The ChadCameroon Petroleum Development and Pipeline Project

1 / 33
About This Presentation
Title:

The ChadCameroon Petroleum Development and Pipeline Project

Description:

Non government organizations (NGO) wanted financers of large projects to take ... The project financing arrangement is limited non-recourse debt because it ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:119
Avg rating:3.0/5.0

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: The ChadCameroon Petroleum Development and Pipeline Project


1
The Chad-Cameroon Petroleum Development and
Pipeline Project
  • Professor Doug Cerf
  • Donald Bren Graduate School of Environmental
    Science and Management
  • Environmental Risk Management (ESM 286)
  • Winter 2008

2
What has been accomplished by the Chad Cameroon
Project?
  • Very interesting consortium of parties to
    accomplish
  • Economic development in a developing country
  • Shared financial returns
  • Sharing of risks
  • Poverty alleviation
  • Project development with concern for sustainable
    development
  • Partnership of Governments, Private Corporations,
    Private Banks and The World Bank
  • How much risk is acceptable in economic
    development situations that have severe
    environmental and social issues?

3
How did the financing differ?
  • Review Corporate Structure in Exhibit 3a
  • Review Sources / Uses of Cash Exhibit 3b
  • Field System
  • Oil wells and drilling equipment
  • Export System
  • Pipeline and off-shore loading system

4
Corporate Finance for the Field System
  • No debt all equity
  • 3 sponsors (upstream consortium)
  • Exxon/Mobil exposure 608m
  • 40 of 1,521m
  • Market value of equity 280b
  • High discretion over cash flows
  • Monitoring is done internally
  • As opposed to the external monitoring similar to
    the equator principles

5
Equator Principles
  • A new voluntary framework to guide project
    financing decisions
  • Endorsed in 2003 by ten leading banks
  • Non government organizations (NGO) wanted
    financers of large projects to take legal and
    moral responsibility for the social and
    environmental impact on local communities and
    host nations caused by the projects that they
    financed

6
Project Finance
  • Project finance involves the use of limited or
    fully non-recourse debt by a corporate partner
    (the sponsor or sponsors) to finance investment
    in and ownership of a legally independent, single
    purpose industrial asset usually with a limited
    life.

7
Key elements of the project finance agreement
  • Key elements
  • An investment in an industrial asset
  • An organizational decision to create a new,
    legally-independent entity
  • Financing decision involving non-recourse debt
  • The project financing arrangement is limited
    non-recourse debt because it provides a guarantee
    for debt repayment through completion
  • After completion there is no recourse to sponsors
  • The debt is an obligation of the project
    companies, Techad (TOTCO) and Cameroon (COTCO)
    pipeline projects
  • Repayment is a function of project cash flows

8
Key elements of the project finance agreement
  • By creating a legally-independent entity the
    borrowing entities (the sponsors) are able to
    protect their balance sheets
  • Off balance sheet financing
  • Exxon/Mobil has a debt to equity capital ratio on
    its balance sheet of 23
  • Export system debt to equity ratio is 62-64
  • Would Exxon/Mobil do this deal on their balance
    sheet?

9
Exxon Review
  • Look on Google finance to determine
  • Total Market capitalization
  • Balance sheet debt and equity

10
Risk Management
  • Reason for using project finance
  • Risk sharing and risk mitigation
  • Risk sharing
  • Lead sponsor Exxon/Mobil brought in other
    sponsors (Chevron and Petronas)
  • Diversified borrowing through banks, bond holders
    and the World Bank

11
Risk Mitigation
  • Risk mitigation
  • Inclusion of the World Bank /IFC to help mitigate
    political and reputation risk
  • The world bank ..
  • as the lender of last resort for impoverished
    countries the World Bank has leverage over these
    countries that private sponsors do not have.
  • has the experience and technology to deal with
    environmental, social and political risk that is
    superior to that of a private sponsor
  • the world bank can sort through the propaganda to
    determine the actual behavior on environmental
    and social issues

12
How much risk mitigation is needed?
  • How much involvement by the world bank is needed
    to get the risk mitigation benefits that
    Exxon/Mobil (sponsors) are looking for?
  • Generally, for highly rated companies like
    Exxon/Mobil project finance is more expensive
    than corporate finance
  • The extra costs are in the costs to structure and
    fund the project finance (15 million of
    preparation costs)
  • See quote under financial projections on page 3
    of case

13
The World Banks role
  • Sponsors want World Bank involvement for risk
    mitigation
  • The world bank is primarily interested in
  • Poverty alleviation
  • Sustainable economic development
  • There is no better place than Chad for poverty
    alleviation
  • The World Bank has the expertise to understand
    and impact the risk issues
  • Corporate sponsors could not take on a project
    with these risks because they do not have this
    expertise
  • The World Bank loans to projects it does not loan
    to companies.

14
The World Banks role
  • World Bank Group played four key roles
  • It appraised the project for sponsors and other
    outside lenders to uncover important information
  • It assisted with the environmental assessment
  • It structured the project to ensure fairness
    and to minimize social and environmental impact
  • Policy advice to ensure long term sustainability
  • It made direct investments and mobilized other
    funding sources
  • Deter government interference

15
Is this deal fair to Chad?
  • Investment of capital is very low 47 million
  • Equity investment is funded by loans
  • Chad is using up one of its only natural
    resources
  • Net present value (Low/High scenarios from Table
    5)
  • Low expected oil price and low volume 108
    million
  • High expected oil price and high volume 1,170
    million
  • Expected value 463 million
  • Internal Rate of return
  • Relatively low investment therefore IRRs are high
  • Low 42
  • High 90
  • Chad makes more than the private sponsors in all
    of the low volume/low price scenarios
  • Chad has the greatest downside risk protection

16
Is this deal fair to Cameroon?
  • Equity investment in pipeline project
  • Returns are essentially invariant to the price of
    oil
  • It is most sensitive to volume changes
  • Net present value (Low/High scenarios from Table
    5)
  • Low expected oil price and low volume 92
    million
  • High expected oil price and high volume 156
    million
  • Internal Rate of return
  • Relatively low investment therefore IRRs are high
  • Low 34
  • High 40
  • Much less variation than for Chad

17
Is this deal fair to Private Sponsors?
  • Very sensitive to the change in oil price and
    volume
  • Net present value (Low/High scenarios Table 5)
  • Low expected oil price and low volume (917)
    million
  • High expected oil price and high volume 1,614
    million
  • Internal Rate of return
  • Low less than zero
  • High 27
  • The largest upside in dollar return

18
Fairness and the distribution of project returns
  • Timing of the returns
  • Chad, Cameroon and private sponsors get 29.2,
    51.4 and 56.3 of its undiscounted cash flows
    respectively in the first 10 years
  • Chads receipts are back-loaded to protect
    against sovereign interference
  • This approach may be inappropriate given Chads
    needs to alleviate poverty
  • Chad is assuming reserve risk
  • Proven reserves last through year nine
  • If probable and possible reserves do not
    materialize then Chad suffers

19
Fairness and the distribution of project returns
  • Division of the returns
  • Total 1.78 billion
  • Chad, Cameroon and private sponsors get 22, 6.6
    and 71.4 of the total distributable cash flows
  • Looks pretty good for Chad based on the amount
    invested
  • Chads position is driven by their inability to
    raise external capital
  • If they could raise external capital would they
    have needed the private sponsors (Exxon/Mobil
    etc.)?
  • Cash flows would have tripled without the private
    sponsors (assumes inclusion of Cameroon)

20
Fairness and distribution of project risks
  • Construction risk
  • Construction risk is low
  • Sponsors know how to develop oil fields
  • They have certified variables related to the
    amount of reserves with independent consultants
  • Financial risks (excluding sovereign risk)
  • Low given the debt service reserve fund
  • Debt service coverage ratio is 2.1 or higher
  • Low finding and development costs of 5.20/barrel
  • Risk of oil price fluctuations
  • Risk of quality of the oil extracted

21
Fairness and distribution of project risks
  • Sovereign Risks
  • Political risk
  • Potential to disrupt the project
  • Dependent on the political situation in both Chad
    and Cameroon
  • Environmental and social risk fall on the host
    nations
  • Sponsors bear the environmental and social risk
    indirectly through reputation damage
  • Could be large has shown by Exxon Valdez

22
Is the sharing of the risks and returns fair?
  • Is World Bank involvement evidence of fairness?
  • Would you approve the deal as a World Bank/IFC
    board member?
  • Three slides follow on why the plan should be
    approved
  • Three slides follow on why the plan should not be
    approved
  • What are the alternatives?

