Survey: US offshore VLCC terminal race narrows

  • Market: Crude oil, Oil products
  • 18/12/20

The race to build US offshore crude export docks that can load very large crude carriers (VLCCs) has narrowed in scope, with some plans merging and others falling by the wayside.

But four major projects are still in contention — one off the coast of Corpus Christi, Texas; two near the Houston-Freeport area in Texas; and one connected to the hub of Nederland, near the Texas-Louisiana border.

US midstream companies Energy Transfer, Enterprise Products Partners and Sentinel Midstream are leading projects. The fourth is a joint venture between Phillips 66 and trading company Trafigura. All are vying to be the first to reach the finish line, banking on the continued growth of US exports, which have been resilient — hovering in the 2.75mn-3.2mn b/d range — even in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic and its devastating impact on global oil demand.

Sentinel's Texas GulfLink project, off the coast of Freeport, recently cleared a major hurdle after the US Maritime Administration (MARAD) issued a draft environmental impact statement last month. Sentinel called it a "critical step in the regulatory process" and said the terminal will be uniquely positioned to benefit when global demand stabilizes.

Texas GulfLink includes a manned offshore platform with two single-point mooring buoys. The project would have export loading rates of up to 85,000 bl/hour. The facility is expected to service 15 VLCCs per month. The project is backed by private equity company Cresta Fund Management.

Another large US infrastructure company, Magellan Midstream, has been weighing a partnership that would connect its terminal in east Houston to the Texas GulfLink offshore port.

Magellan was tight-lipped about the potential partnership this week, saying that the company is "continuing to evaluate options for on and offshore infrastructure" to meet the needs of its customers. Magellan's east Houston terminal includes 9mn bl of storage. It is the pricing hub for the Argus WTI Houston assessment, which includes crude delivered from west Texas on the 440,000 b/d BridgeTex and 275,000 b/d Longhorn pipelines.

Enterprise, which also owns a large Permian-to-Houston pipeline network, is moving forward with a competing project, the Sea Port Oil Terminal (SPOT), also off the coast of Freeport.

Enterprise made a final investment decision on SPOT last year after signing term contracts for crude transport, storage and marine services with Chevron, a key oil producer in the Permian basin.

SPOT includes two crude pipelines running from the port to the shore. Two single-point mooring buoys will be able to load at about 85,000 bl/hour or about 2mn b/d. MARAD issued a draft environmental impact statement for SPOT in February. But federal regulators temporarily suspended the timeline of the review in June, using what is known as a "stop clock" order. The procedure, which has also been applied to other VLCC port applications, occurs when regulators need more information or analysis. The application for Texas GulfLink has seen two such temporary "stop clock" orders and the Phillip 66-Trafigura project, Bluewater, also was issued a "stop clock" order to obtain more information for its environmental impact statement.

Canadian pipeline giant Enbridge joined the SPOT project last year, after exiting a partnership with terminal operator Oiltanking on a competing offshore crude terminal.

Enbridge and Enterprise were planning to negotiate an agreement that would allow Enbridge to buy into SPOT after the project receives a deepwater license. The two companies are co-owners of the 950,000 b/d Seaway pipeline system which moves crude from Cushing, Oklahoma, to the Houston area.

The SPOT project is the most likely to get built first because it has committed shippers and the benefit of both Enterprise and Enbridge crude flows, Morningstar director of research, energy and commodities Sandy Fielden said.

Two at the most

The next in line could be the Phillips 66-Trafigura Bluewater project in Corpus Christi, but "if it does get built, it will be behind SPOT," Fielden predicted.

Overall, there is only need for two projects at most, one in Corpus Christi and one in Houston, Fielden said.

Trafigura earlier this year joined Phillips 66 in the Bluewater project, which includes two single-point mooring buoys loading crude 21 nautical miles east of the Port of Corpus Christi. The project is designed to load 16 VLCCs a month. Trafigura was previously developing a competing project but withdrew that application.

