Tag Archive | gas exploration

Gas undoubtedly on energy back burner

Energy mix on gas unresolved…..

LP gasNot one word on gas and gas exploration, gas pipelines or gas as a contributor to the integrated resources plan has passed through Parliament in nearly one year. The last word was in respect of gas, whether oceanic or land-based, was the knowledge that fracking regulations had been published, the dropping of the oil price seeming to cool off any comment and certainly statements by international investors and companies.
President Zuma has, however made passing reference to Operation Phakisa, the plan to develop South Africa’s oceanic resources but most parliamentary reference to this programme has been in reference to the recent press releases by government in the form of a long term wish to build up South Africa’s maritime ability; create an international ship register and regulate for a merchant shipping fleet.
Going back a bit
In a parliamentary question in the National Assembly last year, Mr. S J NJIKELANAa, previously chairperson of the Energy Portfolio Committee, asked for a written reply by the then Minister of Energy on how far gas exploration had progressed and what urgent state intervention was planned, particularly as far as containment of fuel prices was concerned.
The reply came from the Department of Energy (DOE) in a reply that was somewhat evasive in that it summed what everybody knows; that the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP); the Integrated Energy Plan (IEP;) and the Gas Utilisation Master Plan (GUMP) are amongst the measures which were developed to improve South Africa’s multi-source security of energy supply.
The reply at the time gave responses on the then stage of renewable energy aggregating to cumulative contribution of 17800 MW to the IRP’s final estimate of energy from all sources of 40 000 Megawatts (MW). All of this really helped nobody.

Sourcing of energy
The second contributor to the formula was nuclear power contributing a much quoted 9600MW (and now expected to be more) and hydropower at 2600 MW, with“75% of new generation capacity being derived from energy sources other than coal”, it was stated.

 DOE finally got round to GUMP, describing it as “the development of a gas pipeline infrastructure for South Africa’s needs and to connect South Africa with African countries endowed with vast natural gas resources” but at the time DOE was still recovering from the shock of splitting up from environmental affairs and could not separate gas exploration from mining exploration, in that the Department of Mineral Resources was deeply involved. A total figure for gas has not been formulated.

Another problem for DOE.

In reality, the Petroleum Agency of South Africa (PASA) is technically responsible for GUMP although gas exploration seaDOE’s hydrocarbons division seemed to have been lumped with the problem of what has been described by most authorities and energy specialists as an “exciting hope” for solving SA’s energy problems.
In the meanwhile, it has become the poor child of the energy mix, Minister Joemat-Pettersson recently explaining last week DOE’s poor performance and lack of response on the gas issue as being due to short staffing and “too many issues” on hand.

Last definition

GUMP in fact, (when Parliament was last told} would take a 30-year view of the gas industry from regulatory, economic and social perspectives and this was in the final stage of internal approval and was expected to be released for public comment during the second quarter of the 2015 financial year.
The request for IP proposals for gas-fired generation through a gas-to-power procurement programme for a combined 3 126 MW allocation was expected to be released to the market in September this year, with a bid submission phase planned for the first quarter of 2016.

It seems that South Africa’s DOE can only handle one problem at a time. First it was Eskom and electricity and then the nuclear tendering process, which is in fact a very long term solution to South Africa’s energy problem, as put by one member.

Behind closed doors

Gas exploration, as a subject in itself, benefited from a final decision (which in fact is still mostly rumour in Parliament and unreported) that the Minister Rob Davies’s solution not to acquire 20% -25% “free carry” in gas exploration “finds” seems to be the last definitive action to be taken by government on the whole question of gas exploitation and development.

Meanwhile, Minister Joemat-Pettersson, Minister of Energy, was quoted in the media (and we quote tina-joemattEngineering News specifically) as saying that nuclear power was staying at 9600MW and hydropower at 2600 MW.
The Minister added, “We have paid little attention to gas . . . We have been preoccupied with nuclear [energy].  The South Africa we [are] dealing with now is not the same [as the one we dealt with] in 2013 [when many energy-generation plans were put into play]; the scenarios have changed,” she said to the Creamer organisation.

Not on the agenda

In the remaining few weeks of the third parliamentary calendar sessions, no meetings of the parliamentary committee on energy are scheduled for this vital component of the energy mix, although the anti-fracking lobby was particularly evident at a recent energy committee meeting on the five nuclear vendor agreements.

karoo2They were particularly agitated to hear that the South Korean nuclear vendor offers included development of uranium deposits as part of their deal, such deposits known to be in the Karoo. The only movement recently therefore on gas development would seem to be in the area of Sasol development in infrastructure development locally, presumably in pipelines, and a rather “cool” statement from Shell Oil on fracking possibilities in the Karoo related the world price of oil.
The shortage of liquid petroleum gas (LPG) to meet market demand appears to be the only gas issue to coming before Parliament in the near future.
Other articles in this category or as background
Fracking, shale gas gets nearer – ParlyReportSA
Competition Commission turns to LP gas market – ParlyReportSA
Gas Utilisation Master Plan gets things going – ParlyReportSA
Oil sea gas/debate restarted by Parliament
Uncertainty in oil and gas exploration industry

Posted in Energy, Enviro,Water, Facebook and Twitter, Finance, economic, LinkedIn, Trade & Industry0 Comments

Fuel price controlled by seasonal US supply

US refinery shut downs affect fuel price…..

US refineryThe current spike in the price of petrol is due of a number of international issues  compounding together but the primary cause is that at this time of year in the United States, a number of major US refineries close down for maintenance in order to prepare for the US summer surge in fuel sales.

This was said by Dr Wolsey Barnard, acting DG of the department of energy (DoE), when he introduced a briefing to the portfolio committee on energy on its strategy for the coming year.

In actual fact, the meeting had been called to debate the promised “5-point energy plan” from the cabinet’s “war room” which did not eventualise, the minister of energy also being absent for the presentation as scheduled. It appeared that the DoE presentation had been hastily put together.

“Price swingers” make perfect storm

Dr Wolsey BarnardDr Barnard said that it could be expected that the price of fuel would be extremely volatile in the coming months due in main “geo-political events” affecting the price of oil, local pricing issues of fuel products and possibly even sea lane interruptions. Price would always be based on import parity and current events in Mexico, Venezuela and the Middle East would always be “price swingers”, he said.

On electricity matters, his speciality, he avoided any reference to past lack of investment in infrastructure, but said that he called for caution in the media, by government officials and the committee on the use of the two expressions “blackouts” and “load shedding”.

Same old story

“Over the next two years”, he said, “until sufficient infrastructure was in place, there would have to be planned maintenance in South Africa” and referred to the situation in the US as far as maintenance of refinery plant was concerned. He said that also “unexpected isolated problems” could also arise with ageing generation installations, during which planned “load shedding” would have to take place.

He said he could not imagine there being a “blackout”.

Opposition members complained that the whole electricity crisis could be solved if some companies would cease importing raw minerals, using South African electricity at discounted prices well below the general consuming manufacturing industry paid, and re-exporting smelted aluminium back to the same customer. They accused DoE of trying to “normalise what was a totally abnormal position for a country to be in.”

Billiton back in contention

One MP said, “Industry was in some cases just using cheap South African electricity to make a profit”. Suchaluminium smelter practices went against South Africa’s own beneficiation programme, he said, in the light of the raw material being imported and the finished product re-exported. “It would be cheaper to shut down company and pay the fines”, the DA opposition member added, naming BH Billiton as the offender in his view.

Dr Barnard said DoE could not discuss Eskom’s special pricing agreements which were outside DoE’s control  and “which were a thing of the past and a matter which we seem to be stuck with for the moment.”

High solar installation costs

Dr Barnard also said that DoE had established that the department had to be “cautious on the implementation of solar energy plan” as a substitute energy resource in poorer, rural areas and even some of the lower income municipal areas.  DoE, he said, “had to find a different funding model”, since the cost of installation and maintenance were beyond the purse of most low income groups.

In general, he promised more financial oversight on DoE state owned enterprises and better communications.   There were plenty of good news stories, he said, but South Africa was hypnotising itself into a position of “bad news” on so many issues, including energy matters. He refused to discuss any matters regarding PetroSA, saying this was not the correct forum nor was it on the agenda.

Still out there checking

On petroleum and products regulation, the DG of that department, Tseliso Maquebela, said that non-compliance in the sale of products still remained a major issue. “We have detected a few cases of fraudulent fuel mixes”, he said, “but we plan to double up on inspectors in the coming months, especially in the rural areas, putting pressure on those who exploit the consumer.” The objective, he said was reach a target of a 90% crackdown on such cases with enforcement notices.

Maquebela added that on BEE factors, 40% of licence applications with that had 50% BEE compliance was now the target.

Competition would be good

On local fuel pricing regulations, Maquebela said “he would dearly like to move towards a more open and competitive pricing policy introducing more competition and less regulations.”

fuel tanker engenOn complaints that the new fuel pipeline between Gauteng and Durban was still not in full production after much waiting, Maquebela said the pipeline was operating well but it was taking longer than expected to bring about the complicated issue of pumping through so many different types of fuel down through the same pipeline. “But we are experts at it and it will happen”, he said.

Fracking hits the paper work

On gas, particularly fracking, DoE said that the regulations “were going to take some time in view of all the stakeholder issues”.

On clean energy and “renewables” from IPP sources, DoE stated that the “REIPP” was still “on track” but an announcement was awaited from the minister who presumably was consulting with other cabinet portfolios regarding implementation of the fourth round of applications from independent producers.

Opposition totally unimpressed

In conclusion, DA member and shadow minister of energy, Gordon McKay, said that the DoEgordon mackay DA presentation was the most “underwhelming” he had ever listened to on energy.   Even the ANC chair, Fikile Majola, sided with the opposition and said that DoE  “can do better than this.”

He asked how Parliament could possibly exercise oversight with this paucity of information.   DoE representatives looked uncomfortable during most of the presentations and under questioning it was quite clear that communications between cabinet and the DoE were poor.

When asked by members who the new director general of the department of energy would be and why was the minister taking so long to make any announcement on this, Dr Wolsey Barnard, as acting DG, evaded the question by answering that “all would be answered in good time”.

Other articles in this category or as background
Energy gets war room status – ParlyReportSA
Medupi is key to short term energy crisis – ParlyReportSA
Integrated energy plan (IEP) around the corner – ParlyReportSAenergy legislation is lined up for two years – ParlyReportSA

Posted in Electricity, Energy, Enviro,Water, Facebook and Twitter, Fuel,oil,renewables, LinkedIn, Mining, beneficiation, Public utilities, Special Recent Posts, Trade & Industry, Transport0 Comments

MPRDA Bill to be amended urgently

Some form of compromise….

coal miningIn referring back to Parliament the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Bill (MPRDA) and acknowledging in his State of Nation Address (SONA) that in its present form it could be damaging to South Africa’s investment climate, President Zuma and his cabinet have introduced more certainty to both the mining and oil and gas industries.

At least a year and a half delay was a guess if the suggestion that two replacement Bills were to be drafted separating mineral resources from oil and gas in the light of the fact that both have separate BEE charters.

Certainty needed

However, mineral resources minister Ngoako Ramatlhodi has agreed with mining companies and also the point put forward by Chamber of Mines that the best and fastest way forward to bring certainty to theRoughnecks wrestle pipe on a True Company oil drilling rig outside Watford industry would be to pass the Bill subject to amendments based on a new approach to the mining beneficiation issue and the matter of state “free carry” in any successful gas exploration.

Originally, on an issue raised both in submissions and by opposition parties and, even a couple of ANC MPs, the presidency has also agreed to doubts expressed whether, once signed, the MPRD Act after amendment would pass constitutional muster on the basis of the amending Bill’s passage through Parliament and the process adopted.

Section 79(1) of the Constitution empowers the President to return a Bill to Parliament for reconsideration if reservations about the constitutionality of the Bill prevail.

Mining land

Subsequently pointed out as a further reason for the Bill not beingtrad leaders signed, raised in a presidency statment issued by spokeperson Mac Maharaj, was a concern of cabinet that the Bill had to be processed through the Council of Traditional Leaders.

Parliament passed the Bill all in a rush at the end of March 2014 after much lobbying by ANC whips and despite warnings and constitutional challenges from many parties.  Nearly a year has passed since sending the proposals off for presidential assent.

The subject of the regulatory environment has not even been touched upon or has come up in the debate at this stage.

During the parliamentary recess both the Chamber of Mines and others have complained of sustained uncertainty in their industries and in the investment world.

Two issues emerged almost immediately when the President announced he was delaying his signature. The first issue was a hefty warning from mineral resources minister Ngoako Ramatlhodi who said “the implications for companies that did not meet BEE targets set out in the mining charter would be severe”, inferring that this might eventually affect the granting of mining licences. He raised, once again, the issue of employee shareholding.

“Developmental” metals pricing

Consequently, it still remains somewhat foggy what government policy was in instituting such clauses other than an overall ambition for the state to have more ownership of strategic resources in both industries and the drive by minister of trade and industry, Dr Rob Davies, to assist smaller manufacturing metals industries becoming more viable at the cost of larger industries, therefore creating more jobs, he said.

On the subject of BEE and the two different charters affected, all that has been said officially was a remark by minister Ramatlhodi “We have to satisfy ourselves that the Act meets our broader socio-economic development activities.”

The second issue to emerge after the announcement of the return of the MPRDA to Parliament was further mention by the department of energy of“Operation Phakisa”, the speed-up process as part of a co-ordination exercise with the oil and gas industry to reduce reliance on oil imports.

Fracking and renewables

On a separate issue, further statements by ministers with regard to fracking and speeding of delays in the IPP world with renewables has also emerged, overshadowed by the urgent need of an energy plan from the newly formed energy “war room”.

