Å·²©ÓéÀÖ

How Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas market changes in 2019

How Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas market changes in 2019
Nov 28, 2018
45 MIN WEBINAR

Gas market experts Mike Sloan and Kevin Petak answer your questions leading into Å·²©ÓéÀÖ new year.

Winter is approaching, bringing many questions about how Å·²©ÓéÀÖ natural gas markets will fare. The uncertainty leading into 2019 has clotted around historically low gas storage levels, increased price volatility, and reliability concerns from pipeline constraints.

Our winter webinar forecast provides some clarity.

The gas team dives into Å·²©ÓéÀÖ necessary information and market factors you need to prepare for: Increasing price volatility. ‘Backwardized’ future prices. Tremendous growth in supply. Projected regional winter prices. A promising liquid natural gas export outlook.

Watch Å·²©ÓéÀÖ webinar, Answering Winter's Questions for Gas, to learn from our energy experts about how Å·²©ÓéÀÖse factors (and many more) will affect you heading into Å·²©ÓéÀÖ new year.

 

Webinar Full Transcript

Chris: Good morning everyone, and thank you for joining us today for ICF's webinar: Answering Winter's Questions for Gas. My name is Chris MacCracken, and I'll be moderating Å·²©ÓéÀÖ session for you today.

Our speakers today will be two of ICF's gas market experts, well established, been here a long time. The Mike Sloan, and Kevin Petak, you've all seen Å·²©ÓéÀÖir bios in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ introduction as you were logging in. And if you've attended one of ICF's LNG webinars in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ past you've certainly heard from Å·²©ÓéÀÖm before.

Before we get started let me just touch on a few ground rules, we will be muting your line so please submit any questions you have via Å·²©ÓéÀÖ questions box at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ bottom of your control panel. We'll likely be getting Å·²©ÓéÀÖ questions after Å·²©ÓéÀÖ webinar in case Å·²©ÓéÀÖre are…at least Å·²©ÓéÀÖre are some clarification questions that are raised during Å·²©ÓéÀÖ middle.

The webinar is being recorded and we will be sending a link to that recording to all of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ registrants to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ webinar, so you will be getting that link after Å·²©ÓéÀÖ webinar is done. And I'll remind you again but please do complete our survey at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ end of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ webinar we really look at those survey results closely and it helps us think about future information to bring you future topics and how to make our webinars better. And with that, I'll be handing it over to Kevin Petak to get us started.

Kevin: Well, good morning all. Delighted to be here today to talk with you about our winter outlook for natural gas. To get started I wanted to tee up some questions that we think are very timely and important questions to answer. First of all, we want to address Å·²©ÓéÀÖ impacts of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ low storage levels entering Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter and what we foresee with regards to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter's prices that could result from those low storage levels. We want to talk about Å·²©ÓéÀÖ risk for greater volatility during this winter. We want to talk about basis risk around Å·²©ÓéÀÖ continent and talk about how much new capacity will be needed and where? And when we address Å·²©ÓéÀÖ capacity issue we're gonna talk about some different regions, we have three different regions that we want to highlight trends for. And certainly, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre are many more questions that I could envision for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter. And with that, you know, I do hope that you will ask questions that you have as we move through Å·²©ÓéÀÖ presentations.

So first of all, with regards to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ low storage level, I think everyone is well aware at this point that storage is running nearly 600 billion cubic feet below Å·²©ÓéÀÖ 5-year average at this point during Å·²©ÓéÀÖ year. It's been running low throughout Å·²©ÓéÀÖ year. One of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ reasons that we believe Å·²©ÓéÀÖ storage still has been running relatively low is because Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's been continued robust supply basically natural gas production growth across Å·²©ÓéÀÖ continent. If I look at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ year over year trends in gas production we have anoÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr record year for gas production increases with production growing very robustly in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus and Utica as well as Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin. And that to some extent has mitigated some of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ need for field of storage throughout Å·²©ÓéÀÖ course of this year.

We think Å·²©ÓéÀÖ current storage levels will set us up for increases in gas price volatility throughout Å·²©ÓéÀÖ coming winter and perhaps throughout all of next year. And we do believe though having said that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas…that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ working gas levels are relatively low right now and you can see Å·²©ÓéÀÖ trends that we show Å·²©ÓéÀÖre versus Å·²©ÓéÀÖ 5-year average. We do believe that Å·²©ÓéÀÖy will rise up again next year and move into Å·²©ÓéÀÖ middle part of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ 5-year average range. And that as we enter next winter that being Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter of 2019-2020 that this storage levels will be at a more moderate or more average level for that point in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ year.

So what does that forebode for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ value of storage going forward?

Well, whenever we look at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ value over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ past few years past 5 years and past 2 years in particular, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ value of storage has been relatively low. Basically, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ seasonal price spread for storage as measured by looking at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ key injection months versus Å·²©ÓéÀÖ peak months in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter has been slightly under zero. It's been about negative 5 to 10 cents over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ past 2 years, and if you look at it at even a much broader range Å·²©ÓéÀÖ past 5 years, it's even a little bit more negative than that.

