What's Up With Hugo and PDVSA? *
Posted by Dave Cohen on May 25, 2006 - 10:55am
Topic: Policy/Politics
Tags: bolivia, heavy oil, hugo chavez, nationalization, pdvsa [list all tags]
* With a Note on Bolivia
Update [2006-5-27 19:2:44 by Dave]: Gulf News reports yesterday PDVSA expects 3.4m bpd output"We should be closing the year with a production ... of 3.4 million barrels per day," Vierma told reporters. "The average production for this month has been almost 3.3 million barrels per day."The US Department of Energy and Wall Street analysts say Venezuela's total oil production is only around 2.6 million bpd.
It's time to check in with Venezuela and some other events in South America as Hugo's Bolivarian Revolution goes forward. Apparently, he strives to be Fidel Castro only with oil and without the beard.
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
There's lot to report on--oil shenanigans in Venezuela, nationalization of the oil & gas industry in Bolivia, Hugo's deals with China and the escalating conflict between Hugo and the United States.
Is Venezuela's oil production rapidly waning? One source reports that the world's fifth largest oil producer is showing signs of a rapid decrease in production, one of the key tenets of the peak oil theory....Venezuela is buying oil from Russia in order to avoid defaulting on deliveries to clients.... According to the Financial Times: "Venezuela, the world's fifth-largest oil exporter, has struck a $2bn deal to buy about 100,000 barrels a day of crude oil from Russia until the end of the year.
PDVSA is a center of financial and political intrigue, as it is the hub of Mr. Chavez' political ambitions. The Venezuelan government uses the proceeds from oil sales to finance Chavez' Bolivarian revolution, in essence the spread of the hybrid Socialism espoused by Chavez and Fidel Castro...
PDVSA has not filed papers with the SEC in at least two years...
The EIA OPEC short term energy outlook for OPEC lists production for April of 2006 as 2.5/mbpd, well under the OPEC "quota" of 3.223/mbpd. (I quote quota because in my view, these OPEC numbers are meaningless in today's world.) However, this current production number has been disputed as coming from the political opposition in Venezuela, so how much oil they are actually producing remains something of a mystery. The EIA has not updated Venezuela's oil country brief page since 2004. This may not be an accident or perhaps they just haven't gotten arouund to it.
Back in 2005, in Running On Empty, Duarte had asserted that
Stratfor.com estimates that since Chavez became president, starting in 1998, "PDVSA has lost about 1.5 million bpd of its net crude oil production."Does lack of an experienced workforce some familiar? In any case, it appears to be true that Venenzuela's production has never recovered from the strike.The main reasons have been the replacement of capable engineers and workers who disagreed with Chavez's revolutionary views, with inexperienced, and in many cases incapable replacements, and the lack of attention to infrastructure maintenance and improvement.
The result of the bad management and neglect, has been the steady erosion and near incapacitation of a major oil-producing region of Venezuela, the Western portion of the country, where as many as 10,000 wells have been estimated to have been rendered mostly useless. Venezuela is nominally the world's fifth largest oil producer.
Click to Enlarge (from EIA)
But these production questions are only part of the story. Lately, Hugo and PDVSA have "renegotiated" their contracts with the IOC's operating there.
Venezuela, the largest oil producer in South America, plans to force ChevronTexaco Corp., ConocoPhillips and other companies to convert contracts covering 32 fields into joint ventures with the state oil company so the country can earn more from petroleum sales.Lately, they've escalated the stakes to cover their heavy oil production from the Orinoco Basin, which currently stands at 600/kbpd. From Bloomberg Venezuela's Assembly Approves Higher Oil RoyaltiesPetroleos de Venezuela SA would hold a 51 percent stake in the ventures under the plan, Rafael Ramirez, the country's energy and oil minister, said at a press conference today in Caracas. The operating companies, mostly foreign owned, now hold oil- production contracts in which they're paid a per-barrel fee.
An overhaul of domestic hydrocarbons law was unanimously approved, state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela SA said on its Web site. The bill increases royalties to 33.3 percent from 16.67 percent on all oil companies operating in the country, including the four heavy-oil joint ventures. The higher rate will raise about $1.3 billion annually.Are these just the first steps toward total nationalization? Which brings us to Bolivia.
What's Up in Bolivia?
President Evo Morales has nationalized his country's oil & gas industry. As the Economist tells us in Now it's the people's gasEvo Morales chose May 1st, his hundredth day in office as Bolivia's president, to lead troops into his country's biggest natural-gas field, operated by Brazil's state-owned oil company, Petrobras. Wearing an oilworker's hard hat, he read out a nine-point decree under which the Bolivian state proclaimed its control of the country's oil and gas industry. “The plunder has ended,” Mr Morales, a socialist of indigenous descent, declared....
Morales joins the Bolivarian Revolution
Bolivia's natural gas reserves are the 2nd largest in South America after Venezuela's. How much are we talking about here? See for yourself, from the EIA.
Bolivian natural gas reserves (EIA)
Not bad, something to fight over
You can find some more detail at Wikipedia's Bolivian Gas War. The Economist says in their dry, understated style, "Mr Chávez's strategy clashes with Brazil's". No kidding. In fact, Brazil is pissed off. But nationalizing your fossil fuels doesn't exactly encourage foreign investment, does it? Again, the Economist notes
Bolivia needs outside capital and technology to develop its gas industry. Without new investment, by the end of next year it might struggle to fulfil its gas export contracts with Brazil and Argentina, says Carlos Alberto López, a consultant in La Paz. A recent landslide at one gasfield briefly cut exports, a sign that output is close to capacity....Hugo has jumped all over this deal, however. "Mr Chávez has offered to buy all of Bolivia's soya crop (its second-biggest export) in return for all the diesel the country imports". Welcome aboard. Viva la Revolution!
Back to Venezuela
Hugo has already made some deals with China (see Venezuela and China sign oil deal) and is trying to make arrangements to export directly to Asia, but he needs a pipeline, always a dicey proposition.Since supertankers cannot pass through the Panama Canal, the journey to Asia is long and expensive. For now, Venezuela exports only about 300,000 barrels of oil per day to China.Furthermore, Hugo has opined lately that trading in Euros rather than dollars sounds good to him--this comes as no surprise.In its effort to gain access to the Pacific, Venezuela has signed an agreement with Colombia to build a pipeline to the port of Tribuga on the Pacific coast. An additional proposal with Panama would modify a Panamanian oil pipeline to facilitate shipping oil to the Pacific coast.
Finally, there is the usual escalating war of words between the US and Venezuela. America actually took a concrete step recently
Relations between Venezuela and the United States have grown tense in recent months. The Bush administration has accused Mr. Chavez of being a destabilizing force in Latin America. It announced earlier this month that the U.S. would stop selling arms to Caracas, saying it has failed to cooperate in the fight against terrorism.The Bush Team have the usual concerns that Venezuela is moving away from democracy--which, ironically, is actually true in this case. Chavez, naturally, has dismissed such concerns and asserts that Bush is "bad for world peace" (yet another true statement) and feels, generally speaking, that Bush is a really bad guy. So, both sides are right!
In conclusion, here's some wanton speculation about the situation.
- What will the US do? A sponsored coop attempt seems unlikely and outright military action is out of the question. The internal opposition is weak and Chavez is on the move.
- Will Hugo nationalize the oil & gas industry? This also appears unlikely. He is wise enough to know that he needs outside investment and can not go it alone if he hopes to fund the Bolivarian Revolution, support other countries like Cuba and keep the people happy.
- How about "heavy" oil development? Unlike the tar sands, I believe the longer these political difficulties go on, the more delayed any expansion of the Orinoco Basin production will be. So, I wouldn't expect much new development there anytime soon.



I think Hugo will get a direct lesson in net energy over the next few years as Venezuela tries to liquify its heavy oil using energy intensive techniques. No one really knows the energy balance on that stuff but clearly one barrel of heavy equals something much less than one barrel of light sweet.
Who is the blonde?
: )
Marisabel Rodriguez de Chavez
Apparently, she couldn't stand the pressure after the failed 2002 coup d'etat.
7891012345678910101234567891010123456789101012345678910
1012345678910101234567891010123456789101112123456789101112
12345678910123456789101234561012345670123456789101234
5678910123456789101234567891012345678910
It is simply incredible how much bitching there is about the token gasoline price increase in Canada and the USA. Consumers have been conditioned to expect ridiculously low prices that are cheaper than bottled water. Considering that oil will not be available for any price when it is no longer viably accessible, it is about time prices started to increase seriously. The pulling back of production in Venezuela and Russia is the proper course of action. Demands for endless amounts of cheap oil are the true obscenity.