Whatever happens, both industries should be prepared for another round of public comment, hopefully in the first parliamentary period after the Budget…… minister of finance Nene notably mentioning nothing of nuclear interest in his budget speech.
Other articles in this category or as background
Energy War Room formed to meet crisis – Parly ReportSA
Mineral and Petroleum Resources Bill halted perhaps – ParlyReportSA
Medupi is the key to short term energy crisis – ParlyReportSA

Posted in Energy, Facebook and Twitter, Finance, economic, Land,Agriculture, LinkedIn, Mining, beneficiation, Trade & Industry0 Comments

Mineral and Petroleum Resources Bill halted perhaps

Mineral and Petroleum Act extends State rights…

New MPRDA starts with 20% free carry, maybe more….

oil rigThe Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Bill, the legislation that will give the state a right to a 20% free carried interest in all new exploration and production rights in the energy field, has been passed by Parliament before it closed and sent to President Zuma for assent. According to press reports, new minister of mineral resources, Ngoako Ramatlhodi, may have halted the process by request, however, in the light of public sentiment and opposition moves to challenge the Bill’s legality.

Section 3(4) of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) currently states that the amount of royalty payable to the State must be determined and levied by the Minister of Finance in terms of an Act of Parliament. This Act, in force, is the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Royalty Act 28 of 2008 but considerable uncertainty always surrounded how this would work and what was actually meant.

Any uncertainty has now been removed and the MPRDA amendments now passed have brought to an end a process which started when the draft Bill was first published for comment in December 2012.

Beneficiation of minerals included

mine dumpThe legislation seeks to “regulate the exploitation of associated minerals” and make provision for the implementation of an approved beneficiation strategy through which strategic minerals can be processed locally for a higher value – the exact definition of the word “beneficiation” yet having to be defined.

Importantly, the new Act will give clear definitions of designated minerals; free carried interest; historic residue stockpiles; a mine gate price; production sharing agreements; security of supply and state participation generally.

Stockpiles and residues affected

The new Act also states that regulations will apply to all historic residue stockpiles both inside and outside their mining areas and residue deposits currently not regulated belong to the owners. Ownership status will remain for two years after the promulgation of the bill.

In addition to the right to a 20% free carried interest on all new projects, ownership by the state can be expanded via an agreed price or production sharing agreements.

The NCOP concurred with Bill on its passage through Parliament and made no changes.

Legal commentators note that the Royalty Act, at present in force, triggers payment in terms of the MPRDA upon “transfer”, this being defined as the consumption, theft, destruction or loss of a mineral resource other than by way of flaring or other liberation into the atmosphere during exploration or production.

The Royalty Act differentiates between refined and unrefined mineral resources as “beneficiation”, this being seen as being important to the economy; incentives being that refined minerals are subject to a slightly lower royalty rate.

Coal and  gas targeted maybe

Nevertheless it appears, commentators note, that in terms of mineral resources coal is being targeted and also zeroed in on is state participation in petroleum licences. Others have pointed to the possible wish of government to have a state owned petroleum entity such as PetroSA to be involved fracking exploration.

Earlier versions of the Bill entitled the State to a free carried interest of 20% and a further participation interest of 30%, with the total State interest capped at 50%; however, the version that Parliament approved removed the reference to a 30% participation interest as well as the limit of 50%, effectively giving the State the right to take over an existing petroleum operation, law firm Bowman Gilfillan explained in a media release earlier this month.

Democratic Alliance (DA) Shadow Minister of Mineral Resources, James Lorimer said in a statement that the Act, “would leave the South African economy in a shambles”, adding that this would lead to people losing their jobs.

The DA has said it has now begun a process to petition President Zuma, in terms of Section 79 of the Constitution, to send this Bill back to the National Assembly for reconsideration,” he said.

Chamber opinion differs

Surprisingly, the Chamber of Mines stated that it “generally welcomed and supported” the approval of the MPRDA Amendment Bill, adding that it believed significant progress had been made in addressing the mining industry’s concerns with the first draft of the Bill, published back in December 2012.

Clearly the mining and petroleum industries particularly gas exploration industries, both of whom have separate equity BEE charters, are still very much at odds on the effects of the promulgation of such an Act, as is DA and the ANC.

Other articles in this category or as background

http://parlyreportsa.co.za//bee/mprda-bill-causes-contention-parliament/

http://parlyreportsa.co.za//bee/major-objections-minerals-and-petroleum-resources-bill/

Posted in BEE, cabinet, Energy, Facebook and Twitter, Fuel,oil,renewables, Justice, constitutional, LinkedIn, Mining, beneficiation, Public utilities, Trade & Industry0 Comments

Oil/sea gas debate re-started by Parliament

Parliament calls for public input on gas debate….

Roughnecks wrestle pipe on a True Company oil drilling rig outside WatfordOn the prospects of transforming the gas industry through partnerships, the parliamentary portfolio committee on energy has invited comments.  Recent presentations to the portfolio committee have led to a renewed belief that gas, whether found and transformed, offshore or onshore, needs more focus.

The background to the invitation for comment, which will have no doubt come from chair Sisi Njikelana, says, “Current development of regional gas-fields will lead to natural gas becoming a more important fuel source in South Africa. With the availability of natural gas in neighbouring countries, such as Mozambique, Namibia and Tanzania, and the additional discovery of offshore gas reserves in South Africa, the gas industry in South Africa is poised to undergo expansion.”

The notice continues, “ Natural and coal gas play separate roles in the energy system, with natural gas being used solely as a feedstock for the production of synthetic fuels, and coal gas as an industrial and domestic fuel.”

“The gas industry in South Africa is regulated by the Gas Act 48 of 2001, which is currently being revised. As part of the build up to discussing amendments to this Act, Parliament wishes to engage the public on the topic of “Prospects of transforming the gas industry through partnerships”.

“Sub topics (as part of the main theme) can include (but not limited to) finance, pricing, infrastructure development, procurement, technology research and development, key success factors, skills development and transfer, community involvement and expansion of the gas industry in South Africa.”

Public hearings are scheduled for 30 January 2014. Interested individuals, organisations and institutions wishing to comment were requested in the notice to forward written submissions to the Portfolio Committee have been asked to declare an interest in making an oral presentation to the portfolio committee itself if they so wish.

Posted in Energy, Enviro,Water, Facebook and Twitter, Finance, economic, Fuel,oil,renewables, LinkedIn, Mining, beneficiation0 Comments

Nuclear and gas workshop meeting

Gas emerges as winner……

nuclear logoIn what appeared to be a listening platform for anti-nuclear lobbyists, an energy stakeholders meeting, organised by the portfolio committee on energy on nuclear energy with the subject of nuclear energy as a component of South Africa’s future energy mix, was billed as a debate as such.  However it turned out to be a platform for speakers and not a debate at all.

This was primarily because there were so many submissions and questions had to be cut down to one minute, most of the earlier time having been taken by the department of energy, NECSA and proponents of the nuclear build programme using the day for presentations, already seen in Parliament and by parliamentarians.

