ADVFN Logo

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Registration Strip Icon for alerts Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers

RDSA Shell Plc

1,895.20
0.00 (0.00%)
18 Mar 2024 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Shell Plc LSE:RDSA London Ordinary Share GB00B03MLX29 'A' ORD EUR0.07
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.00% 1,895.20 1,900.20 1,900.80 - 0.00 00:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
0 0 N/A 0

Shell Share Discussion Threads

Showing 276 to 285 of 3150 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  18  17  16  15  14  13  12  11  10  9  8  7  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
10/3/2016
20:46
March 10th, 2016 3:35pm Posted In: Environment, News, News By Country, Netherlands, Corporate, Litigation, Exploration & Production, Political, Ministries, Supply/Demand
inShare
Email
Print
Shell Acknowledges Groningen Risks

In the starkest terms yet Royal Dutch Shell's 2015 annual report, released on March 10, says that decisions on the future operation of the giant Groningen field in the Netherlands "could have a material adverse effect on our earnings, cash flows, proved reserves and financial condition."

The Groningen field is 60% owned by NAM – the operating company jointly owned by Shell and ExxonMobil – and 40% by the state; last year a Dutch court imposed an annual cap going forward that is roughly half the 54bn m3 it produced in 2013.

"Production from the Groningen asset has resulted in earth tremors in the past, and tremors are expected to continue", the Risk Factors section of Shell's annual report published March 10 states. "This has resulted in damage to buildings and complaints from local communities. The Dutch government, local authorities and the operator are implementing measures to address the concerns of the local communities. The government has ordered a cap on production and a further reduction of production is possible. If the government decides not to develop the full field as currently planned, it could have a material adverse effect on our earnings, cash flows, proved reserves and financial condition." The most powerful quake caused by Groningen drilling was a 3.6 magnitude in August 2012.

Elsewhere in the report Shell notes that, in Q2 2015, the Dutch economy minister announced a further cut in the Groningen production for 2015 to 30bn m3 in an effort to reduce the potential for seismic activity while allowing a further 3bn m3 to be drawn from Norg storage for winter supply. But it also notes that the Dutch State Council ruled last November that Groningen production be capped at 27bn m3 for the gas year 2016, until the minister takes a new decision on NAM’s production plan. He is expected to approve a new development plan for Groningen no later than October 1 this year.

Shell said that NAM produced just 28.1 bn m3 from Groningen in 2015: "While the Dutch government currently supports the full development of the Groningen gas field," asserts Shell: "...any decision to change the development plan to reduce the ultimate recovery of resources would adversely affect our proved reserves."

The largest Dutch gas marketer, GasTerra, which is half owned by the government, recently observed that Dutch gas sales would never be the same again. The swing field earns valuable receipts from domestic sales and exports to northwest Europe, producing more when demand is higher.

The Shell annual report also discusses related environmental issues. "An extensive study is in progress to better understand seismic risk in the area. Several universities and researchers are involved and a report is expected in 2016. Interim results from November 2015 included a fully-integrated seismic risk assessment. This risk assessment demonstrated that all the analysed production levels meet the acceptable risk boundaries set by the ministry of economic affairs of the Netherlands."

Shell notes that a long-term programme has been developed by the National Coordinator for Groningen to work with regional authorities and residents on improving claims handling and dispute resolution, and that NAM is working together with all relevant parties. However the report does not reference a Dutch court ruling last September that owners of damaged or blighted buildings in the affected area have the right to claim against NAM for the fall in their property value, whether or not they are up for sale. A lawyer for claimants Pieter Huitema of De Haan said at the time that could potentially lead to up to €5bn claims against the operator NAM. In December, NAM lodged an appeal against the court ruling.



Mark Smedley



Natural Gas Europe welcomes all viewpoints. Should you wish to provide an alternative perspective on the above article, please contact editor@minoils.com

waldron
10/3/2016
11:34
Shell Cuts Chief Executive's Pay -- Update
10/03/2016 11:19am
Dow Jones News

Shell A (LSE:RDSA)
Intraday Stock Chart

Today : Thursday 10 March 2016
Click Here for more Shell A Charts.

