NY Times October 21, 2013
An Odd Alliance in Patagonia
By SIMON ROMERO and CLIFFORD KRAUSS

NEUQUÉN, Argentina — On the windswept Patagonian steppe, crews of 
roughnecks are drilling around the clock in pursuit of a vast shale oil 
reservoir that might be the world’s next great oil field.

But that ambition hinges on an improbable alliance between the American 
oil giant Chevron and Argentina, a politically volatile country with a 
history of hostility toward foreign investors. What brings them together 
is the dream of an enormous bounty from the field, called Vaca Muerta, 
or Dead Cow.

President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner’s decision to press ahead with 
the partnership with Chevron has her critics and supporters fuming 
because of the company’s long conflict with Ecuador over an Amazon 
pollution case. Other legal battles are raging over Argentina’s 
nationalization of its largest oil company, which also threaten to 
entangle Chevron.

And protests against hydraulic fracturing, the high pressure blasting of 
water and chemicals through the shale fields here in the Patagonian 
desert, have grown so fierce that the police have cracked down on 
thousands of demonstrators with tear gas and rubber bullets. Though 
Chevron is not directly involved in the fracturing, the popular 
agitation over the company’s venture here may subject other energy 
initiatives in this remote region to greater scrutiny.

Mrs. Kirchner’s embrace of Chevron is a striking demonstration of the 
lengths to which some governments, desperate for money, and energy 
companies, combing the world for new sources of oil, will go to emulate 
the shale oil revolution in the United States.

And few fields offer the potential riches of Vaca Muerta, which has 
estimated oil and gas reserves nearly equal to the total reserves of the 
oil giant Exxon Mobil.

“There is nothing close to this in the world,” Ali Moshiri, president of 
Chevron’s Africa-Latin America Exploration and Production, said of Vaca 
Muerta in an interview. “In our business risk is part of the equation.”

Even with her health in doubt, after surgery this month to drain a blood 
clot that resulted from a head injury, Mrs. Kirchner has shown that she 
is willing to turn her back on years of economic policies that 
discouraged some energy investments. In the process, she is testing 
relations with her Ecuadorean ally, President Rafael Correa, who is 
trying to get Chevron to pay $19 billion in damages related to oil 
pollution in the Amazon rain forest.

Chevron’s assets in Argentina were frozen for months last year as the 
Ecuadorean plaintiffs in the case began increasing pressure on the 
company outside Ecuador. Chevron not only continued to operate in 
Argentina after that initial scare, but also opted to aggressively 
expand here, reflecting a vital need by big oil companies to find new 
oil reserves even in the most politically unstable places.

The United States Energy Information Administration has ranked Argentina 
fourth behind Russia, the United States and China in the world, with 
technically recoverable shale oil reserves of 27 billion barrels. And it 
ranks Argentina second after China in potentially recoverable shale gas 
reserves, with 802 trillion cubic feet. But as in many countries outside 
the United States, shale development in Argentina had progressed at a 
snail’s pace until now because of resistance and regulatory uncertainty. 
Local opposition among environmentalists and Mapuche Indians remains fierce.

“This is the worst form of extracting oil by the company with the worst 
record,” said Enrique Viale, the president of the Argentina Association 
of Environmental Lawyers, who took part in a protest of thousands 
against the agreement with Chevron in August when legislators were 
voting on it. Some buildings in Buenos Aires, the capital, remain 
covered in anti-Chevron graffiti. A rap video on social media in 
Argentina excoriates the authorities for working with Chevron.

Despite all the friction, Chevron took the leap a year ago with a 
tentative partnership agreement with YPF, the Argentine oil company that 
is now controlled by the government, to help develop part of Vaca 
Muerta. In control of a third of the field, YPF is also preparing 
agreements with several other companies including Bridas Corporation, a 
venture including the China National Offshore Oil Corporation, or Cnooc.

Chevron initially plans to invest $1.24 billion for the drilling of more 
than 100 wells, and if all goes well, the Chevron-YPF venture would 
drill an additional 1,500 wells by 2017, requiring more than $17 billion 
in investment. That could raise production to 50,000 barrels of oil and 
three million cubic meters of gas a day over 35 years.

Few companies have had the moxie to wager so much since Argentina 
defaulted on its $81 billion sovereign debt in 2001. President Kirchner 
renationalized YPF last year, and has yet to compensate the Spanish oil 
company Repsol any money for its controlling interest, which Repsol says 
was worth $10.5 billion.

Pointing to these challenges, Miguel Galuccio, the chief executive of 
YPF, insisted in an interview that the future of Argentina’s economy 
depends on YPF’s ability to develop the nation’s shale oil resources.