Nuclear platform not provided

Opposition members expressed their anger at their inability to listen to any serious opposition to the use or deployment of nuclear facilities but a number of interesting points did emerge that may give value to whether or not it was worth having had a meeting at all.

Much of what emerged was the seriousness of the costs of any nuclear programme; safety matters and job creation ability, particularly in the relationship between nuclear versus solar and wind and other clean energy projects.

Govt. seems fixed on nuclear

Whilst the chair, Sisa Njikelana, said the meeting was not about trying to change government plans on its nuclear ambitions which clearly included nuclear energy in its planning, or debate the extent to which whether or not nuclear will or will not be part of the energy mix, he nullified arguments put forward by stating that a revised integrated resources plan was to be available in the coming weeks.

Most presenters expressed surprise that government policy was so fixed on the matter.

What did emerge that detractors were quoting the high costs of Finnish nuclear re-actors but the subject of low-cost Chinese or Korean re-actors did not emerge, as stated by one commentator.

Plans for waste in hand

Furthermore, DEO negated all complainants on the issue of nuclear waste by saying that plans were in process to handle long term nuclear waste with a scientific solution by government and the main problem was a misinformed public at this stage.

DEO also responded that hydro power could be a lot more dangerous and threatening to a massive number of communities downstream than any nuclear re-actor and that nobody had died in the Fukushima accident, which was the result of an earthquake not nuclear mishandling.

From results tabled it appeared that wind power was more expensive on a consumer cost basis.

Shell says gas cost effective

A major input came from Shell SA who pointed out that whilst they were not against building nuclear plants but for cost of building one nuclear plant, three national gas pipelines could be built, enough to handle all South Africa’s gas field requirements and include also the cost of gas to fuel technology.

The result of the stakeholders meeting in fact resulted in a determination of parliamentarians to insist upon DEO that gas should be focussed upon to a far greater extent when determining South Africa’s future energy mix and needs.

Refer to articles in this category

http://parlyreportsa.co.za//energy/integrated-energy-plan-iep-around-corner/ http://parlyreportsa.co.za//cabinetpresidential/nuclear-goes-ahead-maybe-strategic-partner/ http://parlyreportsa.co.za//energy/national-nuclear-control-centre-now-in-place/

Posted in Energy, Facebook and Twitter, Finance, economic, LinkedIn, Mining, beneficiation, Public utilities, Trade & Industry0 Comments

Electricity connections not making targets

No hope of meeting Zuma’s promises…

elec poleThe inability of municipalities and local government to bring electricity to the poor and for the department of energy (DOE) to meet its promised target of electricity to all households by 2015 was a subject which dominated the DOE’s annual report to Parliament recently. New Minister of governance and traditional affairs, Pravin Gordhan, will have this issue before him as he tackles local government problems as will new minister of public enterprises, Lynne Brown.

Ms Nelisiwe Magubane, DG of DOE was reporting on the activities of her department for the 2o12/13 period and neither the minister of energy, Ben Martins, or his deputy, was present, much to the chagrin of portfolio  committee energy committee chairperson, Sisi Njikelena, who reported angrily on the subject.      DOE was reporting on its annual report and second quarter achievements.

Success with avoiding Middle East for oil

In noting that the year had been dominated by fluctuating oil prices, Ms Magubane noted that South Africa had succeeded in switching 41% of its oil imports to the African continent.

DG Magubane also reported that the electricity supply situation had improved in the country and the department’s own household electricity connection programme had also improved, mainly thanks to Eskom, but there was a large backlog that still existed due to lack of accountability by municipalities. This was a worrying factor for the country, she said. On this subject, further reports followed.

Other DOE targets met

Dr Barnard

Dr Barnard

On clean energy as far as the year was concerned, she reported that in August financial close had been received from twenty eight of the independent power producer (IPP) bids: the biofuels blending regulations had been drafted; the draft pricing arrangements started; and a nuclear safety report compiled and submitted as a result of lessons learnt from the Fukushima disaster.
 Dr Wolsey Barnard took up the issue of DOE’s poor record on electricity connections and said that bearing in mind the lack of skills and training at local government, it “was a miracle that South Africa had achieved so much”.

Aside from the fact, he said, that the government financial year was different to the municipal year, which made a mockery of funding programmes and targets, he said dealing with municipalities was “extremely difficult”  but nevertheless “for each seventy seconds of each day there was a connection some here in South Africa”.

Treasury must ring fence local funding

On the problematic relationships with local government, Dr Barnard said DOE was doing as much as it could “but you can pull a rope but you can’t push it and that was the trouble in dealing with local government officials”.   He said he looked forward to the day when National Treasury’s promised Bill “ring fencing” funds was promulgated “and then we might get somewhere”, he said.

He noted that each municipality had to sign a contract to get funding in the first place, providing business plan, “but sometimes we get to a place to install for a lot of homes built and there is no sub-station or any hope of connecting to the national grid”.

Cabora Bassa dam debt at R1

nelisiwe magubaneMs Magubane confirmed that in the annual reports a loan to Mozambique for the Cabora Bassa dam had been written down to R1 with the permission of Treasury. This loan was in respect of money loaned in the ‘sixties and it was clear that the Mozambique government could not pay. However, the question of re-payment of this loan would be re-raised, she said.

On queries why there seemed so little interest in gas exploration by government in Mozambique, whereas other countries seemed to have “got their foot in first”, Muzi Mkhize, chief director of hydrocarbons, said that “unlike other countries, we do not subsidize our national oil exploration effort and, in any case, the quest of dealing with countries was a foreign affairs matter and country to country relationships had to come first.”

SA to meet Mozambique on gas exploration

Sisi Njikelana said that this was a totally unsatisfactory answer and called on Mkhize for a better explanation to his committee.  Mkhize admitted that South Africa was “meeting Mozambique on a government to government basis on gas exploration matters in mid-October”.

When asked what had happened to the nuclear safety report, deputy director general of nuclear, DOE, Zizamele Mbambo, said that this was a security document but it had been acted upon.

The Eskom representative was asked to speak on the subject when a question was raised about the Koeberg Nuclear plant by a Cape Town MP, and the Eskom official reported that a “fortnightly nuclear safety committee met in the area with all representatives present” and that the meeting was chaired by a person drawn from the local community.

Refer to articles in this category
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//public-utilities/municipal-free-basic-services-slow-build/
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//energy/dpe-

Posted in BEE, Electricity, Energy, Enviro,Water, Facebook and Twitter, Finance, economic, LinkedIn, Public utilities, Trade & Industry0 Comments

PASA ready for fracking and sea gas

Gas regulator separate from others….

In a presentation to Parliament, the strategic role of the new Petroleum Agency of SA (PASA) was debated and government officials showed MPs that estimations indicated that at least 20% of PASA’ future effort would be spent on contributing to the legislative and regulatory framework surrounding shale gas in South Africa.

Two major areas of gas and oil exploration revenue for the new body were clearly indicated as income from shale gas operations, or “fracking”, and also from maritime gas investments mainly off the East coast of South Africa, and from current operations on the West coast which were also to be extended, PASA officials said.

Licensing revenue from gas

Current inland petroleum operations and possible extensions of exploration within the main body of South Africa would also continue as a source of revenue, PASA said.

The present mandate of PASA, parliamentarians were told, was to facilitate and regulate the exploration and sustainable development of oil and gas “for the benefit of all South Africans”.     Cash flows from licensing were expected to increase from the forecast R13.7m for 2013 to R147m by 2017 which would be used for oil and gas investments although this was not necessarily ring fenced according to national treasury.

MPRDA includes PASA

The licensing process in terms of the Minerals and Petroleum Development Act, under which PASA falls, includes receiving applications for oil and gas reconnaissance permits, technical co-operation permits, exploration rights and production rights.

In all instances, the major focus, PASA officials indicated, would be to advise and regularly report to the minister of energy affairs on recommendations regarding the industry and “to receive, maintain, store, interpret, evaluate, add value to, disseminate or deal in all geological or geophysical information related to petroleum”, such a data base being the most important part of current work being undertaken.

Skills to be acquired

The future includes the establishment of a force of a number of geologists with specific specialist knowledge, particularly in the near future to support South Africa’s current claim to the international agencies for the extension of its maritime territorial limits.

This is to include some 45,000 km2 off the West Coast of South Africa; about 560,000 km2 in the vicinity of the Prince Edward Islands owned by SA; an area 190,000 km2 south of Madagascar; and the largest area which includes sections of the Mozambique Channel amounting to 1,075,000 km2.

Mozambique Channel

Most of the current litigation involved the application for the area known as “Discovery Ridge” in the Mozambique Channel, where gas deposit realisations are expected to be high.

Income for the new function, other than from “exploration rental” and application for exploration fees, was expected to mainly come from the sale of data but, for the present moment, PASA is expected to operate, for the current year, at a major loss of some R74m as it establishes its mandate, awaits the legal outcome on the moratorium on shale gas exploration and continues to support South Africa’s application to extend its nautical offshore limits.
Refer previous articles in this category
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//cabinetpresidential/to-ignore-fracking-would-be-an-opportunity-lost/
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//bee/mprda-bill-causes-contention-parliament/
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//energy/chemical-industries-plan-for-training-skills-in-fracking/

 

Posted in Facebook and Twitter, Fuel,oil,renewables, LinkedIn0 Comments

Objections to Minerals and Petroleum Resources Bill

Exploration investment threatened……

Roughnecks wrestle pipe on a True Company oil drilling rig outside WatfordProposed changes to the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Bill (MPRDA) were given the “thumbs down” sign by a number of international participants in the oil and gas industry who provided the minister of mineral resources with a solid indication that the amendments to the Bill are not acceptable as they stand if major investment is to be expected or gas exploration encouraged.

Shell SA was largely ambivalent, although calling for greater clarity on a number of issues.

Confrontation was clearly evident from some of the submissions made by members of the oil and gas exploration industry, however, to a number of principles contained in the MPRDA Bill, the most common issues being lack of clarity for investment purposes and objections to the consolidation of the B-BBEE charters for mining and liquid fuels.

Plenty to think about

oil rigWhilst the chairperson of the portfolio committee of mineral resources claimed there were over six hundred pages from the private sector on the subject which the minister of mineral resources already had stated would probably be a contentious matter, a number of exploration companies were quite vociferous in their objections, both in their oral hearings and when it came to questioning from MPs.

At the last minute the submission from PetroSA was withdrawn subsequently explained by the CEO of PetroSA to the portfolio committee on energy as being for reasons of signatures to various confidentiality agreements.

The amendments contained in the Bill are extensive, including proposals to seek to promote beneficiation of resources: extend government ownership into all ventures; place two state officials on the boards of companies to monitor BEE compliance; the combining of both industry BEE charters; the dissolution of the Petroleum Agency of SA (PASA) and to declare “certain minerals” as strategic resources.

Anadarko at sea over Bill

anardarkoAnadarko SA, a subsidiary of Anadarko Petroleum Corporation who stated they were one of the world’s largest independent oil and gas exploration and production companies with over 5,000 employees and were currently in partnership with PetroSA in Mozambique waters, said their primary areas of concern with the MPRD amendments were that they caused total fiscal instability and uncertainty, something they were not used to working with.

They preferred a dedicated regulator to deal with the oil and gas industry who dealt with only that, they said.   On the issue of fiscal stability, their CEO, Emil Ranoszek, stated that the new Bill “lacked robust economic stability provisions to protect the rights and legitimate expectations of existing rights and permit holders going from an exploration right through to a production right”.

Risk at unacceptable levels

Anadarko, he said, was “committed to establishing a mutually beneficial relationship with the South African state and that oil and gas companies and (they) were ready to make significant investments in South Africa but the Bill in its current form disturbed this balance and raised commercial risk to unacceptably high levels”.

Ranoszek noted that PetroSA was a 20% shareholder in the areas where Anadarko already had a license.    Anadarko was one of the few companies in the world, he said, which had the technical knowledge to “draw the water depths” where they were currently working. If the terms, conditions and risks were deemed to be too high and Anadarko decided not to proceed with operations, then the company would relinquish its licenses.

How PetroSA was going to decide to handle such a situation was unknown and he could not speak for them.

Money flowing to communities

When asked how Anadarko was contributing to the job creation situation in Mozambique, Ranoszek replied that this had been both in the form of direct and indirect jobs from services providers and other sourcing companies. The revenue generated was in the billions of dollars, he said, with the result that Anadarko “was literally building small towns along the coast.”

Anadarko was presently funding a programme in a Mozambican University for the study of petroleum engineering “to upscale the locals in terms of petroleum skills and knowledge.”

ExxonMobil says no clarity

Exxon mobileRuss Berkoben, president of ExxonMobil said the amendments would have several adverse consequences for the growth potential of the South African oil and gas industry. There was “much ambiguity as to the State’s intent”, he said.

Clarity was required regarding the concept that the state would be issuing so-called special shares if it exercised an option for an interest and the state’s right to appoint two directors to a management board of a production operation.”  The Bill gave no clarity on how such matters would be applied.

Berkoben said the minister had to recognise the differences between the petroleum industry and the mining sector and it was his opinion was that PASA should be retained as a body, an entity that understood many of the complexities of his industry, some of which he outlined.  The dissolution of PASA was unwise, he suggested, and with no idea of what regulations were intended, the situation regarding investment had become totally fluid.

BEE  and beneficiation a problem for industry

On the issue of the proposed fines for non-BEE compliance, ExxonMobil said that this would further compromise the viability of certain petroleum operations and discourage expenditure on exploration and development work programmes.  On beneficiation requirements Berkoben stated that he could not visualise how these were applicable to the petroleum exploration or gas industry in reality, other than the minister having rights to offer fuel to outlets with different pricing structures downstream.

