dealmaker

Billionaire Texas oilman inks deal with Venezuela's state-run oil giant as U.S. sanctions loom

As part of the deal announced Wednesday, LNG was awarded contracts by state-run PDVSA to take over production and develop two oil fields in eastern Venezuela that currently produce about 3,000 barrels of crude per day. Photo via Getty Images

A company started by a Texas billionaire oilman announced a deal Wednesday with Venezuela's state-owned oil company to rehabilitate five aging oil fields, days after the Biden administration put a brake on sanctions relief over concerns about the fairness of the country's upcoming presidential election.

LNG Energy Group is a publicly traded company listed in Canada that produces natural gas in Colombia. It was created last year as a result of a merger with a company owned by Rod Lewis, a legendary Texas wildcatter who Forbes Magazine once called the “only gringo allowed to drill in Mexico."

As part of the deal announced Wednesday, LNG was awarded contracts by state-run PDVSA to take over production and develop two oil fields in eastern Venezuela that currently produce about 3,000 barrels of crude per day.

LNG said the deal was executed within the framework of sanctions relief announced by the U.S. government last year in support of an agreement between President Nicolas Maduro and his opponents to hold a competitive presidential election this year. Last week, the Biden administration reimposed sanctions as hopes for a democratic opening in Venezuela fade.

However, the White House left open the possibility for companies to apply for licenses exempting them from the restrictions, something that could attract investment to a country sitting atop the world's largest petroleum reserves at a time of growing concerns about energy supplies in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Other than Chevron, which has operated in Venezuela for a century and was awarded its own license in 2022, few American companies have been looking to make major capital investments in the high risk South American country in recent years because of concerns about government seizure, U.S. sanctions and corruption.

“This will be a test of U.S. sanctions whether they get a license or not,” said Francisco Monaldi, an expert on Latin American energy policy at Rice University's Baker Institute.

LNG said in a statement that it “intends to operate in full compliance with the applicable sanctions" but declined further comment

Lewis, who Forbes estimates has a net worth of $1.1 billion, struck it rich in the 1980s as a wildcatter drilling for natural gas near his home in Laredo, Texas. His company, Lewis Energy Group, was the state's fourth biggest natural gas producer last year.

In 2004, Lewis was awarded a contract by Mexico's tightly controlled energy industry covering almost 100,000 acres (400 square kilometers) just across the border from his south Texas facility. He started investing in Colombia in 2003.

In October, the U.S. granted Maduro’s government relief from sanctions on its state-run oil, gas and mining sectors after it agreed to work with members of the opposition to hold a free and competitive presidential election this year.

While Maduro went on to schedule an election for July and invite international observers to monitor voting, his inner circle has used the ruling party’s total control over Venezuela’s institutions to undermine the agreement. Actions include blocking his main rival, ex lawmaker Maria Corina Machado, from registering her candidacy or that of a designated alternative. Numerous government critics have also been jailed over the past six months, including several of Machado’s aides.

Trending News

 

A View From HETI

“It’s one piece of a puzzle in this broad fight against the climate change.” Photo via Getty Images

Power plants and industrial facilities that emit carbon dioxide, the primary driver of global warming, are hopeful that Congress will keep tax credits for capturing the gas and storing it deep underground.

The process, called carbon capture and sequestration, is seen by many as an important way to reduce pollution during a transition to renewable energy.

But it faces criticism from some conservatives, who say it is expensive and unnecessary, and from environmentalists, who say it has consistently failed to capture as much pollution as promised and is simply a way for producers of fossil fuels like oil, gas and coal to continue their use.

Here's a closer look.

How does the process work?

Carbon dioxide is a gas produced by burning of fossil fuels. It traps heat close to the ground when released to the atmosphere, where it persists for hundreds of years and raises global temperatures.

Industries and power plants can install equipment to separate carbon dioxide from other gases before it leaves the smokestack. The carbon then is compressed and shipped — usually through a pipeline — to a location where it’s injected deep underground for long-term storage.

Carbon also can be captured directly from the atmosphere using giant vacuums. Once captured, it is dissolved by chemicals or trapped by solid material.

Lauren Read, a senior vice president at BKV Corp., which built a carbon capture facility in Texas, said the company injects carbon at high pressure, forcing it almost two miles below the surface and into geological formations that can hold it for thousands of years.

The carbon can be stored in deep saline or basalt formations and unmineable coal seams. But about three-fourths of captured carbon dioxide is pumped back into oil fields to build up pressure that helps extract harder-to-reach reserves — meaning it's not stored permanently, according to the International Energy Agency and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

How much carbon dioxide is captured?

The most commonly used technology allows facilities to capture and store around 60% of their carbon dioxide emissions during the production process. Anything above that rate is much more difficult and expensive, according to the IEA.

Some companies have forecast carbon capture rates of 90% or more, “in practice, that has never happened,” said Alexandra Shaykevich, research manager at the Environmental Integrity Project’s Oil & Gas Watch.

That's because it's difficult to capture carbon dioxide from every point where it's emitted, said Grant Hauber, a strategic adviser on energy and financial markets at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.

Environmentalists also cite potential problems keeping it in the ground. For example, last year, agribusiness company Archer-Daniels-Midland discovered a leak about a mile underground at its Illinois carbon capture and storage site, prompting the state legislature this year to ban carbon sequestration above or below the Mahomet Aquifer, an important source of drinking water for about a million people.

Carbon capture can be used to help reduce emissions from hard-to-abate industries like cement and steel, but many environmentalists contend it's less helpful when it extends the use of coal, oil and gas.

A 2021 study also found the carbon capture process emits significant amounts of methane, a potent greenhouse gas that’s shorter-lived than carbon dioxide but traps over 80 times more heat. That happens through leaks when the gas is brought to the surface and transported to plants.

About 45 carbon-capture facilities operated on a commercial scale last year, capturing a combined 50 million metric tons of carbon dioxide — a tiny fraction of the 37.8 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide emissions from the energy sector alone, according to the IEA.

It's an even smaller share of all greenhouse gas emissions, which amounted to 53 gigatonnes for 2023, according to the latest report from the European Commission’s Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research.

The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis says one of the world's largest carbon capture utilization and storage projects, ExxonMobil’s Shute Creek facility in Wyoming, captures only about half its carbon dioxide, and most of that is sold to oil and gas companies to pump back into oil fields.

Future of US tax credits is unclear

Even so, carbon capture is an important tool to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, particularly in heavy industries, said Sangeet Nepal, a technology specialist at the Carbon Capture Coalition.

“It’s not a substitution for renewables ... it’s just a complementary technology,” Nepal said. “It’s one piece of a puzzle in this broad fight against the climate change.”

Experts say many projects, including proposed ammonia and hydrogen plants on the U.S. Gulf Coast, likely won't be built without the tax credits, which Carbon Capture Coalition Executive Director Jessie Stolark says already have driven significant investment and are crucial U.S. global competitiveness.

Trending News