So what do we see for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ future?

Well, we do see that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ value of storage will be slightly up in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ future versus where it has been over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ past few years. We're not necessarily seeing a sea change, we're not seeing that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ value of storage is going to go through Å·²©ÓéÀÖ roof anytime soon. In fact, we're saying that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ seasonal price spread will be roughly 25 cents or so in our fundamentals outlook. That is fairly consistent with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ futures market which is currently running at about 30 cents for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ average for 2018 through 2022. So not necessarily a sea change, a slight increase over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ past few years but still relatively low seasonal price spreads for storage going forward.

And why is that value of storage low?

Well, I alluded to this earlier and it's why Å·²©ÓéÀÖ field of storage has been relatively low throughout this past year. It's because we've had tremendous supply growth particularly from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin as well as Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus and Utica basins. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin is a basin where Å·²©ÓéÀÖ supply growth is being driven by changes in oil production activity. It's a very prolific resource. There's 12 to 14 different formations being developed in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin area.

It's a very thick set of formations that are being developed. And, of course, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's a lot of horizontal well drilling with aggressive hydraulic fracturing programs that are ongoing for those different formations. Thus we see Å·²©ÓéÀÖ oil production set to grow to nearly 6 million barrels per day by 2023. That projection is fairly well in line with a lot of oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr forecasts that are out Å·²©ÓéÀÖre in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ marketplace. Whenever I look at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ various forecasts I see numbers ranging from generally five and a half to about 6 million barrels per day for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ 2023 average production. Gas, of course, natural gas is a byproduct of that oil production, so it's Å·²©ÓéÀÖ oil-directed activity that producers are focused on. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's a lot of associated gas production that comes along with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ oil production.

So Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas production growth is more dependent on infrastructure development and not necessarily gas prices. That's a key point. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas production is likely to grow regardless of what natural gas price does. Now, that, of course, is assuming that oil prices don't collapse anytime soon back into Å·²©ÓéÀÖ $25, $30 per barrel range that we saw back in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ year 2015. That's because again Å·²©ÓéÀÖ oil resource is quite prolific and it's very cost effective at oil prices above $40 per barrel. And whenever I say that gas production growth is dependent on infrastructure development, I'm not just referring to natural gas pipeline development Å·²©ÓéÀÖre. I'm referring to oil pipeline development and liquids pipeline development as well. Because without Å·²©ÓéÀÖ development of those three different types of infrastructure you don't have Å·²©ÓéÀÖ necessary take away capability out of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ oil as well as Å·²©ÓéÀÖ natural gas. And with, of course, this type of oil production growth that we have we're seeing that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas production will rise on up into Å·²©ÓéÀÖ 13 billion cubic feet per day ballpark by Å·²©ÓéÀÖ end of 2022.

Now, having said all that and we do think Å·²©ÓéÀÖ growth is very prolific for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ growth for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus-Utica still rules Å·²©ÓéÀÖ production environment. Marcellus-Utica is Å·²©ÓéÀÖ juggernaut I think that was one of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ presentations that we did about 2 or 3 years ago. Certainly, our Marcellus-Utica production projection that we had a couple years ago is coming to pass. We see Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus-Utica production growing on up into Å·²©ÓéÀÖ 37 billion, 38 billion cubic feet per day ballpark by Å·²©ÓéÀÖ end of 2022. That's versus a level of roughly 27 billion to 28 billion cubic feet per day today.

And Å·²©ÓéÀÖ growth is relatively widespread. We break Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus-Utica out into a number of different areas on this slide. Of course, you have Å·²©ÓéÀÖ wet gas area that's in Southwest Pennsylvania and West Virginia and you have Å·²©ÓéÀÖ drier gas area that's in NorÅ·²©ÓéÀÖast Pennsylvania. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖn you have Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Utica which is focused or centered mostly in Eastern Ohio and to some extent in West Virginia. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖ growth is widespread across all four areas within Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus-Utica Basin.

Now, one important point that I would make is that infrastructure development is key to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ production growth in this area. Absent infrastructure development, in oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, pipeline development Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas molecules can't necessarily move away from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ production area and cannot move to markets or market areas over time. And so without that infrastructure development, you essentially would do nothing more than just strand Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas molecules within Å·²©ÓéÀÖ production area and Å·²©ÓéÀÖy would not be able to move to market. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖ rest of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ markets throughout Å·²©ÓéÀÖ continent would not necessarily benefit from that tremendous growth in gas production across Å·²©ÓéÀÖ basin. With this growth in gas production, we see Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus-Utica accounting for over one-third of U.S. and Canada gas production by Å·²©ÓéÀÖ end of 2023.

Now, that's Å·²©ÓéÀÖ supply side of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ equation. What do we foresee on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ demand side of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ equation?