When asked by MPs if ExxonMobil had consulted at ministerial level on the Bill and its proposals, Berkoben replied that the answer was simply that ExxonMobil had not been consulted as a stakeholder originally regarding the basis of the proposed changes and he felt that they were being imposed on the oil and gas industry. They were unwarranted, he said.

SA may loose opportunity

impact fieldSean Lunn, managing director of Impact Oil and Gas Ltd, told the committee that the company held an exploration right and three technical cooperation permits along the eastern coast of South Africa and prospects so far identified lay in very deep water and a long way offshore, with the Agulhas current which heavily impacted on exploration along the coastline.

He explained that the oil and gas exploration industry was a dynamic, worldwide business and countries were ranked by their “prospectivity” in fiscal terms, resulting in an industry that was willing to take such risks as proposed on South Africa’s East Coast, one of the most dangerous in the world, when it provided the rewards that were commensurate with the risks taken.

Impact was partnering with ExxonMobil, he explained, and the potential benefits for South Africa “were great, not to mention that the country could become self-sufficient in oil and gas.  South Africa was currently considered to have very high geological risk as no major oil or gas fields had yet been found.

If the current process was unable to find a mutually workable solution, the possibilities that existed offshore may, therefore, lie untapped for decades to come and the huge potential benefit to the country could remain unrealised, he concluded.

Perilous uncertainties

A briefing by the Offshore Petroleum Association of South Africa (OPASA) was made by the acting chairperson, Vusumuzi Sihwa, who re-iterated that the oil and gas exploration environment was challenging environment; high risk; had a surprisingly low success rate with a massive capital outlay to explore a hostile offshore environment such as the East Coast of Africa; and with no guarantee of commercial success.

South Africa’s potential resources, coupled with the current legislation, encouraged the industry to take these huge risks but the MPRDA Bill created “perilous uncertainty for the industry” through lack of stability, uncertainty, coupled with added confusion through the disbandment of PASA.

Sihwa said oil and gas companies could simply shift their focus to other global opportunities.  He suggested that a full working group of all stakeholders, not just some, be convened before the President signed the Bill and the group engage meaningfully and in good faith to reach a mutually agreeable way forward.

OPASA recommended that an upstream petroleum regulator be retained as one unit in one location.

Changing playing fields

Under questioning, the company said existing regulations and the operating environment were very favourable, which was why almost all the prospecting blocks were taken up. The current amendments had brought an element of uncertainty to the table; “the rug was being pulled from under the feet of the industry and this was now a worry, especially whilst projects were in process.” Companies had come into South Africa in terms of a set of rules which were now being decisively altered, he said.

With regard to the liquid fuels charter, OPSA complained that they have never been part of any matters involving mining charters and it was incorrect to impose regulations historically from one industry upon another industry.

Unintended consequences of Bill

sasolIn a separate presentation, Sasol, represented by Johan Thyse, said that Sasol was different to many in the oil and gas industry as it was present throughout the value chain. Consequently government policy and regulation affected the company extensively. Thyse warned the chairperson that the Bill, as it stood, would have serious unintended consequences for both industries.

He said the proposals if left unchallenged would severely affect Sasol’s ability to execute its strategy in South Africa and play its role in the National Growth Path and in the National Development Plan.

Sasol commented in detail on issues surrounding free carried interest and also the mining charter as compared with the liquid fuels charter; the concept of “concentration of rights” which they were highly critical of; the transfer of petroleum licencing; what was referred to in the Bill as regional regulators; the disbandment of PASA and beneficiation as it affected Sasol.

Environmental off beam

They were particularly and deeply concerned regard environmental management issues proposed and the authorisation of issues surrounding increasing the extent of a mining rights through amendments; the removal of prescribed time-frames on many issues and the matter of redefinition of strategic minerals and any consequent effect upon on exports.

Under questioning Sasol said there was total lack of clarity on many issues. Coal for example did not follow cadastral boundaries on the issue of rights as did maritime resources and there was confusion on beneficiation targets and time-frames as to whom and what it applied to.

When asked whether the Bill, with its uncertainties and bearing in mind Sasol’s stakeholders and shareholders, would make it easier or harder to operate in South Africa Thyse replied that “due to the lack of clarity on investment in the Bill, Sasol certainly would re-look at how and where it would invest.”

Investment climate threatened

shellJan W Eggink, Upstream General Manager, Shell SA, said their primary concern where matters equity ownership provisions in the mining charter and how this would the affect investment climate. He said that his company fully supported government’s B-BBEE agenda and matters related to a state interest in the petroleum and mining industry but he needed clarity on whether mining, offshore gas exploration on BEE issues could possibly be combined under one set of rules in view of their disparity.

Under questioning, Egglink called for “more constructive engagement with government” on the combining of matters affecting both the mining and onshore gas industry”.  His overall opinion was that it was difficult to say much on the MPRDA without any knowledge of how any regulations might work.

It was after the Shell presentation, that it was announced by the chair that the PetroSA submission had been withdrawn although the absence from the hearings had been noticeable.

Refer previous articles in this category
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//bee/mprda-bill-causes-contention-parliament/
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//uncategorized/mineral-and-petroleum-development-bill-grabs-resources/
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//energy/draft-mprda-bill-for-comment/

Posted in BEE, Energy, Enviro,Water, Facebook and Twitter, LinkedIn, Trade & Industry0 Comments

Parliament: last chance to clean up

Last session of parliament….

Houses_of_Parliament_(Cape_Town)The final gathering of a Parliament is always an auspicious time. This is the thirteenth parliament of South Africa as a republic but currently the fourth under the ANC, this particular parliament having been started in 2009.   How time passes indeed.

Four times five is twenty and nobody can change the fact that this is the number of years we have had in South Africa to get things into first gear and pull away as leaders in Africa.

The poor still out there

But whilst security was always the issue in governments before 1994, service delivery to the poor has been the issue ever since, followed more recently by the need to fill the gap caused by inaction on infrastructure build.   When will the poor actually not be poor seems to be the question and in the case of South Africa the answer always seems to be within our grasp.

As do the energy, rail, transport and harbour, the communications, health and education issues seem to be equally just within our grasp.   Closing that gap is, of course, not helped by the lack of skills and training at the coalface and where it matters.

Up skilling in skills

Aspects to watch in Parliament over the coming weeks involve monitoring the reports of each department’s on the skills training aspect.  Expense was not been spared in the budget. Everybody has been given money. But the “work-hard, focused, skillful, get it done properly” Chinese mentality seems to be missing.

Where the Chinese score is through leadership and therein lies the rub in South Africa, from the top, to the most low worker.

Leadership vacuum maybe

With an extraordinarily long list of legislation to get through in the next session of Parliament it will be interesting to see if the qualities of leadership emerge at all, or the country remains driven, even at cost to basic economic structures, by imperatives to get votes.

Unusual has been the move by the President to return the Protection of State Information Bill back to Parliament, ostensibly in the light of some grammatical errors. Whilst this does not vitally affect the business world, other than perhaps a number of businesses or industries in a strategic role finding itself involved or suspected as being involved in the leaking of some highly sensitive subject – say nuclear or defence, this affair will play out noisily in our newspapers but is not really a serious business issue.