By Sarah Kent

LONDON-- Royal Dutch Shell PLC Chief Executive Ben van Beurden took an 8% pay cut in 2015, with his direct compensation dropping to EUR5.1 million ($5.61 million) after a historic oil-price slump sliced the company's profits.

Mr. van Beurden's salary and bonus were steady last year, but the value of his performance-linked shares tumbled. Mr. van Beurden received just 16% of his shares under a long-term incentive plan that takes into account the company's performance over a three-year time frame.

Shell has underperformed its peers in several metrics over the last three years, including total shareholder returns and growth in oil and gas production. Last year, its profits dropped 80% after tumbling oil prices hammered the company's earnings.

Mr. van Beurden's brief tenure as chief executive has been eventful. He took over Shell at the start of 2014, six months before oil prices began their current dive. He has overseen a large wave of cost-cuts, shelved big projects in the Alaskan arctic and Canadian oil sands, and pushed Shell's roughly $50 billion takeover of BG Group PLC last year.

"The CEO provided strong leadership both strategically and operationally, " Shell said in its annual report Thursday.

Mr. Van Beurden's total remuneration--including his pension--totaled $6.2 million, but was also dented by a sharp decline in pension receipts after last year's number was inflated by tax and accounting requirements relating to his promotion to chief executive and move to the Netherlands.

Write to Sarah Kent at sarah.kent@wsj.com



(END) Dow Jones Newswires

March 10, 2016 06:04 ET (11:04 GMT)

ariane
09/3/2016
21:50
Is The Dividend Of Royal Dutch Shell Safe?
Mar. 9, 2016 4:40 PM ET|
About: Royal Dutch Shell plc (RDS.A), RDS.B
Aristofanis Papadatos
Aristofanis Papadatos
⊕Follow
(1,308 followers)
Oil & gas, portfolio strategy, value
Send Message
|
Website(345 clicks)
Summary

As most of the shareholders of Shell hold the stock for its high dividend, the big question is whether the company will manage to maintain its current dividend.

Due to the collapse of the oil price, the operating cash flows are not sufficient to cover the capital expenses and the high dividend.

However, the company is planning to sell $30 B of assets during 2016-2018. In addition, its relatively strong balance sheet can withstand reasonable, additional amounts of debt.

Therefore, Shell is likely to maintain its current dividend in the foreseeable future.

Royal Dutch Shell (NYSE:RDS.A) (NYSE:RDS.B) is an exceptional company that has not cut its dividend for 70 consecutive years. However, it has been greatly affected by the collapse of the oil price. To be sure, it reported full-year earnings of $10.6 B for 2015, which were 53% lower compared to 2014. In addition, the company just completed its major acquisition of BG Group, which amounted to $53 B. Therefore, as most of the shareholders of Shell hold the stock for its high dividend, the big question is whether the company will manage to maintain its current dividend or be forced to cut it.

The major point of concern is that the company's free cash flow is not sufficient to cover the dividend. More specifically, the operating cash flow, which was assisted by asset sales of about $10 B, was approximately $30 B in 2015, just $4B higher than the capital expenses. Therefore, the free cash flow was only $4 B, while the dividend payment was $12 B and hence the company had to add some debt to fund its dividend. Nevertheless, the management provided guidance for additional asset sales of $30 B in the 3-year period 2016-2018, which should be sufficient to cover the gap between the free cash flow and the dividend.

Of course the company cannot keep selling assets at its recent pace forever, as it will experience great decline in its output. This should be a major point of concern for shareholders, as the proved reserves of the company have markedly decreased in the last two years. More specifically, the proved reserves have decreased from 13.9 B barrels in 2013 to 13.1 B barrels in 2014 and 11.7 B barrels in 2015. This is a 16% decrease in just two years. Fortunately, a large wave of new growth projects is coming online during 2017-2020. These start-ups will contribute about 800,000 barrels per day to the total output. Moreover, BG Group reported a 16% output increase last year thanks to its liquefied natural gas project in Australia and some oilfields in Brazil. Therefore, Shell seems to have secured enough extra future output to compensate for its huge program of asset sales.

It is also worth noting that the company has a relatively strong balance sheet compared to other oil majors, such as BP (NYSE:BP) and Chevron (NYSE:CVX), which have added an excessive amount of debt in the last few years. More specifically, the net debt of Shell (as per Buffett, net debt = total liabilities - cash - receivables) currently stands at $101 B, which is about 10 times last year's earnings. While this amount of debt is not particularly low, it is still manageable and the management will not have much problem to slightly increase it if necessary, to avoid a dividend cut.

On the other hand, S&P recently downgraded Shell from AA-/A-1+ to A+/A-1. However, the current oil prices are unsustainable as they render numerous oilfields unprofitable and have thus led oil producers to cancel about 150 projects, which are worth 19 M bbls/day (~20% of global oil production). Consequently, oil is likely to rebound to at least $50-$70 within the next 2 years and hence the free cash flow of Shell is likely to improve and the company will probably not have to add an excessive amount of debt to cover its dividend.

It is also fair to note that the management of Shell has been moving in the right direction to cut the operating expenses and thus protect the high dividend. More specifically, the company reduced its operating expenses by $4 B last year and is aiming for additional $3 B savings this year by reducing its headcount and negotiating its contract rates with its service providers. While the effect of these savings on the cash flow is much weaker than that of the prevailing oil prices, it is evident that the management is doing its best in order to maintain the dividend.

To sum up, while Shell's cash flows have been greatly affected by the collapse of the oil price and the recent acquisition of BG Group, the company is doing its best to maintain its dividend. Thanks to its program of extensive asset sales for the period 2016-2018, the company is likely to maintain its dividend without much problem. In addition, when this program comes to an end, the price of oil will probably have rebounded to a more sustainable level, which will help Shell maintain its dividend without the need for additional asset sales. Therefore, the shareholders of Shell can rest assured that the dividend will not be cut in the foreseeable future.

Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.

I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

grupo
08/3/2016
07:49
Did Shell's Failure to Disclose Climate Risks Break the Law?
Congressmen who have asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate Exxon now request a similar probe of Shell.
By David Hasemyer, InsideClimate News
Mar 7, 2016

Credit: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images

Three members of Congress have asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate whether Shell Oil Co. violated securities laws by failing to adequately disclose material business risks from climate change.

Members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, led by California Democrat Ted Lieu, said in a letter to the SEC that Shell understood the consequences of climate change and made business decisions based on that knowledge.

"Yet, Shell funded and publicly engaged in a campaign to deceive the American people about the known risks of fossil fuels in causing climate change," the lawmakers said in their letter to SEC Chairwoman Mary Jo White.

"As a publicly traded company, Shell has a duty to follow U.S. securities law … including disclosure requirements as they apply to business or legal developments relating to the issue of climate change. Unfortunately, it appears that Shell may have omitted or misrepresented material information in official filings."

The call for an SEC probe of Shell is similar to an earlier demand that securities regulators investigate ExxonMobil. There has been a rising chorus of demands from lawmakers, presidential candidates, environmental activists and climate scientists for federal inquiries into whether Exxon's actions and communications on climate change violated U.S. laws. InsideClimate News reported last week that the Justice Department referred a request to investigation Exxon to the FBI's criminal investigation unit.

Shell spokeswoman Natalie Mazey and SEC spokeswoman Judith Burns both declined to comment.

The letter to the SEC cites investigative reporting by InsideClimate News and later by The Los Angeles Times reporting on early research into climate change by Shell, Exxon, Texaco and other fossil fuel companies.

Based on information from the news stories, Shell "intentionally obfuscated the role of fossil fuels in influencing climate change," according to the letter signed by Lieu and fellow Democrats Matthew Cartwright of Pennsylvania and Peter Welch of Vermont.

As an example of Shell's awareness of climate change and its impacts on the company's business, the congressmen's letter cites a Los Angeles Times report that Shell announced in 1989 it was redesigning a long-term, $3 billion natural gas platform in the North Sea because of rising sea levels from global warming.

But even then, Shell went on to fund climate deniers, according to the letter. It cited Shell's membership in the Global Climate Coalition, a collection the largest companies seeking to block government efforts to curb fossil fuel emissions.

"Based on the allegations above, it appears U.S. securities laws may have been violated," according to the letter. "If you determine that violations did occur, we respectfully request the SEC to seek appropriate equitable remedies against Shell."