Surprising critics of Mrs. Kirchner who expected her to politicize YPF, 
as her government had done with other state-controlled companies, Mr. 
Galuccio seems to have taken a different approach. He has hired 
respected managers and petroleum engineers, many of them Argentines who 
were living abroad, to fill YPF’s top ranks. And he has begun to reverse 
a decline in YPF’s production, repositioning the company to focus on 
fracturing in Neuquén which he argues will not jeopardize local water 
supplies.

In the interview, he lauded Chevron for its partnership with YPF, saying 
he was well aware of the risks, including Chevron’s legal battles in 
Ecuador, which persist. “This brings a level of complexity I’d like not 
to have,” he said. “We need more Chevrons in Argentina.”

Facing a potential financial crisis, the Argentine government reversed 
course on energy policy in recent months as it has often done in the past.

It is now allowing companies to sell gas at a higher fixed price, and in 
a move especially for Chevron, Mrs. Kirchner recently issued a decree 
allowing oil and gas companies to sell 20 percent of their production 
abroad without paying export taxes or obligations to repatriate profits 
— as long as they invest more than $1 billion in the country.

Still, Chevron faces enduring problems in Argentina, highlighted by 
pressure from the country’s most influential journalist, Jorge Lanata, 
an outspoken critic of Mrs. Kirchner who has been attacking Chevron’s 
record in Ecuador.

Soon after Chevron and YPF signed their initial deal in 2012, two lower 
courts threatened the arrangement by freezing part of Chevron 
Argentina’s assets in the country so they might eventually be sold to 
pay the Ecuadoreans who are suing Chevron.

Lawyers representing Ecuadorean Amazon Indians won a judgment in a local 
Ecuadorean court ordering Chevron to pay more than $18 billion in 
damages for the dumping of toxic waste into a vast area of Amazon jungle 
by Texaco in the 1970s before it was acquired by Chevron years later. 
(Chevron insists that Texaco cleaned up its area of operations and 
subsequent pollution was caused by PetroEcuador, the state company that 
once partnered with Texaco.)

Since Chevron has no assets in Ecuador, the plaintiffs are trying to 
collect on the judgment in Canada, Brazil and Argentina, where Chevron 
subsidiaries have significant holdings.

When the case reached the Argentine Supreme Court, Mrs. Kirchner threw 
her support behind Chevron despite the lobbying of President Correa of 
Ecuador, an ally who has publicly declared that the oil company is an 
enemy of his country. Her attorney general filed a brief with the court 
arguing that the Ecuadorean judgment could not be enforced against 
Chevron Argentina since the subsidiary could not defend itself in the 
Ecuadorean proceeding, warning that the Supreme Court needed to act to 
avoid “irreparable and irreversible harm to essential national interests.”

The Supreme Court agreed with the government in a June decision, opening 
the way to the final Chevron-YPF agreement signing in July. But lawyers 
for the Ecuadorean Indians say they are not finished in Argentina.

The lawyers said that the Supreme Court decision was merely a technical 
problem that could easily be corrected by returning to the Ecuadorean 
courts in the coming months to file a petition seeking to execute the 
original judgment against Chevron Argentina and possibly other foreign 
subsidiaries. Once they succeed, they say, they will demand that 
Argentine courts accept the Ecuadorean judgment under reciprocal legal 
treaties.

“I am certain the case is still alive in Argentina, of course,” said 
Pablo Fajardo, the lead Ecuadorean lawyer. “I believe the Supreme Court 
in Argentina made a mistake and should correct it. I have confidence in 
their judges.”

Kent Robertson, a Chevron spokesman, responded: “They have demonstrated 
they can get whatever they want in Ecuador. It doesn’t mean they can 
collect. There has been no trial against Chevron Argentina.”

Argentine oil officials said that the Chevron-YPF deal will shield the 
American company from financial loss connected to a change in the 
political winds. After the company invests $1.2 billion, 18 months later 
it can withdraw from operations without penalty and continue to receive 
net profits of 50 percent of the production from the initial wells in 
perpetuity.

Mr. Moshiri of Chevron said he was not focused on the Ecuador case. 
“That’s a separate issue unrelated to what we are doing in Argentina and 
in the Vaca Muerta,” he said. “We are just going to continue with our 
business. Chevron Argentina has nothing to do with it.”

Still, the legal battle is just one of the obstacles that both companies 
face.

“We’ll continue our fight to defend the land, the water and the air,” 
said Lefxaru Nahuel, 26, a Mapuche in Patagonia who has been leading 
protests. “With fracking, there is no future for us here.”

Simon Romero reported from Neuquén, Argentina, and Clifford Krauss from 
Houston. Jonathan Gilbert contributed reporting from Buenos Aires.


_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to