Last minute rush

Meanwhile, the last session of any parliamentary government period will always see MPs distracted by forthcoming elections whilst attempting to handle a voluminous amount of legislation that sincerely affects business and they would like to see passed before the period ends.    Consequently, the expression “fast-tracking” will occur again and again over the coming two months.

Ministers will also make many a speech from a podium aimed at the electorate, rather than adding substance to a legislative issue.  Much will involve sorting the wheat from the chaff when it comes to government policy on critical issues.

Shabangu drops a bomb

Critical issues are obviously the Minerals and Petroleum Resources amendments, bearing in mind minister Shabangu’s recent statement on “free carry” and the ability of the state  to acquire up to 50% shareholding in gas exploration successes; the combining of the liquid fuels and mining BEE charters; land reform; fracking, carbon tax and e-tolling.

Also a certain number of ministers will be attempting to justify their stay in the cabinet and the requirement of pleasing the electorate will feature more heavily on their minds than that of the international investment public. Much will have to be ignored.

This is always a bad period for South African public relations; the political lobby; government relations and for departmental heads who may get rough treatment as they report to MPs on their achievements and as Parliament progresses towards the period of the medium term budget.

Heads down.

Posted in Facebook and Twitter, Finance, economic, Justice, constitutional, Labour, Land,Agriculture, LinkedIn, Public utilities, Trade & Industry0 Comments

Green Paper on nautical limits to make SA oceanic nation

SA to extend its nautical limits…

South Africa’s claim to resources from the sea bed currently extends some 400 nautical miles but with claims by government now submitted to international authorities, this could well run to 700 nautical miles, adding nearly two million square kilometers to South Africa’s “continental shelf”, making the country a nautical and oceanic resource nation of some consequence.

This fact emerged in Parliament recently on the tabling of a Green Paper on the subject but the warning was added by Adv. “Johnny” de Lange that at the same time South Africa must find the resources, both in skills and finance, to administer a “national data base” of resources, weather, oceanic data such as currents and tides, fishing factors and maritime general information that was available to and contributed to by all sectors of government and industry to manage such an additional load .

More environmental changes

With only four submissions to Parliament emanating from the public, department of water and environmental affairs (DWEA) specialist in monitoring, Ashley Naidoo, briefed the parliamentary committee on water and environmental affairs on the new Green Paper on a future South African policy framework falling under the National Environmental Management Act for the management of ocean sectors.

Primarily motivated by the enormous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the fact that issues like liabilities and the basis for governance of the oceans are still outstanding, DWEA said it has been motivated of late to engage urgently in policy regarding the management of the ocean sector generically, a policy which will be developed shortly and submitted to cabinet as a White Paper.

Other countries

The process, said Naidoo, involves studying the policies of about twelve other countries, such as Norway, Korea, Brazil and Russia which already had frameworks in place whilst including in their deliberations the USA and the United Kingdom who are developing theirs.

Involved also as an ongoing process is a review of sectoral stakeholders, such as mining, fishing and gas exploration; a review of international agreements across all departments that South Africa is subject to; and, finally, shipping policies.

Most important would be the development of a national inter-departmental data base for all to consult with and a regulatory base on which to consider activity applications.  South differed from most nations, Naidoo said, in that 95% of its oceans in the continental area of South Africa were pristine and benefited also from strong currents. South Africa was lucky in this regard, he said.

Fishing, oil, shipping involved

It was noted, Naidoo told parliamentarians, that  whilst each sector, such as the fishing, the oil industry in its many aspects and merchant shipping all had their own conventions and agreements, it was time for SA to develop its own overall policy framework to which all could refer to and fall under.

“Whilst there was a good knowledge base on fishing and on the currents and climate factors, we have very little knowledge on what minerals and where they are located and also pharmaceutical resources”, said Naidoo.

Present situation

The current position, he said, was that South Africa had a line representing a 400 nautical mile ownership on waters adjacent to its coastline; a line which was mapped and fixed. At present, South Africa was negotiating a claim through the relevant international bodies for an 1,800,000 sq kilometers additional ownership over the next five years in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans, which would classify South Africa as an “ocean” country of some significance.

Naidoo said that there were some 15,000 ships passing through our waters a year with about 9,000 ships calling at SA ports.   “We have few competitors in the Southern Oceans wanting to gain space, although there are existing zones “owned’ by countries and South Africa will have to learn to live with some of its new oceanic neighbours, such as Norway.

Looking ahead

Naidoo said that with 70% of the globe being covered by water, climatic effects are the major issue affecting the oceanic eco-system at present and consequently there is a need to build on general environmental governance principles in order to handle governance on the high seas.   Provisions had to be made for sea trade; fish and fishing; minerals, pharmaceuticals, sewage and waste disposal.

Also, he said, regulation had to cover environmental issues, climate response, weather matters and the recycling of carbon and nitrogen and heat issues.  Support had to be provided for niche projects on bio-diversity such as mangrove development and delta management and cultural aspects had to be considered. All this would be found in the White Paper.

Naidoo outlined the guiding principles and strategic objectives, Adv. De Lange chairperson the portfolio committee concerned, emphasising that the priority in his view was a national data base across all departments which had to be costed in properly so that Treasury was involved, otherwise regulation of the high seas managed as a national policy would just be a “pipe dream”.

“Government was designing too many policies and not enough working systems and the time has come to deliver”, he said.

Mossel Bay objection

Of the submissions presented orally, notable was the submission from REVAG, an environmental group from Mossel Bay, vehemently objecting to the PetroSA LNG tanker depot and unloading facilities moored offshore within a few hundred metres of the coast at Pinnacle Point, next to Mossel Bay.

REVAG said that they could not wait for such a Bill as envisaged by the Green Paper and called for a moratorium on the PetroSA LNG activities at Mossel Bay and an immediate halting of such operations.

REVAG said that PetroSA’s first application in the form of a land-based EIA to undertake this project was withdrawn in the light of objections initially but it is understood that such an application has now been re-submitted. REVAG said that the projects would be an environmental disaster of major proportions for the area from many aspects.

Adv. De Lange said how surprised he was that only four submissions from the public on the Green Paper had been received by Parliament.
Refer previous articles in this category
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//uncategorized/integrated-energy-plan-iep-is-not-crystal-ball-gazing-says-doe/
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//uncategorized/better-year-for-petrosa-with-offshore-gas-potential/

Posted in Energy, Enviro,Water, Facebook and Twitter, Finance, economic, Fuel,oil,renewables, Land,Agriculture, LinkedIn, Mining, beneficiation, Public utilities, Trade & Industry, Transport0 Comments

Mineral and Petroleum Development Bill grabs resources

The state muscles in…

offshore gasThe Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Bill, approved by the cabinet in May, has now been tabled in Parliament and sections 80 and 84 of the anchor Act are to be amended, it is proposed, to provide for State participation in petroleum development carried out by the private sector.

The draft bill was published for comment in December 2012 and the proposed legislation, other than to extensively address the issue of re-describing many definitions and include petroleum and petroleum products in many of the issues covered by the Act such as beneficiation, also regulates extensively the exploitation of minerals and the legal movement and transfer of resource rights.

The new Bill also aligns the MPRDA with the newly assented Geoscience Amendment Act and “addresses shortcomings identified, whilst simultaneously streamlining the administrative processes in relation to the regulation of the mining environment management function”.

“New entity” to be formed

Two issues are of note in that under section 71 of the new Bill it is proposed that the minister forms a “new entity” which will “promote onshore and offshore exploration for and production of petroleum” and which will also “receive, store, maintain, interpret, add value to, evaluate, disseminate or deal in all geological or geophysical information relating to petroleum submitted” of the anchor Act, the MPRDA.

The new entity (and it is to be assumed those involved in “exploitation” of minerals and petroleum must through such an entity) must, it is proposed, “ bring to the notice of the Minister any information in relation to the exploration and production of petroleum which is likely to be of use or benefit to the state”. This clause will no doubt cause debate.

The background to the Bill clearly states that in terms of the new proposals, Sections 80 and 84 of the anchor Act are amended to provide for the state participation in petroleum development as described and that the state “has a right to a free carried interest in all new exploration and production rights”.

The proposal that matters

Section 84 of the MPRDA is further amended to include State board participation in the holders of production rights in terms of the proposals.

Section 2.9 of the background giving policy views also underlines the concept that the state will “exercise its rights and options having evaluated the applicable finance modalities to prioritise and optimise state participation in petroleum exploitation and in line with the national developmental priorities.”

The newly tabled Bill states that “specific details regarding the extent of the State’s free carried interests” will be published in a government gazette.

More background articles on subject
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//energy/south-africa-at-energy-crossroadsdoe-speaks-out/
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//energy/draft-mprda-bill-for-comment/

Posted in Cabinet,Presidential, Energy, Enviro,Water, Facebook and Twitter, Finance, economic, Fuel,oil,renewables, LinkedIn, Mining, beneficiation, Public utilities, Special Recent Posts, Trade & Industry, Uncategorized0 Comments

PetroSA has high hopes with the Chinese

Sinopec agreement necessary

PetroSA logoDr Benny Mokaba, an independent consultant on energy planning and options working for PetroSA, confirmed to parliamentarians of the energy committee that a framework agreement had been signed between PetroSA and the giant Chinese petrochemical company, Sinopec. As a result, the Mthombo refinery project at Coega, “continues to gather momentum”.

He asked parliamentarians to remember “that this project had been named as one of the six major projects of the New Growth Plan”.

Crucial infrastructure problems affecting the project were described as rail, port and pipeline issues, relationships with the Coega Development Corporation, Eskom power and dealing with provincial and municipal matters. As this was a presidential “SIP” project, ongoing engagement and reporting on status was being given but parliamentarians were advised that “due to the competitive nature of the industry, very little more could be said.”

Refinery and gas projects

Dr Mokaba said that in the year under review PetroSA had continued to operate safely and profitably; that the Mossel Bay refinery “sustenance” had remained a key focus and the Ikhwezi offshore gas project is progressing well, drilling having started and first gas expected shortly.

However, he said that PetroSA faced increasing challenges with declining feedstock; increased competition for hydrocarbon assets; a weak rand and funding limitations; with the result that it’s cash “was depleting at a fast rate”.

African ventures

Most of the focus of the strategy was on the “upstream plan”, where Dr Mokaba said that PetroSA would “consolidate its recent acquisition in Ghana, known as ‘Sabre’; finalise “farming out” 55% of its equity stake in a block in Equatorial Guinea; and was looking at funding options for a possible acquisition in Venezuela. (During the presentation the exposure by the media of PetroSA of problems in dealings in Ghana had not been made, nor was it mentioned at this meeting)

Sinopec important to the venture

CoegaJoern Falbe, vice president, new ventures, PetroSA, said on midstream matters that the main issue was “we know what we don’t know” and this had led to better planning certainty and the realization that experts, especially when it came to the Mathombo project, were needed.

He pointed out that PetroSA were not the real experts in mega-projects such as this – in fact total project managers and logistical team expertise hardly existed in SA for this kind of undertaking to be handled “in house”, but Sinopec from China were, in their view, the answer and that is why the new framework agreement was an important stage to have finalised.

“We are working closely with IDC over the Mathombo project as well and through them we shall get the financing correct”, he said.   Members asked if government guarantees were going to be needed but this stage had not yet been reached, was the reply.

Little happening downstream

PetroSA said nothing on downstream issues other than to mention a petrol station was being built at Mbizana, working with the local community. Mbizana is a large municipal area located in the Eastern Cape Province on the R61 road connecting KwaZulu Natal south coastal boundary to the N2 highway with a population of approximately 246 500.

On downstream issues generally, the chair explained that PetroSA was in a competitive world and this would not be discussed
Associated articles archived
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//uncategorized/better-year-for-petrosa-with-offshore-gas-potential/
http://parlyreportsa.co.za//uncategorized/integrated-energy-plan-iep-is-not-crystal-ball-gazing-says-doe/

Posted in Energy, Finance, economic, Fuel,oil,renewables, Land,Agriculture, Public utilities, Trade & Industry, Transport0 Comments


This website is Archival

If you want your publications as they come from Parliament please contact ParlyReportSA directly. All information on this site is posted two weeks after client alert reports sent out.

Upcoming Articles

  1. MPRDA : Shale gas developers not satisfied
  2. Environmental Bill changes EIAs
  3. Parliament thrashes out debt relief Bill
  4. Border Mangement Bill grinds through Parliament
  5. BUSA, farmers, COSATU give no support to sugar tax

Earlier Editorials

Earlier Stories

  • Anti Corruption Unit overwhelmed

    Focus on top down elements of patronage  ….editorial….As Parliament went into short recess, the Anti-Corruption Unit, the combined team made up of SARS, Hawks, the National Prosecuting Authority and Justice Department, divulged […]

  • PIC comes under pressure to disclose

    Unlisted investments of PIC queried…. When asked for information on how the Public Investment Corporation (PIC) had invested its funds, Dr  Daniel Matjila, Chief Executive Officer, told parliamentarians that the most […]

  • International Arbitration Bill to replace BITs

    Arbitration Bill gets SA in line with UNCTRAL ….. The tabling of the International Arbitration Bill in Parliament will see ‘normalisation’ on a number of issues regarding arbitration between foreign companies […]

  • Parliament rattled by Sizani departure

    Closed ranks on Sizani resignation….. As South Africa struggles with the backlash of having had three finance ministers rotated in four days and news echoes around the parliamentary precinct that […]

  • Protected Disclosures Bill: employer to be involved

    New Protected Disclosures Bill ups protection…. sent to clients 21 January……The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Affairs will shortly be debating the recently tabled Protected Disclosures Amendment Bill which proposes a duty […]