The Port of Corpus Christi Authority this week approved a lease agreement and a pipeline easement for Bluewater. The lease allows Bluewater to access existing pipeline corridors and other property, including 12 acres for an operations facility on Harbor Island.

Corpus Christi has become the top port for US exports of crude after three new pipelines went into service in 2019 and early 2020 moving Permian crude to the south Texas port. The new lines include the 670,000 b/d Cactus 2 line, the 600,000 b/d Epic line and the 900,000 Gray Oak line.

The Port of Corpus Christi has also proposed a separate project to develop a marine terminal at Harbor Island to increase crude export capacity, including the loading of VLCCs. That project is not an offshore buoy and does not need a MARAD application. A previous partner in the project, private equity firm the Carlyle Group, dropped out last year, raising questions about funding as additional dredging would be needed.

One of the largest US midstream companies, Energy Transfer, became the latest to officially enter the VLCC offshore port race when it submitted an application to MARAD in October for a project connected to its Nederland terminal.

The project — the Blue Marlin Offshore Port — will be capable of loading 80,000 bl/hour onto VLCCs or other crude carriers and will be designed to load up to 365 ships/year.

The project includes building a 37-mile (60km) crude pipeline from a tank terminal at Nederland to an existing natural gas pipeline, the Stingray pipeline, in Cameron Parish, Louisiana. The Stingray line would be converted from natural gas to crude service for delivery to an existing offshore platform complex.

Energy Transfer is proposing to start construction on the Blue Marlin Offshore Port in the fourth quarter of 2021 and to start service in 2023.

Just one US port, the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, is currently capable of fully loading VLCCs. A few onshore marine terminals can partially load the supertankers but have to rely on reverse lightering to fill the ship.

All the offshore VLCC terminal projects were driven by a surge in US crude production, which hit a record high of 12.9mn b/d in November of 2019. But the Covid-19 pandemic caused global demand to plummet and US production cuts followed, with output now hovering around 11mn b/d.

"If shale expansion had continued in 2020 instead of stopping in its tracks for Covid, these terminals would be closer to the finishing post," Fielden said. Going forward, one project with shipper commitments is feasible and probably not before 2022 at least, he said. "Anything more is a gamble."

And all the focus on an energy transition away from fossil fuels is "a long-term damper on crude demand hence production" but Fielden said he doubts that "it comes into payback calculations for these terminals yet."

By Eunice Bridges

US VLCC-loading projects

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

Crane barge arriving at Baltimore bridge tonight

Crane barge arriving at Baltimore bridge tonight

Houston, 28 March (Argus) — The first major piece of equipment capable of beginning to clear the blocked Port of Baltimore, Maryland, is expected to arrive onsite tonight. The Chesapeake 1000 crane barge, capable of lifting 1,000 short tons with its a 231ft-long boom, is expected to arrive at the site of the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge near Baltimore at 11pm ET on 28 March, the US Coast Guard (USCG) told Argus . Both the crane and the tug pulling it, Atlantic Enterprise , are owned by Donjon Marine. It is currently the only crane on route to the collapsed bridge, the USCG said. There is no official timetable for the reopening of the port after the Interstate 695 highway bridge over the Patapsco River was hit in the early hours of 26 March by a container ship and collapsed, with the debris and ship blocking the waterway. The operator of the ship, Maersk, has contracted with marine salvage company Resolve Marine to refloat the vessel and remove it from the area, according to the USCG. It is not clear who has contracted for the Chesapeake 1000. Despite the inbound crane, it could take weeks or even months to clear debris and reopen the waterway under the collapsed bridge according to a engineering professor at the nearby Johns Hopkins University. By Nathan Risser Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Read more
News