In the case of Exxon, scientists repeatedly briefed the company's top executives of the probability of rising global temperatures driven largely by fossil fuel use in the late 1970s. Yet the company didn’t elaborate on the carbon problem in SEC filings during the height of its research. Nor did it mention in the filings that concerns over carbon dioxide’s effect on climate change were influencing business decisions.

White made a noncommittal response to the earlier request for an investigation of Exxon.

"I want to assure you that the Commission's staff will consider carefully the information included in your correspondence in connection with our statutory and regulatory responsibilities," White said in a letter to Lieu.

Lieu said he hopes an investigation will not only address possible harm to investors but will send a message industry-wide that it has a responsibility to halt climate change.

"Climate change is the one issue that can kill humanity as a species if it isn't stopped and mitigated right now," Lieu said. "If there is a successful prosecution, hopefully a settlement can lead to companies taking action to mitigate climate change."
Published Under:
Business and Accountability

waldron
08/3/2016
06:28
Chevron's massive Gorgon LNG export facility begins natural gas production ...(with Royal Dutch Shell holding a full 25% stake)


Mar 7 2016, 17:58 ET | About: Chevron Corporation (CVX) | By: Carl Surran, SA News Editor

Chevron (NYSE:CVX) says it expects to ship its first cargo from the $54B Gorgon gas-export facility off Australia's west coast next week, as the project has started producing liquefied natural gas after years of cost blowouts and delays.

CVX considers the project a cornerstone in its plans to become a major LNG supplier over the next four years, with Gorgon and the neighboring Wheatstone project in Western Australia targeting growing demand for natural gas in the Asia-Pacific region.

Gorgon will be one of the world's biggest new LNG operations and represents the single largest investment in Australia by a private company or government; three production trains will produce 15.6M metric tons/year of LNG plus enough gas to generate electricity for 2.5M Australian homes at full capacity.

In recent months, CVX has lined up two Chinese buyers (I, II) for gas from its Australian operations, and overall has secured commitments for more than 80% of the volumes from the Gorgon and Wheatstone projects.

CVX is Gorgon's operator and majority owner, with Exxon Mobil (NYSE:XOM) and Royal Dutch Shell (RDS.A, RDS.B) each holding 25% stakes.

waldron
06/3/2016
13:29
080512F1,Oil rig
Indigenous firms, banks look to traders to help restructure oil finance deals
0
By Editor on Mar 6, 2016 Business & Finance, Upstream

A report from Forbes has said that the the billions of dollars in debt which indigenous companies raised for the acquisitions oil fields from supermajors such as Chevron, Shell and Total now risk going unpaid with oil revenues a fraction of 2013 levels.

At the time the acquisition deals were concluded for these assets by firms such as Aiteo and Newcross, oil prices soared above $110 a barrel and local banks – less risk-adverse than their international counterparts – readily lent on a price basis of about $80-$90 per barrel. But Nigerian banks’ ability to maintain the lines of credit in place is now under question, given their exposure to the sector and also considering the rising cost of US dollar-denominated funding.

But restructuring seems more likely than write-offs. Restructurings will take the form of amend-and-extend exercises through covenant readjustments and extension of debt maturities. Pushing things down the road in order to trade out of the situation until the oil price returns seems to be the most viable option for both oil producers and banks. Furthermore, traders such as Glencore, Mercuria and Shell Trading have been looking to participate in refinancing and restructuring deals. Traders have much-needed US dollar liquidity, and are therefore welcome by distressed borrowers and over-exposed lenders.

waldron
02/3/2016
16:40
Citywire Money > News
Income star tips Shell to yield 20% over two years
Citywire AAA-rated Chris White says that 'the market is wrong' to challenge the sustainability of the oil major's dividend policy.
Markets
Other markets

FTSE 100Prev: 6152.88
▼ 0.31%19.27
6133.615:22 PM
13:0017:0021:006,1006,1256,1506,1756,200

Market Data Notice
More market charts
Favourites (0)
Sign in for alerts

Add funds, managers, shares and investment trusts to your Citywire favourite's list here.

Register or Sign in, and we will email you when we have news on them.


by Sean Butters on Mar 02, 2016 at 08:00
Income star tips Shell to yield 20% over two years

Chris White, Premier Asset Management’s head of UK equities, argues a reversal in oil sentiment could push Shell (RDSb +

Add to favourites
) to yield the best part of 20% over the next two years.

