Trump is opening Alaska’s wilderness to the oil business, but no one is buying

Quartz

Trump is opening Alaska’s wilderness to the oil business, but no one is buying

By Michael J. Coren, Climate reporter         August 20, 2020
REUTERS/U.S FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. Prime drilling habitat?
The climate economy and the severity of the climate crisis has finally sunk in, and it’s inspiring individuals and industries to take action.

 

The Trump administration  announced this week it would issue decades-long leases in the massive Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), potentially holding its first auctions by the end of the year.

It’s not clear anyone will take them up on the offer.

For quite some time, oil and gas companies (and their financiers) have been running in the other direction. Major banks have already refused to lend to projects that would drill in the 19.6-million-acre Alaskan preserve known as the  “last great wilderness.” Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo had all sworn off financing oil development in the tundra’s refuge.

And few oil firms appear ready to take out loans, in any case. Last year, BP sold off its Alaska operations (including leasing rights in a private holding of ANWR). Anadarko, Pioneer Natural Resources, and Marathon Oil have hocked their holdings. Shell left Alaska without bothering to sell its assets. That’s left two companies, ConocoPhillips and Hilcorp, controlling 72% of Alaska’s oil production (the rest are owned by Exxon Mobil and a few smaller firms).

For all Donald Trump’s talk of “energy dominance,” the future of ANWR may be out of his hands. The hesitancy to drill new wells in Alaska’s Arctic is driven in part by a warming world: The state is heating up twice as fast as the rest of the nation, and its melting permafrost wreaks havoc on drilling infrastructure. But it has much more to do with the dire economics of drilling for expensive oil in remote locations.

Coronavirus has presented an existential crisis for the oil and gas industry, forcing every company to reckon with what it will take to survive.

Because of those high costs and low prices, the state’s oil production has declined 75% from its 2 million barrels per day peak in 1988. Alaska is predicting no growth in oil production for the rest of the decade.

“ANWR is a distraction,” said energy consultant Phil Verleger. If any leases do go up for auction, he predicts, “I doubt any company will bid.” Yet the refuge remains a battleground. The possibility of a billion-barrel oil discovery remains, and a few oil companies are holding out in hopes of hitting pay dirt one last time before the global economy shifts definitively away from fossil fuels.

Big Oil, no money

For decades, Republicans in the US have been trying to open up a critical strip of the refuge’s coastal plain to drilling. And until recently, legislators have been able to stall those efforts. Since 1980, more than 50 votes over ANWR drilling have gone before Congress. All have gone on to defeat—until 2017, when drilling was finally authorized as part of Republicans’ “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.”

US EIA
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and trans-Alaska pipeline from the North Slope to Valdez, Alaska.

The decision came just late enough to be virtually irrelevant. Drilling in this region of Alaska might have made economic sense 10 or even five years ago. Today, it’s risky and out of reach for a diminished oil and gas industry that has seen its stock prices plunge along with the price of oil.

Energy companies’ share of the S&P500 has fallen from nearly 30% in 1980 to less than 5% today. “There is almost no rationale for Arctic exploration,” said Goldman Sachs analyst Michele Della Vigna on CNBC’s Squawk Box in 2017. “Immensely complex, expensive projects like the Arctic we think can move too high on the cost curve to be economically doable.”

Since then, it’s only gotten worse. Oil prices have hit historic lows, dropping to $45 this year, while breakeven prices to extract oil in Alaska’s rugged, remote terrain remain between $55 to $65 per barrel, estimates S&P Global Platts Analytics. In ANWR itself, the bar may be even higher:  $78 per barrel, according to the liberal think tank Center for American Progress.

This all comes on top of the logistical difficulties of building infrastructure in a place that is rapidly melting as a result of climate change. ConocoPhillips, one of the few major operators left in the region, is proposing a drilling project on Alaska’s North Slope. Expected to be approved by the federal Bureau of Land Management, it is so vulnerable to melting permafrost that the environmental impact statement proposes re-freezing the Alaskan tundra beneath its oil platforms (using gas-filled cylinders called thermosyphons), as well as constructing gravel roads built five to seven feet deep to prevent more thawing.

Oil production in ANWR is decades away, if it happens at all. With oil prices expected to fall along with demand as electric vehicle sales rise, it’s unclear if prices will rise again to the point where it makes economic sense to open ANWR.

Author: John Hanno

Born and raised in Chicago, Illinois. Bogan High School. Worked in Alaska after the earthquake. Joined U.S. Army at 17. Sergeant, B Battery, 3rd Battalion, 84th Artillery, 7th Army. Member of 12 different unions, including 4 different locals of the I.B.E.W. Worked for fortune 50, 100 and 200 companies as an industrial electrician, electrical/electronic technician.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *