Viewpoint: Europe base oils face oversupply

  • Market: Oil products
  • 15/01/19

The European market will prove vulnerable to global structural changes as Group I base oil producers maintain output levels and are slow to upgrade units.

The global base oil market faces unprecedented change in the coming years with rising premium base oil capacity, higher specification requirements for engine oils and the implementation of the International Maritime Organisation's (IMO) 2020 sulphur cap.

Group I prices face downward pressure in 2019 amid falling demand as more buyers switch to premium-grade Group II and Group III base oils. Spot Group I volumes could get a further boost in 2019 from a drop in supplies committed to term contracts compared with 2018. Producers attracted less demand for 2019 term supplies during negotiations at the end of 2018, although some negotiations have continued into 2019.

Many blenders lock in a large share of their requirements with term contracts. But these supplies have reflected an increase in volumes of Group II and Group III base oils in place of Group I. The availability of larger spot volumes is likely to cushion prices against higher-than-expected demand, unplanned maintenance or rising feedstock costs.

Scheduled plant maintenance should curb some spot availability during the peak demand season in the first half of 2019. Maintenance schedules are still being finalised. But several turnarounds in the Mediterranean region are already due to take place in the first half of 2019.

Portuguese refiner Galp 110,000 b/d Oporto facility will shut down in March for a month's maintenance work. The shutdown follows a 10-week shutdown in late 2018 for maintenance work. The earlier shutdown provided little upward price support because of weaker demand and sufficient market availability. Algerian state-owned Sonatrach's 170,000 b/d Augusta refinery will undergo six to eight weeks maintenance starting in the first quarter. The facility is home to the largest base oil unit in Europe, with a nameplate capacity of 782,000t/yr. In Russia, partial maintenance is scheduled to take place at Gazpromneft's Omsk Group I base oil plant from early March.

Persistent surplus supply could limit producers' leverage to raise European prices in response to higher feedstock costs, in the same way it did last year. Crude prices rose in the third quarter of 2018 to their highest levels since 2014. With producers unable to raise prices in response, base oil margins slumped. Some producers trimmed run-rates in response. A slump in crude prices during the fourth quarter of 2018 then triggered a sharp rebound in base oil margins, although they remained historically low. Any moves to cut output in 2019 in response to weaker margins should add price support.

Group I producers will prioritise keeping domestic prices firm by clearing surplus volumes through the export market. Such a move would impact the spread between domestic and export prices. A similar strategy in 2018 prompted a widening of the domestic-export spread from less than $50/t in the first quarter of that year to close to or above $100/t by the end of the year.

But overseas demand from more typical outlets like Turkey, India, the Mideast Gulf and Africa has been slowing. The trend reflects the uncompetitive price of European exports versus those markets' domestic supplies, and versus exports to those markets from other regions.

A repercussion of Turkey's economic crisis was sharply lower demand for Group I SN 150 and SN 500 supplies from Europe. European Group I base oil prices were also uncompetitive versus US Group II supplies and Asia-Pacific Group II/III base oils into India, Mideast Gulf and Africa. That trend has already extended into the start of 2019 and shows signs of extending longer. The prospect of the start-up of new capacity in the Asia-Pacific region and a relatively light round of global plant maintenance in 2019 is likely to sustain plentiful availability to move to other markets this year.

Bright stock was an outlier in 2018, mostly because of strong overseas demand from Egypt. EGPC's 115,000 t/yr Group I unit at the Alexandria refinery that was taken off line in October 2017 will restart in the first quarter of 2019. The resumption of supplies from that plant will follow shortly after the start-up of Luberef's additional 80,000 t/yr of new bright stock capacity in the Mideast Gulf in late 2018.

The Group II base oil market faces the prospect of pressure from rising supply. But tighter engine oil regulations and fuel efficiency requirements by European Automobile Manufacturers' Association (ACEA) are driving demand that will help to absorb this availability.

Falling prices in US and Asia-Pacific markets in late 2018 prompted a surge in discounted Group II exports from those markets to Europe. These added to a wave of supplies already moving to Europe from those markets. Asia-Pacific base oil exports to Europe exceeded 400,000t in 2018. US Group II exports to Europe rose to more than 850,000t in the first 10 months of last year.

