Viewpoint: Asia base oil fundamentals to stay tight

  • : Oil products
  • 20/12/22

Asia-Pacific base oil prices are set to hold firm at least for the first few months of 2021 because of unexpectedly tight supply and strong demand.

Asia-Pacific base oil prices already rebounded by the end of 2020 to their highest levels since 2018. Prices slumped in the first half of the year when Covid-19-related lockdown measures slashed demand in the second quarter. Prices then surged in the second half of the year, when supply-demand fundamentals flipped to increasing tightness.

Prices began 2020 at firm levels. Producers ended 2019 and began the new year with supplies that were more balanced than usual. The lack of any need to clear surplus supplies in late 2019 had helped to support firm prices at that time. This price support extended into the beginning of 2020.

Supply starts 2020 more balanced

Producers' availability was more balanced at the start of the year following extended run cuts in response to persistent oversupply in 2019. The oversupply had left margins unusually weak. The diversion of feedstock and base oil supplies to other fuel markets such as the marine fuel pool added to the relative balance. A narrow price spread between base oils and the other fuels made the diversion feasible. The more balanced supplies then gave producers more leverage with the sale of their remaining volumes.

Producers used that leverage of more limited supply to maintain steady prices even as crude oil values fell throughout the first two months of 2020. Base oil demand also held firm during that period even as the lockdown in China slashed economic activity in the country in February especially. But steep run cuts by Chinese base oil producers cushioned the impact of that decline in activity.

The firmer supply-demand fundamentals helped to support prices well into March, even after crude prices slumped at the start of that month. The combination of steady base oil prices and lower crude and diesel prices triggered a sharp rebound in base oil margins.

Widespread lockdowns slash demand

But lockdowns were then implemented in a growing number of countries throughout the region to curb the Covid-19 outbreak. The moves triggered a sudden and widespread slump in base oil demand. The lockdown in India especially forced regional base oil producers to target other outlets in place of one of the region's largest importers.

A pick-up in Chinese demand in March also began to falter as buyers held back to cut their exposure to the risk of lower prices.

The slowdown in demand put more pressure on Group II producers especially because of the large volumes of supplies that usually move to base oil import giants India and China. Group I producers faced less pressure from oversupply because of run cuts in southeast Asia and Japan, and still-steady demand in China.

Producers slash prices

Group II producers responded to the lack of buying interest by slashing their prices. These fell by early April to an unusual discount to Group I base oils. This discount widened to more than $50/t by early May for Group II light grades.

But the lower prices made more arbitrage opportunities to markets like the Mideast Gulf and east Mediterranean feasible in April, and then to southeast Asia in May.

Group II heavy-grade prices also fell below Group I base oils. But they faced less pressure than Group II light-grade prices amid a steady rise in Chinese demand for heavy-grade base oils.

China soaks up surplus

The lower prices also coincided with steadier domestic prices in China. The widening spread between falling fob Asia cargo prices and steady Chinese prices made the arbitrage increasingly attractive, providing an ideal outlet for South Korean producers to clear their surplus cargoes. With their supplies more balanced, producers were then able to target firmer prices.

The stronger heavy-grade fundamentals also supported a steady rise in the heavy-grade premium to fob Asia Group II light-grade prices. The heavy-light premium rose to more than $80/t by the end of June, up from $20/t in March.

Group II prices began their steep downward correction from the first half of March. Group I base oil prices followed several weeks later, led initially by a slump in bright stock prices.

Prices for Group I light and heavy neutrals then fell as southeast Asian producers offered sizeable volumes at increasingly lower prices to clear a large overhang. Surplus supply had risen because of steady output levels in markets like Thailand in March and April, while the country's lube demand slumped. The surplus volumes attracted buyers from a range of markets, from China and southeast Asia to the Mideast Gulf.

Fundamentals balance out

The region's Group I and Group II producers had cleared most of their surplus supplies by the second half of May. Crude prices were also continuing their strong rebound at that time after bottoming out in the second half of April. Economic activity was reviving in a growing number of countries as lockdown measures were gradually relaxed during the final weeks of the second quarter.

The base oil market then switched from a state of surplus to increasing supply tightness as demand revived strongly in key markets throughout the region.

Supply tightens, demand rebounds

Extended run cuts throughout the region added to the supply tightness. The planned shutdown of several Group II plants in Asia-Pacific in the third quarter curbed those producers' supplies as they built stocks ahead of the maintenance work.

The firmer fundamentals, rising feedstock prices and squeezed margins prompted Group I and Group II producers to target increasingly higher prices, especially for heavy grades.