Although the Citywire AAA-rated manager of the Premier Monthly Income +

Add to favourites
fund is wary of jumping the gun on calling the bottom of the oil price, he does believe the end is in sight.

‘Oil price weakness could continue for another couple of months,’ said White. ‘However, it is a supply problem rather than a demand one. Saudi Arabia and the Opec nations will eventually get their act together and reduce supply, and the price will probably start to recover in the second half of this year,' he said.

While admitting that the price could slide further, ultimately White sees it recovering once oil production is constrained.

‘Market equilibrium should be restored, and if this happens, we will see a very sharp bounce in the oil price. If all the producers tighten supply by 2%, then the oil price will rocket – along with the share price,’ he said.

‘Considering all the shorts in under-pressure oil companies, why shouldn’t the oil price move like a share price when good news comes out? All the shorts would get closed, and the price would move up remarkably fast – as much as $10 in a day and $15 in two.’

While White (pictured) admits that Shell and BP (BP +

Add to favourites
), which represent Premier Monthly Income weightings of 5% and 2% respectively, have both suffered more damage than he initially expected, he remains confident on their future prospects, particularly Shell’s.

‘The market is challenging my assumption that Shell will maintain its dividend,’ he said, referring to fears the oil major may be on the brink of its first cut since 1945. ‘The market is wrong.’

‘I have been a little bit surprised by how much BP and Shell share prices have fallen. I thought they would have been held up by their dividend yield – I wasn’t expecting Shell to drop this far.

‘But [the speculation] has been overdone. My core belief is that Shell will keep its dividend yield for the rest of the year, and there is a reasonable chance that it will next year as well. If that is the case, then Shell shares are cheap and will yield the best part of 20% over the next two years.’
In the 12 months to 31 December, Premier Monthly returned 9.5% versus a UK Equity Income average of 6.46%, while in the five years to December-end the performance was 66.6% versus the peer group’s 56.8%.

waldron
02/3/2016
09:46
Shell faces further suit over Nigeria oil spills
Holly Ellyatt | @HollyEllyatt
1 Hour AgoCNBC.com
17
SHARES

















COMMENTSStart the Discussion

Oil giant Shell is being sued again by two Nigerian communities over multiple spills in the oil-rich Niger Delta with claims that could run into "tens of millions of pounds given the impact on these communities" according to the law firm representing the claimants.

The Bille and Ogale communities, whose livelihoods are mainly based around fishing and farming, are pushing for compensation for environmental damage to the region: They say they have not had clean drinking water since 1989 because of oil spills.

The communities are suing Shell's Nigerian subsidiary, Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria (SPDC) and are being represented by British law firm Leigh Day.

"The two new claims against Royal Dutch Shell plc (RDS) and the Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd (SPDC) have now been issued in the High Court in London on behalf of residents of the Ogale Community in Ogoniland and the Bille Kingdom," Leigh Day said in a statement on Tuesday.

In a statement given to CNBC, Shell said it is at an "early stage" of reviewing the claims and that the case should be heard in Nigeria. It said it believes that many spills in those communities are caused by oil theft which damages pipelines and illegal refining.

A picture taken on March 22, 2013 shows an illegal oil refinery destroyed by Joint Task Force at Nembe Creek in the Niger Delta on March 22, 2013. Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria (SPDC) on April 2, 2013 said it would temporarily shut down production the Nembe Creek Truck Line (NCTL) to remove a number of bunkering points on pipelines vandalized by oil thieves in the region.
PIUS UTOMI EKPEI/AFP/Getty Images
A picture taken on March 22, 2013 shows an illegal oil refinery destroyed by Joint Task Force at Nembe Creek in the Niger Delta on March 22, 2013. Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria (SPDC) on April 2, 2013 said it would temporarily shut down production the Nembe Creek Truck Line (NCTL) to remove a number of bunkering points on pipelines vandalized by oil thieves in the region.

"Both Bille and Ogale are areas heavily impacted by crude oil theft, pipeline sabotage and illegal refining which remain the main sources of pollution across the Niger Delta," Shell said.