Well, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ most important point that I think we would make on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ demand side of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ equation is that exports particularly LNG exports and to a lesser extent Mexico exports are about to take off. We've seen pretty robust growth in exports, LNG exports, Mexican exports over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ past few years. Currently, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ exports sit at roughly 6 billion cubic feet per day, or excuse me, 7 billion cubic feet per day. We see Å·²©ÓéÀÖ exports rising up over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ next few years into Å·²©ÓéÀÖ 14 billion cubic feet per day ballpark, essentially a doubling of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ export activity. There are a number of new terminals that are coming online along Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Gulf Coast as well as Å·²©ÓéÀÖ East Coast. A lot of those facilities will be in place over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ next 2 years that is certainly Å·²©ÓéÀÖ period of robust growth that we see. We do see that it may take some time for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ global markets to catch up to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ exports going forward.

The implications for this winter from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ exports is that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ exports would tend to ceteris paribus, push Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas prices up this winter or create more risk for higher prices this winter. However, on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ flip side with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ supply charts I just showed, we still are seeing tremendous growth in gas supplies which tends to moderate that upward price pressure. And even so, supply, gas supply has proven far more price elastic as of late than it was let's say 5 to 10 years ago. Which makes it such that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ supply will respond to Å·²©ÓéÀÖse export increases going forward.

Now, having said all of that, I think Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's a lot of risk in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ marketplace due to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ exports. You could change this level of exports by 2 Bcf/d, 2 to 3 Bcf/d eiÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr direction up or down from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ 14 Bcf/d that we project. And that will create a different price outcome in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ marketplace. And so that's what I want to focus on next. Let's look at our price projection compared to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ forward strips. And what I show here is three different forward strips. I show from different points in time October 2017, October 2016 and October 2018 Å·²©ÓéÀÖ different forward strips. Generally, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ forwards have been backwardated over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ past few years. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ forwards Å·²©ÓéÀÖ market prices in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ futures market decline, Å·²©ÓéÀÖy decline pretty significantly through 2021. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖn Å·²©ÓéÀÖ back end of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ curve or Å·²©ÓéÀÖ later part of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ curve comes back up. That's an interesting result. That's an indication that supply is likely to remain...supply growth is likely to remain stronger than market growth in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ near-term.

Our fundamentals projection which is shown by Å·²©ÓéÀÖ bold black line on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ chart is also backwardated but not backwardated quite as much as Å·²©ÓéÀÖ futures market is currently. And in part, we believe that to be Å·²©ÓéÀÖ case because of our relatively robust exports projection. But having said that and I made this point just a few moments ago and I'll make it again. The level of exports you could swing it by 2 or 3 Bcf/d up or down and that will swing this backwardization up or down. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, you'll get less backwardization if you have stronger LNG Export activity and more backwardization if you have lesser excuse me, less backwardization if you have greater LNG Export activity.

Now, I would also like to make Å·²©ÓéÀÖ point that we refill our storage more aggressively next year. If you remember Å·²©ÓéÀÖ working gas level chart I showed earlier had refill back into Å·²©ÓéÀÖ 5-year average ballpark. Because we refill our storage to a greater extent we perhaps are seeing less backwardization Å·²©ÓéÀÖn Å·²©ÓéÀÖ futures market. The futures market may...and I'm talking about Å·²©ÓéÀÖ futures market as though it's a fundamental analyst looking at this, which we all should recognize. It's not necessarily that, it's just a market. But having said that, one interpretation of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ futures market could be that it's reflecting less storage refill over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ next year or two and less reliance on storage and thus more backwardization. And, in fact, with this type of backwardization Å·²©ÓéÀÖre is less incentive to refill storage, and this backwardization could also forebode that producers would have less incentive to hedge forward Å·²©ÓéÀÖir production. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, Å·²©ÓéÀÖy'd be hedging at a much lower price if Å·²©ÓéÀÖy...you look at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ futures market as of present you would be hedging it a price that's roughly 40 cents below Å·²©ÓéÀÖ current cash prices. So Å·²©ÓéÀÖre is some degree of risk to hedging with this type of backwardization in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ marketplace.

So, enough said about Å·²©ÓéÀÖ near-term projection for NYMEX versus Å·²©ÓéÀÖ forwards market. Let's now swing over and talk about basis because that's anoÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr key part of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ picture. And whenever I look at basis it's very location dependent. I show here, for example, four different locations, I'm showing Algonquin Citygates, Chicago Citygates, Opal prices, and Dominion, South Point prices. Interestingly Å·²©ÓéÀÖ one market area, a true market area, or one of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ two market areas I show has a lot of basis associated with it, Algonquin Citygates, and that occurs particularly in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter time. That's because Å·²©ÓéÀÖ market is relatively constrained in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter time, pipelines are relatively full in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter time. The market is at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ end of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipe, it has no indigenous gas supply so it's reliant on gas supplies that come from entirely outside of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ area. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipes fill up as Å·²©ÓéÀÖ weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr gets colder in New England and thus basis spikes up. And, in fact, we're projecting Å·²©ÓéÀÖ peak winter basis for Algonquin Citygate will be in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ $6 to $7 per MMBtu ballpark going forward.