Heavy-grade premium rebounds

The supply of heavy grades became tighter because of a drop in shipments from several Mideast Gulf producers, the closure of some production capacity in South Korea in the fourth quarter of the year, and China's structural shortage of those base oils. Persistent refinery run cuts also trimmed feedstock supply. This curbed some producers' room to raise base oil production in response to the surge in margins.

The trend triggered a rebound in the heavy-grade premium to light grades throughout the second half of the year.

Buyers in other regions such as India, Europe and Latin America also faced tight supplies in their own markets. They responded by targeting the limited spot volumes that were available in Asia-Pacific. The pick-up in competition for the supplies triggered a further rise in prices for all base oil grades throughout the fourth quarter of the year.

The sustained competition for those tight supplies left fob Asia Group I bright stock prices more than $150/t higher than at the start of the year. They were also up by more than $350/t after bottoming out at close to $500/t in early May.

Fob Asia Group II heavy-grade prices ended the year more than $140/t higher than at the start of the year. They were also up by more than $350/t from their lowest level in late May.


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.

24/05/02

Canadian rail workers vote to launch strike: Correction

Canadian rail workers vote to launch strike: Correction

Corrects movement of grain loadings from a year earlier in final paragraph. Washington, 2 May (Argus) — Workers at the two major Canadian railroads could go on strike as soon as 22 May now that members of the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference (TCRC) have authorized a strike, potentially causing widespread disruption to shipments of commodities such as crude, coal and grain. A strike could disrupt rail traffic not only in Canada but also in the US and Mexico because trains would not be able to leave, nor could shipments enter into Canada. This labor action could be far more impactful than recent strikes because it would affect Canadian National (CN) and Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) at the same time. Union members at Canadian railroads have gone on strike individually in the past, which has left one of the two carriers to continue operating and handle some of their competitor's freight. But TCRC members completed a vote yesterday about whether to initiate a strike action at each carrier. The union represents about 9,300 workers employed at the two railroads. Roughly 98pc of union members that participated voted in favor of a strike beginning as early as 22 May, the union said. The union said talks are at an impasse. "After six months of negotiations with both companies, we are no closer to reaching a settlement than when we first began, TCRC president Paul Boucher said. Boucher warned that "a simultaneous work stoppage at both CN and CPKC would disrupt supply chains on a scale Canada has likely never experienced." He added that the union does not want to provoke a rail crisis and wants to avoid a work stoppage. The union has argued that the railroads' proposals would harm safety practices. It has also sought an improved work-life balance. But CN and CPKC said the union continues to reject their proposals. CPKC "is committed to negotiating in good faith and responding to our employees' desire for higher pay and improved work-life balance, while respecting the best interests of all our railroaders, their families, our customers, and the North American economy." CN said it wants a contract that addresses the work life balance and productivity, benefiting the company and employees. But even when CN "proposed a solution that would not touch duty-rest rules, the union has rejected it," the railroad said. Canadian commodity volume has fallen this year with only rail shipments of chemicals, petroleum and petroleum products, and non-metallic minerals rising, Association of American Railroads (AAR) data show. Volume data includes cars loaded in the US by Canadian carriers. Coal traffic dropped by 11pc during the 17 weeks ended on 27 April compared with a year earlier, AAR data show. Loadings of motor vehicles and parts have fallen by 5.2pc. CN and CPKC grain loadings fell by 4.3pc from a year earlier, while shipment of farm products and food fell by 9.3pc. By Abby Caplan Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Shell's 1Q profit supported by LNG and refining