Commercial sales of Group II base oils from ExxonMobil's new 1mn t/yr plant at Rotterdam are due to begin in first-quarter 2019. The new plant will quadruple current regional production capacity. Regional demand would need to increase sharply to absorb this combination of new regional supply and rising imports. One way to speed up demand growth would be a narrowing of the spread between Group I and Group II prices to encourage a switch to the premium-grade product in lubricant formulations.

Group II base oil prices were steady throughout 2018, prompting a steady widening of their premium to Group I prices. Their firm prices reflected rising demand for the product as blenders readied for implementation of the ACEA 2016 engine oil sequences at the end of last year.

The sequences outline a minimum standard for engine oils in Europe. Regular updates of those sequences include increasingly stringent testing and higher pass thresholds to ensure that engine oil formulations can withstand higher temperatures in combustion engines, increased use of biofuels and the push for fuel efficiency and economy. Formulations using Group I base oils increasingly struggle to fulfill those requirements. That difficulty in meeting these minimum requirements is set to gather pace as ACEA releases even tighter rules over the coming years.

Rising demand and steady supply helped to support Group II prices. This is in contrast to the slowing demand and plentiful supply that put growing pressure on Group I base oil prices from mid-2018. The result was an increasingly wide price spread between the two groups as their fundamentals disconnected.

Group II light-grade prices ended 2018 at a premium of more than $180/t to domestic SN 150 prices. That was up from an already high premium of around $100/t at the start of the year. Group II heavy-grade prices ended the year at a premium of more than $250/t to Group I SN 500, up from a $140/t premium at the start of the year. The trend reflected the growing structural disconnect between the two markets and the growing danger of linking Group II base oil supply contracts to published Group I base oil prices.

Group III prices are likely to remain mixed throughout 2019 as a result of diverging market fundamentals for base oils with and without original engine manufacturer (OEM) approvals.

The European market faced an increasingly regular and growing flow of Group III supplies from Russia and the Mideast Gulf in 2018. This rising supply of base oils without approvals kept spot prices in a narrow range throughout the year, especially for 4cst base oils. These supplies are likely to impact the Group III market in a similar way in 2019.

Prices for these unapproved supplies were competitive against supplies with approvals. They were also increasingly competitive versus Group II supplies. This prompted some blenders to turn to these supplies instead of using Group II base oils.

Group III prices rose strongly in late 2017 and early 2018 ahead of a raft of global Group III plant maintenance from March. Prices then trended lower after supplies normalised following the completion of that maintenance. But prices for Group III base oils with OEM approvals held increasingly firm relative to supplies with no or limited approvals. The result was a widening spread between supplies with and without approvals to as much as $250-280/t by year-end.

The Group III market faces a lighter round of global plant maintenance in 2019, compared with last year. South Korea's S-Oil will undergo planned maintenance at Onsan in March. But it has been stockpiling supplies at its European storage to cover term demand. Tatneft will also have maintenance at Nizhnekamsk in March, which will impact supplies of light grades for export.

European blenders have a growing number of supply options Group for I, II and III base oils in 2019. Global supply will add to downward price pressure for all three groups and mitigate impact of regional or global shorts. Price competition between groups and suppliers will be a key driver in the evolution of the European market as it switches from Group I to Group I/III base oils.


Sharelinkedin-sharetwitter-sharefacebook-shareemail-share

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News
28/03/24

Stalling climate finance an energy security risk : WRI

Stalling climate finance an energy security risk : WRI

London, 28 March (Argus) — The "best bet" to achieving global energy security is through mitigation funding and multilateral cooperation, according to the World Resources Institute (WRI). WRI highlighted that governments are funding more domestic renewable energy projects but have increased oil and gas production in the name of "energy security" at home in the years following the Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The recent rebrand of energy transition funding to energy security funding has allowed some developed nations to justify domestic oil and gas licences and drag their feet on multilateral financial commitments. This is causing "real worry" among climate-vulnerable developing nations, WRI chief executive Ani Dasgupta said. He said that although the initial "shock" to the world's energy markets after the invasion of Ukraine "quickly went away", it has triggered "real worry among poorer countries that when push comes to shove, it won't be an even game, or have a fair outcome." Developing countries have long complained about the lack of access to climate funding. Richer nations have only recently met the $100bn/yr target in climate finance to developing countries agreed in 2009, while discussions on setting a new climate finance goal for 2025 at Cop 29 in Baku in November could prove difficult. President of the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville) Denis Sassou-Nguesso said last year that the $100bn/yr in climate financing to developing countries promised by rich countries "never reached us", adding that the annual UN Cop climate conferences have become little more than a talking shop. "Just after the invasion of Ukraine, every country started to think about energy security," Dasgupta said. "In theory, good things could have happened, countries could have concluded that their best bet to getting energy security is by going renewable". But it was not the case in key consumer countries or regions, Dasgupta pointed out. China bought the majority of Russian gas following the EU's withdrawal, he said, and has since upped production at coal-fired power stations despite an "extraordinary" acceleration towards renewables set for 2023-28, according to Paris-based energy watchdog IEA . In Europe, the UK and Norway continue to award new oil and gas licences . "In the US, the fossil fuel lobby argues that the best route to energy security is to invest more in fossil fuels". But the best route is to invest in more renewables, he said. "Even if the US produces a large amount of oil and gas, it is still a traded commodity, and so you have to pay a price for it that is set globally." The US special presidential co-ordinator for energy security Amos Hochstein has also suggested in September that a widening climate finance gap could ultimately threaten global security. "We have seen the percentage of dollars spent on the energy transition outside the OECD, in developing and middle income countries actually go down instead of up…" By Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Read more
News

ACT to partner with LR, Wartsila, and UECC on CNSL


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

ACT to partner with LR, Wartsila, and UECC on CNSL

London, 28 March (Argus) — Dutch supplier ACT Group is collaborating with classification society Lloyd's Register, Finnish engine manufacturer Wartsila, and Norwegian shipping firm United European Car Carriers (UECC) on the development and evaluation of cashew nut shell liquid (CNSL) as a biofuel in marine biodiesel blends. ACT confirmed the launch of a CNSL-based biofuel called "FSI.100", which has gone through extensive engine testing with various blend combinations. The CNSL-based biofuel has now received approval from engine manufactures to be blended as a 30pc component with marine gasoil (MGO) to form a marine biodiesel blend for the purpose of further sea trials. ACT confirmed that the FSI.100 product will benefit from lower acidity, and there is potential for the product to be compatible for blending with fuel oil. CNSL is an advanced biodiesel feedstock, making it a more appealing and price competitive option to buyers compared with other biodiesel feedstocks. The development follows a report by Lloyd's Register fuel oil bunkering analysis and advisory service (FOBAS) that pointed to a correlation between engine fuel pump and injector-related damage in vessels and the presence of "unestablished" CNSL in the utilised marine fuels. By Hussein Al-Khalisy Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Baltimore bridge collapse to raise retail fuel prices


27/03/24
News
27/03/24

Baltimore bridge collapse to raise retail fuel prices

Houston, 27 March (Argus) — The collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, Maryland, is more likely to increase regional gasoline prices than diesel due to additional freight costs and certain route restrictions. Suppliers in the region have so far signaled that the effect on broader markets will be minimal, but regional prices will likely rise, especially as peak summer demand season begins with Memorial Day weekend in late May. The bridge closure could pose more problems for gasoline supply than diesel, since gasoline cannot be transported through the Fort McHenry (I-95) and Baltimore Harbor (I-895) tunnels — the two other major roads that cross the Patapsco River at Baltimore — while there are no restrictions on diesel, according to the Maryland Transportation Authority (MTA). Fuel wholesaler Global Partners said yesterday that it would like to see hours of service waivers for trucking in the region to minimize fuel supply disruption to customers, but the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is yet to issue one. Elevated retail prices are likely to be limited to the immediate Baltimore area but could spill over into neighboring markets should trucking markets remain tight due to rerouting, market sources told Argus . Fuel markets in eastern Maryland can be supplied by PBF's 171,000 b/d Delaware City, Delaware, refinery and two further plants in Pennsylvania — Monroe Energy's 190,000 b/d Trainer refinery and PBF's 160,000 b/d Paulsboro refinery. To the north, United Refining runs a 65,000 b/d plant in Warren, Pennsylvania, and along the Atlantic coast Phillips 66 operates the 259,000 b/d Bayway refinery in Linden, New Jersey. PBF, Monroe and United did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether the bridge collapse is affecting refinery operations. Phillips 66 declined to comment on commercial activities. Still, the five nearby refineries — representing all the Atlantic coast's 850,000 b/d of crude processing capacity — are unlikely to see their operations curtailed by limits in shipping products to Maryland. With no refinery in the state of Maryland, most fuels are delivered to Baltimore by Gulf coast refiners on the Colonial Pipeline. Global Partners, which operates a terminal just west of the collapsed bridge, said yesterday it is primarily supplied by the pipeline and expects product flows to continue. Several terminals in the Baltimore Harbor and the nearby Port Salisbury can also receive small vessels and barges of road fuels from Delaware and Pennsylvania, according to the Maryland Energy Administration (MEA). The Port of Baltimore — which remains closed since the collapse — took delivery of 24,000 b/d of gasoline and under 2,000 b/d of distillates from barges and small vessels in 2019, about three percent of the Atlantic coast's refining capacity. "A closure of the Port of Baltimore while the Colonial Pipeline is open would not significantly disrupt fuel supply," the MEA wrote in a 2022 analysis of liquid fuels supply in the state. By Nathan Risser Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

European bio-bunker March prices firm on uncertainty


27/03/24
News
27/03/24

European bio-bunker March prices firm on uncertainty

London, 27 March (Argus) — Marine biodiesel prices firmed in the second half of March across Europe as higher levels in underlying markets combined with supply uncertainty to lend support to blend prices, despite limited demand. Very-low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) firmed by $16/t to $585.58/t on a dob Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerp (ARA) basis and $17.47/t to $628.17/t on a dob Gibraltar-Algeciras-Ceuta (GAC) basis during 14-26 March compared with the two weeks prior. Gains in the fossil market were mainly attributed to an increase in European refinery turnarounds as well as stronger crude values. The front-month Ice Brent crude futures 16:30 GMT marker averaged $86.07/bl on 14-16 March, an increase of $2.92/bl from 1-13 March. Rising fossil levels were accompanied by increases in the biodiesel spot barge market. Prices for advanced fatty acid methyl ester (Fame) 0°C cold-filter plugging point (CFPP) on a fob ARA barge basis averaged $1,407.15/t during the last two weeks of March, a $53.58/t rise from 1-13 March. Used cooking oil methyl ester (Ucome) barges firmed by $47.47/t to $1,316/t during the same timeframe. Biodiesel prices have firmed from long-term lows on the back of a reduction in European production and limited demand. Higher prices in underlying markets were accompanied by an emerging theme of biofuel supply uncertainty. Participants reported that European suppliers may look to steer away from Chinese-origin biodiesel as the EU's anti-dumping investigation continues, with a conclusion by early 2025 at the latest. This was compounded by chronic disruption in the Red Sea, historically the most utilised route on the east-west voyage, leading to traffic redirecting via the Cape of Good Hope and a subsequent increase in freight costs. The potential shift in supply routes can be supported by changes in product flows. Some 19,000t of Fame has been exported from China with a marked destination in Europe in March so far, an 80pc drop from February's 106,000t — according to Kpler data. This month's exports are just 10pc of the 184,000t exported from China to Europe in March last year, according to Kpler. Declining volumes from China were accompanied by an increase in Fame volumes exported from northwest Europe intra-continental to 409,000t in March from 364,000t a month prior. GTT data pointed to a 47pc decline in Chinese biodiesel exports in January-February, coinciding with an increase in Chinese exports of used cooking oil (UCO) with northwest Europe the main destination. Uncertainty in the supply import pool coincided with raised concerns around the presence of "unestablished" biodiesel feedstocks in bunker fuels. A report from Lloyd's Register fuel oil bunkering analysis and advisory service (FOBAS) highlighted a correlation between engine fuel pump and injector related damage in vessels and the presence of cashew nut shell liquid (CNSL) in marine fuels utilised by the vessels. CNSL is one of the cheaper advanced feedstocks and can be eligible for Dutch renewable tickets (HBE-G) — which can help make marine biodiesel blends more appealing and price competitive to buyers, as well as reduce production costs. But participants noted that during tests conducted by shipowners to assess the compatibility of CNSL with marine engines, technical and specification limitations emerged because of potentially high acidity and metal contents. This prompted shipowners and bunker suppliers to avoid fuels that contain CNSL, which may further constrict the pool of biodiesel supply that can be integrated into the maritime sector. Argus assessed the price of B30 Ucome dob ARA, a blend comprising 30pc Ucome and 70pc VLSFO, at $839.17/t during 14-26 March — an increase of just under $22/t from the 1-13 March average. B30 Advanced Fame 0°C CFPP dob ARA range averaged just over $785/t during 14-26 March, higher by $16.19/t from the two weeks prior. B100 Advanced Fame 0 levels rose by $16.62/t to $1,159.79/t in the second half of March. B24 dob Algeciras-Gibraltar firmed to $812.61/t in 14-26 March, an increase of $19.50/t from prices on 1-13 March. By Hussein Al-Khalisy Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Q&A: Singapore leads push for marine decarbonisation