'Weeks, months' to reopen Baltimore waterway: professor


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

'Weeks, months' to reopen Baltimore waterway: professor

Houston, 28 March (Argus) — It could take weeks or even months to clear debris and reopen the waterway under the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, Maryland, according to a engineering professor at the nearby Johns Hopkins University. As of Wednesday, there was no official timetable for the reopening of the Port of Baltimore after a major highway bridge over the Patapsco River was hit in the early hours of 26 March by a container ship and collapsed, with the debris and ship blocking the waterway. "I'd be shocked if it's weeks, but I don't think it'll take even a year" to clear the waterway, structural engineer and Johns Hopkins professor Benjamin Schafer said Wednesday. He expects the rebuild of the bridge to take significantly longer. "I've lived through quite a few civil infrastructure projects and they're rarely less than 10 years. So I think that's what we're looking at," Schafer said. He noted that it took five years to build the original Francis Scott Key Bridge and seven years to repair the Sunshine Skyway Bridge in Tampa Bay, Florida, after a similar collapse in 1980. Still, "this is definitely not a national supply chain crisis," John Hopkins operations management professor Tinglong Dai said Wednesday. "The effect will be mostly local, mostly minimal and mostly temporary." The bridge collapse and port closure is also unlikely to trigger a global supply chain crisis, he said. The Port of Baltimore is an important but "niche" port specializing in automobile imports and exports, Dai added. "The supply chain has evolved...I have already seen a lot of rerouting happening." Automakers started adjusting their supply routes away from the top port for US vehicle imports the day of the collapse, including General Motors, Ford and Mercedes-Benz. Baltimore is also a major port for coal exports, which may start to shift to terminals to the south in Hampton Roads, Virginia. Freight rates for ships that carry coal could see increases in global markets Other commodities like asphalt and caustic soda that move through the port will see challenges, while organic agriculture imports may see less problems due to seasonal flows. By Nathan Risser Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Baltimore probe includes potential contaminated fuel


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

Baltimore probe includes potential contaminated fuel

New York, 28 March (Argus) — Federal authorities are examining whether the containership that crashed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, Maryland, was burning contaminated marine fuel at the time of the incident. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said it will collect a sample of the fuel on board the 116,851-dwt container vessel Dali as part of its investigation into why the ship lost power and hit the bridge support early on 26 March, taking down the span. "That sample will be taken, and we will analyze the quality, any sort of contaminants, we will look at viscosity," NTSB chair Jennifer Homendy said this week. "That will be part of our investigation." Shipboard power is generally generated by turbines connected to the same engines driving propulsion. There are a number of issues related to fuel that could have led to a loss of power on the ship, according to Wajdi Abdmessih, chief executive at Seahawk Services, a marine fuel testing company based in New Jersey. The fuel on the ship could have been contaminated, as was the case last year when contaminated very low-sulphur fuel oil was found on a number of ships fueld through a Houston, Texas, bunkering operation, or it could have been a compatibility issue with the vessel's engine, where the fuel was not optimized for the equipment. "If the vessel switches between different types of fuels, compatibility and stability issues could occur, which may cause a problem with the engine," Abdmessih said. "Unstable fuel could cause increased sludging and high sediment, which could clog the filter and cause fuel starvation and engine downturns." Singapore-based Synergy Marine Group, which manages Dali , said it is taking part of this investigation but declined to comment possible causes of the accident, including possible fuel contamination. The pilots on board the vessel lost control because of a loss of propulsion, according to the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA), which is assisting in the investigation because Dali was sailing under the Singapore flag. An issue with the ship's propulsion and auxiliary machinery was discovered during its June 2023 inspection in San Antonio, Chile , according to Equasis, a vessel information database. The problem involved the vessel's gauges and thermometers, according to the data. Its most recent inspection was in September 2023, but there are no indications of issues from the inspection. The vessel's next inspection was due in June 2024, the MPA said. By Luis Gronda Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Stalling climate finance an energy security risk : WRI


28/03/24
News
28/03/24

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.

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.

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