24/05/02
24/05/02

Shell's 1Q profit supported by LNG and refining

London, 2 May (Argus) — Shell delivered a better-than-expected profit for the first quarter of 2024, helped by a strong performance from its LNG and oil product businesses. The company reported profit of $7.4bn for January-March, up sharply from an impairment-hit $474mn in the previous three months but down from $8.7bn in the first quarter of 2023. Adjusted for inventory valuation effects and one-off items, Shell's profit came in at $7.7bn, 6pc ahead of the preceding three months and above analysts' estimates of $6.3bn-$6.5bn, although it was 20pc lower than the first quarter of 2023 when gas prices were higher. Shell's oil and gas production increased by 3pc on the quarter in January-March and was broadly flat compared with a year earlier at 2.91mn b/d of oil equivalent (boe/d). For the current quarter, Shell expects production in a range of 2.55mn-2.81mn boe/d, reflecting the effect of scheduled maintenance across its portfolio. The company's Integrated Gas segment delivered a profit of $2.76bn in the first quarter, up from $1.73bn in the previous three months and $2.41bn a year earlier. The segment benefited from increased LNG volumes — 7.58mn t compared to 7.06mn t in the previous quarter and 7.19mn t a year earlier — as well as favourable deferred tax movements and lower operating expenses. For the current quarter, Shell expects to produce 6.8mn-7.4mn t of LNG. In the downstream, the company's Chemicals and Products segment swung to a profit of $1.16bn during the quarter from an impairment-driven loss of $1.83bn in the previous three months, supported by a strong contribution from oil trading operations and higher refining margins driven by greater utilisation of its refineries and global supply disruptions. Shell's refinery throughput increased to 1.43mn b/d in the first quarter from 1.32mn b/d in fourth quarter of last year and 1.41mn b/d in January-March 2023. Shell has maintained its quarterly dividend at $0.344/share. It also said it has completed the $3.5bn programme of share repurchases that it announced at its previous set of results and plans to buy back another $3.5bn of its shares before the company's next quarterly results announcement. The company said it expects its capital spending for the year to be within a $22bn-$25bn range. By Jon Mainwaring Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

New US rule may let some shippers swap railroads


24/04/30
24/04/30

New US rule may let some shippers swap railroads

Washington, 30 April (Argus) — US rail regulators today issued a final rule designed to help customers switch railroads in cases of poor rail service, but it is already drawing mixed reviews. Reciprocal switching, which allows freight shippers or receivers captive to a single railroad to access to an alternate carrier, has been allowed under US Surface Transportation Board (STB) rules. But shippers had not used existing STB rules to petition for reciprocal switching in 35 years, prompting regulators to revise rules to encourage shippers to pursue switching while helping resolve service problems. "The rule adopted today has broken new ground in the effort to provide competitive options in an extraordinarily consolidated rail industry," said outgoing STB chairman Martin Oberman. The five-person board unanimously approved a rule that would allow the board to order a reciprocal switching agreement if a facility's rail service falls below specified levels. Orders would be for 3-5 years. "Given the repeated episodes of severe service deterioration in recent years, and the continuing impediments to robust and consistent rail service despite the recent improvements accomplished by Class I carriers, the board has chosen to focus on making reciprocal switching available to shippers who have suffered service problems over an extended period of time," Oberman said today. STB commissioner Robert Primus voted to approve the rule, but also said it did not go far enough. The rule adopted today is "unlikely to accomplish what the board set out to do" since it does not cover freight moving under contract, he said. "I am voting for the final rule because something is better than nothing," Primus said. But he said the rule also does nothing to address competition in the rail industry. The Association of American Railroads (AAR) is reviewing the 154-page final rule, but carriers have been historically opposed to reciprocal switching proposals. "Railroads have been clear about the risks of expanded switching and the resulting slippery slope toward unjustified market intervention," AAR said. But the trade group was pleased that STB rejected "previous proposals that amounted to open access," which is a broad term for proposals that call for railroads to allow other carriers to operate over their tracks. The American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association declined to comment but has indicated it does not expect the rule to have an appreciable impact on shortline traffic, service or operations. Today's rule has drawn mixed reactions from some shipper groups. The National Industrial Transportation League (NITL), which filed its own reciprocal switching proposal in 2011, said it was encouraged by the collection of service metrics required under the rule. But "it is disheartened by its narrow scope as it does not appear to apply to the vast majority of freight rail traffic that moves under contracts or is subject to commodity exemptions," said NITL executive director Nancy O'Liddy, noting it was a departure from the group's original petition which sought switching as a way to facilitate railroad economic competitiveness. The Chlorine Institute said, in its initial analysis, that it does not "see significant benefit for our shipper members since it excludes contract traffic which covers the vast majority of chlorine and other relevant chemical shipments." By Abby Caplan Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