"Ogale is in Ogoniland and it is important to note that SPDC has produced no oil or gas in Ogoniland since 1993. Access to the area has been limited following a rise in violence, threats to staff and attacks on facilities," the company added.

A first court hearing will take place in the Technology and Construction court in London on Wednesday which will decided whether the claimants can lodge a case against Shell's Nigerian business.

Leigh Day said the Ogale community had "been subjected to repeated oil spillages across much of the community since at least 1989" whereas in the smaller Bille community made up of fishing settlements, livelihoods had been "destroyed" from spills emanating from the Nembe Creek pipeline. Laigh Day accused Shell of failing to install a leak detection system and failing to protect against third party interference.

The law firm said Shell had failed to act upon a report from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in 2011 that recommended that Shell instigate a substantial program to clean up and decontaminate the Ogale area.

"At the time, Shell stated it accepted the findings and the recommendations of the UNEP Report. However, four years later, Shell has failed to comply with the recommendations of the UNEP Report and to clean up the sites polluted by their oil," Leigh Day said.

Shell contested that claim, however, stating that following the UNEP recommendations, its Nigerian subsidiary had "initiated action to address all the recommendations directed to it in the UNEP report as operator of the SPCD Joint Venture."

"In mid-2015 SPDC JV, along with the government, UNEP and representatives of the Ogoni community, agreed to an 18-month roadmap to fast-track the environmental clean-up and remediation of Ogoniland which includes a governance framework," it added.

Commenting on the claims and potential damages that Shell could face, Daniel Leader, a partner in the International Group Claims team at the law firm, said that "given the extent of the damage, we believe that the clean-up costs for both communities will run into several hundred million pounds. The claims from the thousands of individuals affected by this pollution, could run into tens of millions of pounds given the impact on these communities."

He said it was "scandalous that four years after the UNEP Report, Shell is yet to clean up its oil in either Ogale or Bille. Our client's patience has now run out and we intend to force Shell to act since it is clear they have no intention of doing so on their own."

It will be the second Nigerian lawsuit in five years for Shell which has had a long-history of tense relations with the local community during its oil extraction operation in the Niger Delta region. Violence and militancy has hampered the oil giant while locals have felt exploited and unable to see the economic benefits of their region's oil wealth.

Shell has already had to award compensation to locals. In January, it announced a £55 million (£76.8 million) payout for pollution caused by two spills in 2008 and 2009 with the compensation split between individuals (mainly fishermen) and the Bodo community which were affected by those spills. Law firm

Leigh Day also represented the Bodo community giving it a precedent in winning compensation.
Holly EllyattAssistant Producer, CNBC.com

maywillow
02/3/2016
06:35
OIL POLLUTION FINES
maywillow
27/2/2016
11:29
Iran ready to sign $20bn oil deal
oil
News ID: 3567154 - Sat 27 February 2016 - 10:42
Economy
TEHRAN, Feb. 27 (MNA) – IOOC managing director has announced that oil investment opportunities worth 20 billion dollars are available in the Persian Gulf.

Managing Director of the Iranian Offshore Oil Company (IOOC) Saeid Hafezi described the most important oil and gas investment opportunities in the Persian Gulf region stating “currently, various talks have been conducted with European and Asian companies over the implementation of new oil and gas projects in the Persian gulf as well as Strait of Hormuz.”

Hafezi highlighted that negotiations have been held with Italy's Eni, France’s Total as well as an Austrian company; “despite consultations, no contract has been sealed yet.”

The official further said the value of investment opportunities in the oil and gas industries in the Persian Gulf reaches about 15 to 20 billion dollars; “a portion of the investment pertained to the expansion of new oil and gas fields which is being pursued by Pars Oil and Gas Company (POGC).”

“Meanwhile, the rest of the negotiations deal with development of old and ongoing fields,” underlined the official asserting “the most important goals include increasing the recovery factor of production in compliance with the preservation principles.”

Hafezi also described some new investment opportunities in Iran’s oil and gas industry including expansion of Soroush, Norouz, Abuzar,Hengam, Doroud in addition to a number of other joint oil and gas fields.

IOOC managing director had previously said all new oil projects will be carried out with increased harvest from joint fields as top priority.

ariane
Chat Pages: Latest  18  17  16  15  14  13  12  11  10  9  8  7  Older

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com