
Survey in March 2014 shows movement from September 2013 with increasing number of people opposed to a statewide moratorium.
March 2014 CRED survey of 600 likely voters shows high number of people who support fracking, but fewer who support it near where they live and work.
47% 41% 48% 54% 5% 5%
Yes to moratorium fracking statewide Unsure September 2013 No – against the moratorium March 2014
7
Legislative Options
•
Congressman Polis willing to negotiate
•
Governor Hickenlooper seeking a compromise to remove the ballot initiative threat
•
7 Operators supporting legislative solution
• Noble, Anadarko, WPX, PDC Energy, KPK, Great Western, DCP Midstream • • • • Represent nearly 70% of working rigs in Colorado and 70% of well starts Employ 4,200 people and more than 7,200 independent contractors Produce 60% of the State’s oil and 35% of the State’s natural gas Combined 2014 cap/ex approximately $6.3 billion •
CRED Campaign and Protect Colorado prepared to defeat ballot measures, but there is risk.
8
Campaign Organizational Development
● Noble Energy and other industry partners formed CRED, a statewide effort to tell the Colorado Energy story ● We have also supported creation of Vital for Colorado, a coalition of business who support energy development ● CRED will run the issues campaign: Protecting Colorado’s Environment, Economy and Energy Independence (PCEEEI) ● Canvassing Door to Door, Direct Mail, and Digital Will Deliver Messages in Q2 ● Loveland Campaign Successful