27/03/24
News
27/03/24

Q&A: Singapore leads push for marine decarbonisation

Singapore, 27 March (Argus) — Argus spoke to Ashish Anilan, assistant director at classification society Bureau Veritas Marine & Offshore, about the expected trends and the impact of EU-led emissions compliance regulations on the Asian maritime sector this year. How will Singapore impact the push for maritime decarbonisation in the coming few years? Though Singapore's position as the world's largest bunkering hub attracts decarbonisation initiatives, its true impact hinges on concrete actions. Initiatives like the Singapore Green Plan 2030 translate sustainability goals into action plans. Recent expressions of interest in electric harbour craft and bunkering for cleaner fuels like methanol and ammonia demonstrate Singapore's commitment to clean energy solutions and alternative fuel adoption. Additionally, digital and green corridor initiatives foster regional collaboration, supply chain resilience and operational efficiency, all crucial for achieving broader sustainability goals. By embracing concrete action, Singapore is showing the way as a true leader in maritime decarbonisation and this can inspire other ports and hubs across the world. What are your expectations for 2024? The maritime sector in 2024 still faces continued fuel price volatility, increased scrutiny on alternative fuels and a push for infrastructure development. Policy-wise, the implementation of EU regulations and potential expansion of regional or international carbon pricing mechanisms are anticipated. At IMO we will see the first year of CII [Carbon Intensity Indicator] verification and conversations on market-based measures. Shipping is a "hard-to-abate" sector and the inherent fragmentation makes decarbonisation a harder challenge. Do you think mandates will drive the change or market economics? Despite being a highly fragmented and a "hard-to-abate" sector, the shipping industry presents a unique opportunity for cost-effective emissions reduction schemes and efficiency improvement plans. It is crucial to recognise that international shipping primarily functions as a commodity mover, and its decarbonisation plays a key role in both supply chain resilience and the life-cycle emissions footprint of the cargo it carries. While regulations and mandates can offer valuable measurement tools, market forces often drive the primary change, facilitated by commitments from cargo owners and incentives provided by financial institutions. Will t he implementation of EU ETS, CII ratings and the upcoming EU FuelMaritime regulations be a deterrent or pave the way for fuel adoption by shipowners in Asia? While the upcoming EU regulations will initially increase compliance costs for Asian shipowners and their charterers engaging in European trade, they will also create multifaceted pathways towards cleaner fuel adoption. The premium for the cleaner fuels will be justified by the penalties imposed by market-based-measures. Alongside cost-effective efficiency measures, a long-term strategy incorporating supply chain collaboration and effective cost sharing mechanisms will be essential for these regulations to truly help incentivise the energy transition. Additionally, the broader Asian market may benefit from the potential harmonisation of environmental regulations spurred by the European framework. By Mahua Chakravarty Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more