23
Reasons for the World bank to approve the deal
  • Opportunity and need to alleviate poverty
  • Chad has few opportunities to alleviate poverty
    and spur economic development
  • Chad situation has deteriorated over the last
    decade
  • Chad situation is bad compared to other African
    nations
  • Opportunity to leverage 177 million from the
    World Bank for a 3.7 billion project (5 of the
    funding)
  • Commercially attractive project with conservative
    oil price and volume assumptions

24
Reasons for the World bank to approve the deal
  • In the view of some the project fairly allocates
    project risks and returns
  • Chad puts in very little and stands to pull out a
    lot
  • Social and environmental issues have been
    adequately addressed
  • 19 volumes of environmental assessment documents
  • Hundreds of meetings with experts, indigenous
    people and NGOs
  • Numerous contingency plans
  • The World Bank knows how to structure projects
    for success

25
Reasons for the World bank to approve the deal
  • The Revenue Management Plan will work
  • Future lending to Chad is contingent on the
    Revenue Management Plan
  • Built in auditing and oversight mechanisms

26
Reasons for the World bank to oppose the deal
  • Pipeline revenues may displace existing aid
  • Chad will have used up the natural resource and
    be in the same aid position
  • Current aid is 188 million per year
  • Expected project cash flows are about half during
    the main part of the project

27
Reasons for the World bank to oppose the deal
  • Key participants have troublesome records
  • Exxon/Mobil
  • Exxon Valdez
  • Chairman spoke against strict environmental
    standards in developing countries
  • The World Bank
  • Has not been successful structuring deals to
    manage oil booms
  • Revenue Management Plan is an experiment
  • Chad and President Deby
  • Civil war has stopped economic development on
    several occasions in the past
  • has a poor record on human rights
  • Can not be trusted to implement the revenue
    management plan

28
Reasons for the World bank to oppose the deal
  • Revenue management plan has serious flaws
  • Lacks specificity
  • Does not provide detailed expenditure guidelines
  • Lacks effective oversight mechanisms
  • Is the oversight committee unbiased?
  • Is the money that goes to the Chadian banks
    guaranteed to be used for the appropriate
    purpose?
  • Lacks credible enforcement mechanisms
  • No subpoena power or investigatory powers

29
Reasons for the World bank to oppose the deal
  • Revenue management plan has serious flaws
    (continued)
  • Represents an invasion of sovereign rights
  • Chad owns the oil reserves and should be allowed
    to spend the countrys wealth as it sees fit
  • Analogy few employees would agree to employment
    contracts that dictated how they should spend
    their disposable income
  • Portion of funding to alleviate poverty is not
    enough
  • Portion of cash for restricted investment is 60
    over the life of the project
  • Chad receives the bulk of its returns in later
    years in the form of upstream taxes
  • These flows are not subject to oversight and
    control

30
Reasons for the World bank to oppose the deal
  • Revenue management plan has serious flaws
    (continued)
  • Environmental and Social risks are excessive
  • Distribution of project returns is not fair
  • Chads returns are in distant years
  • Chads returns may not materialize if probable
    reserves do not materialize
  • Chad needs poverty alleviation now
  • Commercial viability
  • How high can the discount rate go before the
    NPVs turn negative

31
What has been accomplished by the Chad Cameroon
Project?
  • Very interesting consortium of parties to
    accomplish
  • Economic development in a developing country
  • Shared financial returns
  • Sharing of risks
  • Poverty alleviation
  • Project development with concern for sustainable
    development
  • Partnership of Governments, Private Corporations,
    Private Banks and The World Bank
  • How much risk is acceptable in economic
    development situations that have severe
    environmental and social issues?

32
Case questions
  • How are the sponsors financing this deal? How
    does the financing of the Field System differ
    from the financing of the Export System?
  • What is the World Bank/IFCs role in this deal?
    Are they likely to be successful?

33
Case questions
  • Analyze the risks and the returns to Chad,
    Cameroon, and the Private Sponsors. How were the
    returns calculated? Are the risks and the returns
    fair from each partys perspective?
  • Will the Revenue Management Plan work? Are there
    aspects of the plan that you think should be
    changed?
  • Would you approve the deal as a World Bank/IFC
    board member?
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)