That is part of the problem and part of the solution. We are conditioned to believe the future will be very like today, all of us, in any culture. In the US and Canada we are being 'baby-stepped' to death. Each day our societies momentum takes us a small step further in the wrong direction, yet the step is so small that people dont notice it. Its camoflaged with American Idol, Davinci Code and the media threads that ebb and flow through our lives.
Until 10 years have gone by and some people (many TOD readers) see the forest through the trees and the fire raging towards us. Just like fire-fighters stem the continuation of a large fire by actually building then putting out smaller fires ahead of its path, we need to shock the system by raising gas prices dramatically then pulling them back (and many other examples like this). If peoples 'new reality' sets in and is accepted though with griping, complaining and misery, then partially retracting such measures (Say, from $3 gas to $5.50 then back to $4) will make things seem not so bad. Madison Avenue learned long ago to shock people with a negative message, then follow it directly with a positive one.
Status quo is we are all retreating to the part of the forest that is near the cliff. We need to fight back and meet the fire halfway. As a trader, my psychologist friends told me to 'lean into my fear' rather than away from it. That was a valuable lesson. We can take back many of those baby steps in the wrong direction with a couple of big steps in the right direction.
* How do people put others previous quotes in those grey boxes?
** Sorry this post should have been on drumbeat but I was responding to dissidents comment
<block quote> paste the quotation in </block quote> There should be no space in "blockquote"
AHHH. Thanks. Im learning...;)
I disagree with this setence though:
Rick
The irony is that Resident Bush has never been elected and in fact was the beneficiary of a judicial and vote manipulation coup.
Chavez enjoyed a massive plurality, all vetted by Jimmy Carter's group, The Carter Center, while GW Bush's election failed to meet the simple guidelines suggested by President Carter's voting rights group.
Had Carter's group not been barred from monitoring our elections this last presidential election cycle, we may have seen the monkeyshines that passes for democracy in our country in our slide towards fascism.
Do not look where the man behind the curtain points; look at the man behind the curtain.
Do we follow President Carters guidlines or the US constitution? Bush won the electoral college (the constitutional requirement) in 2000.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/
The Electoral college is antiquated and needs to be abolished but it is our current setup.
And in 2004 Bush won the popular and electoral.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/president/
Clarify the coup please because I don't remember a shot being fired. Both Gore and Kerry conceded victory. If they believed differently or had evidence otherwise why are they silent?
There is a HUGE division in this nation between the red and blue states. I believe this is because the candidates offered are so polarized and appealing to extremes. We need a liberal republican Mcain or consevative democrat Clark or some new blood young and less corrupt (Obama?) to take the reigns.
Chavez is brilliantly charismatic and has massive appeal in Latin America. I think he is unpredictable but the US should make him an ally not alienate him. Because as Chavez goes Latin America will probably follow.
Prior to Fidel Batista completed his coup without a drop of blood being shed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulgencio_Batista
If all the ballots in Florida had been counted, Gore would have won.
Bush was selected by the Supreme Court.
Let's keep the facts straight and not let the right wing media control the debate.
New York Times Nov. 12, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/12VOTE.html?ex=1148702400&en=15da315fa8c0e917&ei= 5070
Only applies to the counties that Gore asked for a recount in.
You really need to do your homework and I will not do it for you.
Honorably Discharged Naval Officer
- Worked the Pentagon
- The National Security Agency
BSEE
MBA
Line Comercial Pilot
Be careful who you label because you don't like what they say.
"Be careful who you label because you don't like what they say."
You called me a troll.
Whenever someone posts information that does not fit your world view you attack them instead of honestly considering the data.
Seems your the one with the problem.
You used 7 fallacies on this thread alone. I have not "attacked" anyone, and I carefully consider everything I read. I'm curious what you think my world view is.
Matt
I stand by the facts relayed in my posts.
I already called you out on two obvious ad hominems and one appeal to popularity, I've read all your posts and this appears to be your style. If you disagree with someone provide other information with a reference. Shouting louder "I win" does not make it so.
Matt
The rigging of the 2000 presidential vote in Florida had nothing to do with the Supreme Court. It was even more insidious than that. It was planned months in advance, and was accomplished by erasing thousands of Democrats from the voter rolls. A whole book has been written about it. This link gives a pretty good summation on how it was done. Read it and weep:
http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=15352
Now back to Peak Oil...