HSFO demand supports Rotterdam 1Q bunker sales


24/04/30
24/04/30

HSFO demand supports Rotterdam 1Q bunker sales

London, 30 April (Argus) — Total sales of fossil bunker fuels and marine biodiesel blends at the port of Rotterdam were 2.45mn t in the first quarter this year, up by 13pc compared with the final three months of 2023 but 9pc lower year on year, according to official port data. Sales firmed across the board quarter on quarter, even though market participants had described spot bunker fuel demand in the region as "mostly limited" and shipping demand as lacklustre. High-sulphur fuel oil (HSFO) sales rose the most. Disruption in the Red Sea resulted in many vessels re-routing around the southern tip of Africa, increasing the incentive of bunkering with HSFO as opposed to very low-sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) and marine gasoil (MGO), according to market participants. The longer journeys meant that vessels on the route increased their fuel consumption to reduce delivery delays, supporting conventional bunker fuel sales at Rotterdam. Higher prices for HSFO in Singapore also helped support HSFO demand in Rotterdam. Marine biodiesel sales at Rotterdam increased by 13pc on the quarter and by 76pc on the year in January-March, despite the Dutch government's decision to half the Dutch renewable tickets (HBE-G) multiplier for shipping at the turn of the year. The move has led to a substantial increase in prices for advanced fatty acid methyl ester (Fame) 0 blends in the Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerp (ARA) hub. The inclusion of shipping in the EU's Emissions Trading System (ETS) from January may have lent support to demand for biofuel blends. Marine biodiesel made up 11pc of total bunker fuel sales at Rotterdam in the first quarter, the same share as the previous quarter, which was a record high. LNG bunker sales at Rotterdam in January-March soared by 45pc on the quarter and by 150pc on the year. By Hussein Al-Khalisy Rotterdam bunker sales t Fuel 1Q24 4Q23 1Q23 q-o-q% y-o-y% VLSFO & ULSFO 857,579 847,862 1,205,288 1 -29 HSFO 818,028 643,218 809,871 27 1 MGO/MDO 383,409 361,585 468,373 6 -18 Biofuel blends 262,634 233,108 149,206 13 76 Total 2,453,610 2,177,078 2,685,515 13 -9 LNG (m³) 131,960 91,305 52,777 45 150 Port of Rotterdam Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

G7 countries put timeframe on 'unabated' coal phase-out


24/04/30
24/04/30

G7 countries put timeframe on 'unabated' coal phase-out

London, 30 April (Argus) — G7 countries today committed to phasing out "unabated coal power generation" by 2035 — putting a timeframe on a coal phase-out for the first time. The communique, from a meeting of G7 climate, energy and environment ministers in Turin, northern Italy, represents "an historic agreement" on coal, Canadian environment minister Steven Guilbeault said. Although most G7 nations have set a deadline for phasing out coal-fired power, the agreement marks a step forward for Japan in particular, which had previously not made the commitment, and is a "milestone moment", senior policy advisor at think-tank E3G Katrine Petersen said. The G7 countries are Italy — this year's host — Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the UK and the US. The EU is a non-enumerated member. But the pledge contains a caveat in its reference to "unabated" coal-fired power — suggesting that abatement technologies such as carbon capture and storage could justify its use, while some of the wording around a deadline is less clear. The communique sets a timeframe of "the first half of [the] 2030s or in a timeline consistent with keeping a limit of 1.5°C temperature rise within reach, in line with countries' net-zero pathways". OECD countries should end coal use by 2030 and the rest of the world by 2040, in order to align with the global warming limit of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels set out in the Paris Agreement, according to research institute Climate Analytics. The countries welcomed the outcomes of the UN Cop 28 climate summit , pledging to "accelerate the phase out of unabated fossil fuels so as to achieve net zero in energy systems by 2050". It backed the Cop 28 goal to triple renewable energy capacity by 2030 and added support for a global target for energy storage in the power sector of 1.5TW by 2030. The group committed to submit climate plans — known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) — with "the highest possible ambition" from late this year or in early 2025. And it also called on the IEA to "provide recommendations" next year on how to implement a transition away from fossil fuels. The G7 also reiterated its commitment to a "fully or predominantly decarbonised power sector by 2035" — first made in May 2022 and highlighted roles for carbon management, carbon markets, hydrogen and biofuels. Simon Stiell, head of UN climate body the UNFCCC, urged the G7 and G20 countries to lead on climate action, in a recent speech . The group noted in today's outcome that "further actions from all countries, especially major economies, are required". The communique broadly reaffirmed existing positions on climate finance, although any concrete steps are not likely to be taken ahead of Cop 29 in November. The group underlined its pledge to end "inefficient fossil fuel subsidies" by 2025 or earlier, but added a new promise to "promote a common definition" of the term, which is likely to increase countries' accountability. The group will report on its progress towards ending those subsidies next year, it added. Fostering energy security The communique placed a strong focus on the need for "diverse, resilient, and responsible energy technology supply chains, including manufacturing and critical minerals". It noted the important of "guarding against possible weaponisation of economic dependencies on critical minerals and critical raw materials" — many of which are mined and processed outside the G7 group. Energy security held sway on the group's take on natural gas. It reiterated its stance that gas investments "can be appropriate… if implemented in a manner consistent with our climate objectives" and noted that increased LNG deliveries could play a key role. By Georgia Gratton 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