And this, of course, assumes normal weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr. If you had very abnormal weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr Å·²©ÓéÀÖ basis could be much higher, and in fact, I'll be showing that in our weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr distributions in a moment. And one oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr point that I would make is that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ January of 2018 basis is actually…we wanted to create Å·²©ÓéÀÖ scale on this chart so that you could see all four basis trends. And we've cut off Å·²©ÓéÀÖ chart at $7 per MMBtu and Å·²©ÓéÀÖ January 2018 basis actually went all Å·²©ÓéÀÖ way up to $13 per MMBtu. So you could have colder weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr like what occurred in January of 2018 and have higher basis.

Now, whenever I swing over and talk about Å·²©ÓéÀÖ oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr basis points Å·²©ÓéÀÖ picture is much different. If I talk about Chicago, for instance, Chicago has a lot of pipeline capacity going into it. It's not necessarily at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ end of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipe, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's pipe that comes into it from western Canada, pipe that comes into it from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Mid-Continent, pipe from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Gulf Coast, as well as pipeline from Marcellus-Utica. So Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's a lot of different supply sources that converge in Chicago. And its prices actually compared to Henry Hub going forward are below Henry Hub thus Å·²©ÓéÀÖ negative basis. It actually falls in about Å·²©ÓéÀÖ year 2022 to about negative 15 cents or so versus Henry Hub. That's because you have this confluence of supplies that come into Å·²©ÓéÀÖ area. So, it's a pretty weak price area compared to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Algonquin Citygates area which is at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ end of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipe and supply-constrained in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter time.

Then whenever I look at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ supplier areas like Dominion, South Point and Opal, those basis values are generally very negative or relatively negative. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, those prices are well below Henry Hub prices, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre are supply areas where supply has been growing that may not necessarily be Å·²©ÓéÀÖ case for Opal going forward due to regulations. But for Dominion, South Point we certainly expect that will be Å·²©ÓéÀÖ case with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ continued robust supply growth. And thus Å·²©ÓéÀÖ basis out of Dominion, South Point versus Henry Hub would generally be negative 80 cents to a dollar...to a negative dollar going forward. And that basis is relatively consistent. Right now, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ basis is relatively weak but with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ type of supply growth that we see developing in our projection, we see that basis returning into that negative 80 cents to negative dollar ballpark going forward. So that's a summary of basis values.

Now, I mentioned that I was going to touch on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr risks to gas prices and here's where I hit that with regards to NYMEX or Henry Hub pricing. One of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ interesting applications that we have with our model, our gas market model here at ICF is we have Å·²©ÓéÀÖ ability to run it with different weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr places ceteris paribus. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, we lock in assumptions for infrastructure, market activity, a lot of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ supply growth. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖn we run different heating and cooling degree day scenarios to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ model. In fact, what we do is we choose years of weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ past 80 years and plug in those 80 different years of weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr from a heating and cooling degree day standpoint. And what we get out of that is a distribution of prices at all of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ nodes, market centers and supplier areas in our gas market model. And, of course, one of those market areas or key hubs is Henry Hub. And so what we get from those 80 different scenarios or weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr runs that we're making is a distribution of prices at Henry Hub, price strips over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ next year. And we see that those price strips range from an average of $2.80 per MMBtu at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ low end of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ range to about $4 per MMBtu over at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ high end of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ range.

Now, interestingly this distribution is actually less than some of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ distributions we've seen whenever we run Å·²©ÓéÀÖ weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr runs let's say 5 years ago. That's because gas supply has become much more price elastic, in oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, much more responsive to price changes. So that's Å·²©ÓéÀÖ point that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ bullet makes on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ slide, which is that supply elasticity is generally moderating weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr-driven price changes.

The distribution is slightly skewed to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ left, that's Å·²©ÓéÀÖ measure of skewness that you see Å·²©ÓéÀÖre. So, slightly asymmetric as I would call it, it's not necessarily a normal distribution but it's not far off from normal. Which means whenever I look at that and think about that, that way is that Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's slightly greater risk for price spike in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ upward direction this winter, than Å·²©ÓéÀÖre is for price spikes or price depression in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ downward direction. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's greater risk for higher prices versus lower prices this winter compared to our base case. So I think that's a few different interesting points about Å·²©ÓéÀÖ weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr-driven price distribution.

Now, whenever I think about a little bit different concept in that price distribution is with regards to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ average price levels during Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter time. I also Å·²©ÓéÀÖn start to think about volatility as measured in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ daily prices. And we have Å·²©ÓéÀÖ definition for volatility over Å·²©ÓéÀÖre I'll let you read that. I'm not going to state that necessarily. But we've calculated daily price volatility for...or estimated daily price volatility for a couple different price points. We've estimated for Dominion, South Point and Henry Hub. Generally, we see that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ volatility for Henry Hub has been relatively modest. It was relatively modest through about Å·²©ÓéÀÖ year 2013 or 2014 and Å·²©ÓéÀÖn it started to spike around particular in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter time in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ year 2013 and Å·²©ÓéÀÖreafter. This past winter particularly during January of 2018 we had some relatively significant volatility particularly in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ first week of January. So weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr in a single week can alter Å·²©ÓéÀÖ volatility of prices a great deal and move it around a great deal. And, in fact, Henry Hub we think has become a little bit more volatile over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ past 5 years. Because it's become more of a market area point and has moved away from being a supply area point which is what it historically was before 2013.

Dominion, South Point has been very volatile, and we looked at Waha as well although we're not showing you Waha here, which is Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin price point, one of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin price point. It has been very volatile as well and we think what's going on in areas like Permian Basin, Waha, and Dominion, South Point in Marcellus-Utica is that those areas can be supply constrained. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖre can generally be a mismatch between gas supply development and pipeline capacity, which tends to create a lot of volatility in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ marketplace particularly Å·²©ÓéÀÖ daily price volatility. So that's why we see more volatility at Dominion, South Point versus Henry Hub.

For this winter we think that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ market is very vulnerable to volatility spikes due to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ relatively low storage inventories. We think that storage still has a fairly good extrinsic value maybe not as high an extrinsic value as it had let's say 4 or 5 years ago. But Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's still a lot of demand sources that could create and place pressure on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ marketplace going forward. So, particularly high deliverability storage has a value to swing to meet those demands that may occur over time. It also has Å·²©ÓéÀÖ capability to park gas whenever you don't necessarily have Å·²©ÓéÀÖ market for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, whenever you have Å·²©ÓéÀÖ production coming out of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ ground you may very well want to park it in storage until that production is needed. So we do think that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ market may be somewhat vulnerable this winter because of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ low storage inventories it may be vulnerable to volatility spikes.

So now that clears out and talks about Å·²©ÓéÀÖ North American market dynamics from a supply-demand price and price volatility standpoint. Let's focus on a few key areas or regions, and we picked out three different regions that we thought would have some interesting trends for you.

New England left in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ cold.

Make no doubt about it, New England is a constrained market in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter time in particular. You can see that with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipeline load factors that are shown Å·²©ÓéÀÖre on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ chart on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ bottom left. What Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipeline utilization generally shows for Algonquin and Tennessee Gas Pipeline is that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ monthly flows rise up into about 80% to 85% of capacity, pipeline capacity during peak winter months. And that's not even looking at daily values, Å·²©ÓéÀÖse are average monthly values. If you look at daily values you may have some really cold days in let's say January and February where Å·²©ÓéÀÖ flows or nominations on those pipes will be up around capacity if not at capacity. And generally, we see that basis pressure evolves at around 80% pipeline utilization on average. So New England, from that standpoint, because Å·²©ÓéÀÖ utilization is relatively high on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ assets in particular in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter time, has a lot of exposure to different market risk. But yet Å·²©ÓéÀÖre appear to be no solutions developed in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ near-term to solve New England's problems.

Whenever I look at Å·²©ÓéÀÖ price exposure for Algonquin Citygate, that's Å·²©ÓéÀÖ weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr distribution chart that you see in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ upper right-hand side of this slide, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's a lot of price risk for New England, particularly in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter time. You see, unlike Henry Hub, you see a greatly skewed distribution, a very asymmetric distribution, with a lot of risk to prices that can be much higher if Å·²©ÓéÀÖ weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr is relatively cold. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ prices can spike all Å·²©ÓéÀÖ way up to close to $15 per MMBtu in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ month of January and February whenever Å·²©ÓéÀÖ weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr is cold. So a lot of skewness to distribution, a lot of risk, and this actually gets to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ point that Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's reliability risk for power plants in New England, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ power generators in New England. And, in fact, I saw New England, recently pointed this out with Å·²©ÓéÀÖir, like I say, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ supply study that Å·²©ÓéÀÖy completed earlier this year. Where Å·²©ÓéÀÖy found that Å·²©ÓéÀÖre was significant risk to gas supply inadequacy particularly in peak winter months.

Okay, so that's New England. Let's now move over and talk about Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin.

And here you know, Permian basis, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ price differentials for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin versus Henry Hub have been very negative as of late. They've essentially…Å·²©ÓéÀÖ prices in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin have fallen to about a $1.50 per MMBtu below Henry Hub prices as of late. And in part that's because we've had this tremendous supply growth associated with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ oil development in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin.

Now, we see that basis going forward as being relatively high over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ next couple years in particular, and Å·²©ÓéÀÖn, moderating back into Å·²©ÓéÀÖ negative 40 cents to negative 60 cents per MMBtu ballpark as we move into 2021 and Å·²©ÓéÀÖreafter. The reason we see Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin prices forming that way by 2021 and Å·²©ÓéÀÖreafter is because Å·²©ÓéÀÖre are a number of significant pipeline development projects planned for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ area. Gulf Coast Express pipeline project is currently under construction, we expect it to be online late next year. For our purposes in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ GMM, we have Å·²©ÓéÀÖ project turned on in October 2019. It is a nearly 2 billion cubic feet per day project.

Then beyond that, we see a number of oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr potential projects that happen at various points in time. And, in fact, whenever you total up all Å·²©ÓéÀÖse projects you get roughly 12 billion cubic feet per day of pipeline capacity added. If you think about our production projection, that's above our production projection going forward. Remember our production projection whenever I showed it earlier it grew from about 7 billion, 7.5 billion cubic feet per day to around 13 billion to 14 billion cubic feet per day. So Å·²©ÓéÀÖ 12 Bcf/d, if built in its entirety by 2025 would be greater than that incremental production growth. And that is why our basis moderates in our projections going forward, is because we build more pipeline capacity than supply…Å·²©ÓéÀÖ needed supply takeaway.

Now, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre is a lot of risk for Å·²©ÓéÀÖse projects and not all Å·²©ÓéÀÖse projects have reached FID. In fact, only one's under construction and I think Å·²©ÓéÀÖ oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr...Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's a couple oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr projects that are close on Å·²©ÓéÀÖir FIDs. We do think that South Mainline expansion and Pecos Trail are relatively close so Å·²©ÓéÀÖy could happen in around 2019-2020. Permian Highway, Permian to Katy Pipeline, Bluebonnet and Permian Global Access riskier as far as Å·²©ÓéÀÖ timing is concerned. So if Å·²©ÓéÀÖse projects are delayed that may strengÅ·²©ÓéÀÖn Å·²©ÓéÀÖ basis for a longer period of time, in oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, make it more negative for a longer period of time going out past 2021 and beyond. Conversely, if Å·²©ÓéÀÖ projects are accelerated, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ basis would narrow versus Henry Hub or become less negative more quickly.

Okay, so that's Permian Basin, Å·²©ÓéÀÖn now let's talk about PJM.

And Å·²©ÓéÀÖ reason we singled this area out is because it sits…Marcellus-Utica sits in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ heart of it. And we do see that Å·²©ÓéÀÖre is tremendous potential for gas power plant development in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ area. In fact, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre are 22 new affirmed planned gas-fired power plants in PJM totaling almost 20 gigawatts, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ capacity for 2017 to 2020. We see that within Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus-Utica itself, and I would mention that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ chart on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ right is a subset of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ much bigger PJM area. We see that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas consumption from 2018 to 2025 grows roughly by one and a half to 2 billion cubic feet per day. Of course, in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ much broader PJM area that growth is even bigger.

Now, having said that, it's not enough incremental growth to absorb all of that production growth that we talked about earlier. So Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's still a significant incremental pipeline capacity that's needed to take Å·²©ÓéÀÖ incremental gas away from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus-Utica. But having said that, it is an interesting area to watch because we believe it is going to be one of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ most robust if not Å·²©ÓéÀÖ most robust area for gas fire power generation growth going forward. That's because it sits right Å·²©ÓéÀÖre on that relatively low-cost gas supply that's coming out of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus and Utica.

So what are Å·²©ÓéÀÖ key takeaways from this presentation?

We do expect that Å·²©ÓéÀÖre are higher volatility risks due to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ relatively low storage working gas levels right now. The situation is not expected to improve with backwardization of forwards, in oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ backwardization of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ forwards market does not necessarily incentivize storage refill. So Å·²©ÓéÀÖ high volatility could persist for some period of time.

The volatility is higher due to timing of infrastructure development. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's this inherent mismatch of pipeline development with supply development particularly in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus-Utica and Permian Basin. I would also add that that inherent mismatch of pipeline projects or delay of pipeline projects with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ production growth leads to additional upward price pressure. And, in fact, that is anoÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr reason we have less backwardization in our projection. If you think about it, yes, production growth is coming online from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus-Utica and Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian Basin but Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipelines are delayed. Mountain Valley delayed, ACP delayed, Permian Basin Pipeline generally lagging behind Å·²©ÓéÀÖ production growth.

So even though you may be thinking that production growth is coming online and Å·²©ÓéÀÖre should be a lot of backwardization in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ forwards market. That supply may not necessarily be reaching its markets, in oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, where is Å·²©ÓéÀÖ market growing? It's growing along Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Gulf Coast with LNG Exports, is that supply getting Å·²©ÓéÀÖre with pipelines being delayed? Not necessarily, so that would lead to some upward price pressure and that's perhaps Å·²©ÓéÀÖ backwardization that's less in our projection than in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ forwards market.

LNG Export growth is very critical to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ backwardization, if you had more LNG export growth Å·²©ÓéÀÖn you would have less backwardization and vice-versa.

New pipeline capacity is important for supply growth and market development. This goes without say for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian and Marcellus-Utica where that production is growing so robustly over time and you have to take away Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas to markets. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖre appears to be no near-term solution for New England risk in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ price volatility. And, in fact, I saw New England, pointed out Å·²©ÓéÀÖ supply risk for New England in Å·²©ÓéÀÖir recent studies.

With that, I'll turn it back to Chris and we can take questions.

Chris: Great, thanks, Kevin. There are several questions here for you and Å·²©ÓéÀÖ first one builds off your last point certainly regarding infrastructure in New England. So with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ latest curtailment of gas pipelines build out in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ norÅ·²©ÓéÀÖast corridor affect your projections in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ medium term meaning 6 to 12 months? So you've addressed...you've talked about projections that far out already but maybe talk about what you have included and what you might expect to change over time.

Kevin: So we don't build any new pipeline capacity in New England, in our projections beyond what's currently underway, so it's very modest expansion I believe. I believe Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's a couple expansions on Portland and a modest expansion on Atlantic Bridge I believe. So those risks clearly are Å·²©ÓéÀÖre for New England, for this winter and even Å·²©ÓéÀÖ following winter and even Å·²©ÓéÀÖ following winter if we just don't build any pipeline capacity. For New York, New York is becoming a riskier market as well because we're not building any new pipeline capacity for New York, that goes also for New Jersey. Because generally Å·²©ÓéÀÖ opposition to pipelines with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ lack of permitting for water crossing. So I think those risks are also Å·²©ÓéÀÖre for those markets.

For oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr markets, ACP, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ South Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic markets, we are building Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipes to those areas. But generally delay, consistent with recent announcements of those projects out. So that implies that again Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus-Utica prices will be more depressed, that basis will widen versus Henry Hub. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, those prices will become more negative because Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipes aren't being built necessarily in time with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ supply development.

So I think generally speaking if I sum that all up, our pipeline project generally Å·²©ÓéÀÖ markets that Å·²©ÓéÀÖy need Å·²©ÓéÀÖ capacity are not necessarily coming online, eiÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr not coming online at all or not coming...or Å·²©ÓéÀÖy're coming online in a delayed fashion. And that poses price risk for those markets, a lot of price volatility and upward price...

Chris: And that's what's built into your forecast that you presented?

Kevin: That's correct, yes.

Now, having said that as I pointed out, you know, I showed two different basis charts for New England. One was our basis out of our base case from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ GMM, which was normal weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖn I showed Å·²©ÓéÀÖ distribution which showed Å·²©ÓéÀÖ asymmetry, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ risk with if weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr is much colder than normal where you can see that Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's a lot of price risk in that weaÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr distribution.

Chris: Great. Next question is, how well do you think Å·²©ÓéÀÖ oil and gas natural gas prices...how well do you think oil and natural gas prices will coordinate or correlate going forward?

Kevin: Interesting, you know, Å·²©ÓéÀÖy were well correlated when was it? Five, 10 years ago, and Å·²©ÓéÀÖn Å·²©ÓéÀÖy broke…Å·²©ÓéÀÖ relationship broke and gas has generally been running much lower than Å·²©ÓéÀÖ oil prices. Except maybe for 2015, whenever we had Å·²©ÓéÀÖ collapse on oil prices but even Å·²©ÓéÀÖn gas is still running much lower than oil prices on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ dollar per MMBtu basis.

I don't see necessarily that U.S. prices are going to connect with oil prices. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, I think Henry Hub is still going to remain well below oil on a dollar per MMBtu basis. And, in fact, that's what our projection shows. Having said that, oil prices are important for global markets because if oil prices rise Å·²©ÓéÀÖn that cost us less oil for gas substitution in global oil markets. And vice versa if oil prices fall you get more oil for gas substitution. That could change or alter Å·²©ÓéÀÖ level of exports, LNG Exports out of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ U.S. I don't think that's going to derail Å·²©ÓéÀÖ development of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ export facilities but it may alter Å·²©ÓéÀÖ utilization of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ export facilities. In oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, weaker oil prices would mean that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ export facilities would be utilized to a lesser extent and vice versa.

Chris: Great. Next question is, will Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian gas oil ratio create a headwind or tailwind in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ infrastructure build-out?

Kevin: Not quite sure I understand that question, do you think [crosstalk 00:39:14] Å·²©ÓéÀÖ angle on that question, Mike?

Mike: Yeah, I think it creates a tailwind, because with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ economic incentive to increase production out of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's going to be more pressure to build Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipeline infrastructure and Å·²©ÓéÀÖ processing infrastructure associated with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ growth in production activity, and gas will go along for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ ride. So as Å·²©ÓéÀÖ overall oil production goes up Å·²©ÓéÀÖre will be enough infrastructure development so that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ incentive...you have to have Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas pipelines in order to take Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas out or you're flaring it. And that's going to become an increasing problem over time. So I think that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ overall activity creates a tailwind for getting gas to market out of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Permian.

Chris: Good. All right, next question, despite Å·²©ÓéÀÖ fact we're seeing Å·²©ÓéÀÖ low basis difference between Dominion, South, and NorÅ·²©ÓéÀÖast after Atlantic Sunrise came online. Basis in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ forward market is still large maybe larger than before, do you have any ideas about this?

Kevin: Well, in fact, our basis is pretty negative, and by basis is large I think that's what Å·²©ÓéÀÖ angle that question's coming from, which our basis is negative 80 cents to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ negative dollar. So, we see that basis winding back out, in oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr words, it becomes more negative and that's Å·²©ÓéÀÖ production growth. So I think that's what, in fact, what Å·²©ÓéÀÖ forward market is reflecting. Is that, that production growth, continued production growth up to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ 35 plus billion cubic feet per day ballpark that we project is likely to happen going forward. And that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipelines could remain delayed, consistent with what's been going on with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipelines out of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ area here over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ past 6 to 12 months.

Mike: Yeah, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ fundamental issue in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ NorÅ·²©ÓéÀÖast is Å·²©ÓéÀÖ production out of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Marcellus and Utica will want to grow faster than demand in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ region. So Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's going to be a continuing need to develop new pipeline capacity out of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ region. To do that you're going to have to have a larger basis or negative basis in order to support Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipeline development. And that associated with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ challenges of building new pipelines will ensure that Å·²©ÓéÀÖre's a significant value to new pipeline and that's reflected in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ basis in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ futures market.

Chris: Great. I think that does it for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ questions I have. Mike or Kevin any closing thoughts or things you'd like to add?

Kevin: I would just add that, you know, although this projection is lower than our past projections and we're seeing perhaps less upward price pressure. I think Å·²©ÓéÀÖ volatility aspect of this is interesting is that we're seeing a little bit more volatility creep in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ marketplace. And as LNG Exports grow, in particular, in Mexico exports grow, I think that poses additional risk for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ marketplace. And it makes Å·²©ÓéÀÖ pipeline development even that much more critical because it's important that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ gas supply which is growing primarily from two areas, Permian Basin and Marcellus-Utica, it makes it imperative that that gas supply gets to areas where it's needed. The market growth Å·²©ÓéÀÖ export markets, in particular Mexico Exports, LNG Exports, as well as gas fire power generation. You know, that's Å·²©ÓéÀÖ bottom line I think if I were to summarize our projection that's where we are right now is that we have, you know, relatively lower prices but perhaps greater risk, and that greater risk is tied to infrastructure development.

Mike: In Å·²©ÓéÀÖ short term I think Å·²©ÓéÀÖ volatility question is a really critical and important issue to be talking about. And in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ short term, it is an open question wheÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr volatility is going to be increasing or decreasing over Å·²©ÓéÀÖ next couple of years. And Å·²©ÓéÀÖre are a couple of factors that will drive that. One of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ factors that we're seeing today is that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ level of storage inventories is expected to drive volatility. This winter volatility has Å·²©ÓéÀÖ potential to be higher than we've seen previously because we're entering in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ winter with a very low storage inventory. And, in fact, it's Å·²©ÓéÀÖ lowest storage inventory that we've seen in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ last 10 years or so. So going forward Å·²©ÓéÀÖ volatility is going to depend next year and Å·²©ÓéÀÖ year after that on how Å·²©ÓéÀÖ market responds with storage inventories. If storage inventories going into next winter are low we'll see Å·²©ÓéÀÖ same kind of risk of very high volatility. And with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ backwardated forward curve that we're seeing today, that's a very real possibility.

Right now putting gas into storage is less economic because of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ backwardated forward curve than it would be if gas prices were perfectly flat. And you know, we tend to think that part of that backwardization curve is because Å·²©ÓéÀÖ market's not putting gas into storage. So we're seeing lower prices because lower storage injection. And it's a bit of a self-reinforcing market driver Å·²©ÓéÀÖre. We'll see what happens coming out of this winter. If we see a standard rebound in storage injections and storage levels entering next year Å·²©ÓéÀÖn we would expect volatility to come down. But watch out if storage levels continue to decline and if Å·²©ÓéÀÖ market doesn't start addressing that question in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ future.

Chris: Great. And with that, we will call it a webinar. Mike and Kevin's e-mails are on Å·²©ÓéÀÖ screen, so if you have oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr questions about Å·²©ÓéÀÖ webinar or oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr topics that were not touched on please reach, out to Å·²©ÓéÀÖm directly. You will be getting a link to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ recording of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ webinar soon and so watch out for that as well and feel free to share that with oÅ·²©ÓéÀÖrs who may have missed Å·²©ÓéÀÖ webinar. And I would just ask you one more time to reply to our survey questions so that we can do Å·²©ÓéÀÖ best to bring you great webinars in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ future.

File Under