Cenovus Energy Inc
NYSE:CVE
| US |
|
Johnson & Johnson
NYSE:JNJ
|
Pharmaceuticals
|
| US |
|
Berkshire Hathaway Inc
NYSE:BRK.A
|
Financial Services
|
| US |
|
Bank of America Corp
NYSE:BAC
|
Banking
|
| US |
|
Mastercard Inc
NYSE:MA
|
Technology
|
| US |
|
Abbvie Inc
NYSE:ABBV
|
Biotechnology
|
| US |
|
Pfizer Inc
NYSE:PFE
|
Pharmaceuticals
|
| US |
|
Palantir Technologies Inc
NYSE:PLTR
|
Technology
|
| US |
|
Nike Inc
NYSE:NKE
|
Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods
|
| US |
|
Visa Inc
NYSE:V
|
Technology
|
| CN |
|
Alibaba Group Holding Ltd
NYSE:BABA
|
Retail
|
| US |
|
3M Co
NYSE:MMM
|
Industrial Conglomerates
|
| US |
|
JPMorgan Chase & Co
NYSE:JPM
|
Banking
|
| US |
|
Coca-Cola Co
NYSE:KO
|
Beverages
|
| US |
|
Realty Income Corp
NYSE:O
|
Real Estate
|
| US |
|
Walt Disney Co
NYSE:DIS
|
Media
|
| US |
|
PayPal Holdings Inc
NASDAQ:PYPL
|
Technology
|
If you don’t study any companies, you have the same success buying stocks as you do in a poker game if you bet without looking at your cards.
Utilize notes to systematically review your investment decisions. By reflecting on past outcomes, you can discern effective strategies and identify those that underperformed. This continuous feedback loop enables you to adapt and refine your approach, optimizing for future success.
Each note serves as a learning point, offering insights into your decision-making processes. Over time, you'll accumulate a personalized database of knowledge, enhancing your ability to make informed decisions quickly and effectively.
With a comprehensive record of your investment history at your fingertips, you can compare current opportunities against past experiences. This not only bolsters your confidence but also ensures that each decision is grounded in a well-documented rationale.
Do you really want to delete this note?
This action cannot be undone.
| 52 Week Range |
14.9
21.8
|
| Price Target |
|
We'll email you a reminder when the closing price reaches USD.
Choose the stock you wish to monitor with a price alert.
|
|
Johnson & Johnson
NYSE:JNJ
|
US |
|
|
Berkshire Hathaway Inc
NYSE:BRK.A
|
US |
|
|
Bank of America Corp
NYSE:BAC
|
US |
|
|
Mastercard Inc
NYSE:MA
|
US |
|
|
Abbvie Inc
NYSE:ABBV
|
US |
|
|
Pfizer Inc
NYSE:PFE
|
US |
|
|
Palantir Technologies Inc
NYSE:PLTR
|
US |
|
|
Nike Inc
NYSE:NKE
|
US |
|
|
Visa Inc
NYSE:V
|
US |
|
|
Alibaba Group Holding Ltd
NYSE:BABA
|
CN |
|
|
3M Co
NYSE:MMM
|
US |
|
|
JPMorgan Chase & Co
NYSE:JPM
|
US |
|
|
Coca-Cola Co
NYSE:KO
|
US |
|
|
Realty Income Corp
NYSE:O
|
US |
|
|
Walt Disney Co
NYSE:DIS
|
US |
|
|
PayPal Holdings Inc
NASDAQ:PYPL
|
US |
This alert will be permanently deleted.
You don't have any saved screeners yet
Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to Cenovus Energy's First Quarter 2018 Financial and Operating Results. As a reminder, today's call is being recorded. [Operator Instructions] Please be advised that this conference call may not be recorded or rebroadcast without the express consent of Cenovus Energy.I'd now like to turn the conference call over to Mr. Kam Sandhar, Senior Vice President, Strategy and Corporate Development. Please go ahead, Mr. Sandhar.
Thank you, operator, and welcome, everyone, to our first quarter 2018 results conference call. I'd like to refer you to the advisories located at the end of today's news release. These advisories describe the forward-looking information, non-GAAP measures and oil and gas terms referred to today, and outline the risk factors and assumptions relevant to this discussion. Additional information is available in our annual MD&A and the most recent annual information form and Form 40-F.The quarterly results have been presented in Canadian dollars and on a before royalties basis.We've also posted our results on our website at cenovus.com.Alex Pourbaix, our President and Chief Executive Officer, will provide brief comments, and then we will turn to Q&A portion of the call with Cenovus' leadership team. Please go ahead, Alex.
Thanks, Kam. Let me first begin by addressing the obvious. This was a challenging quarter for us financially. Our results were significantly impacted by sizable hedging losses, the widest light-heavy oil differentials we've seen since late 2013 and one of the largest maintenance turnarounds ever executed at our jointly owned refineries. I want to be clear that these are temporary, not structural financial challenges, and they are not indicative of our future potential to generate funds flow and earnings. As a company that's primarily focused on the oil sands, we're in this business for the long-term, and 1 quarter alone does not represent the strength of our company.For example, in the first quarter, we can attribute over $600 million to hedging losses, increased downstream operating costs associated with turnarounds at our refineries and onetime severance. That's without considering the loss of refining revenues associated with plant maintenance. You should also note the sensitivity provided in our guidance document indicating that with every $1 decrease in WTI/WCS differentials, we expect $80 million of increased annual adjusted funds flow. We have seen differentials narrow in April.Our oil sands and Deep Basin operations were very strong in the first 3 months of the year. I really want to emphasize again that our financial results are not a reflection of our operational performance.I joined Cenovus 6 months ago because I believe the company has top-tier assets, and I saw the opportunity to generate significant value for shareholders. What I've seen over the last 2 quarters has only reinforced that belief. These assets live up to their reputation and continue to perform very well.As you saw on the operational update we released last month, we responded to wider price differentials and transportation constraints in Q1 by temporarily slowing production at our Foster Creek and Christina Lake oil sands projects while maintaining steam injection to continue mobilizing oil. That enabled us to take advantage of our significant capacity to store mobilized oil in the reservoir to be produced when prices improved at a later date. And that's exactly what we did.As heavy oil prices improved in late March and into April, we ramped oil sands production back up to normal levels. It is a great example of our ability to adapt to changing market conditions. Despite the temporary pullback in production in the first quarter, we still expect our oil sands volumes for the year to be within our original guidance of 364,000 to 382,000 barrels per day. The volatile price discounts we face for our oil will continue to be an issue that we monitor and manage until new pipelines are brought into service and crude-by-rail activity increases. In the meantime, should the need arise again, we have the option of managing our production levels to achieve optimum pricing as we did in the first quarter.To help alleviate transportation congestion, we're also working to increase our ability to ship more barrels through our Bruderheim oil-by-rail facility, which has a capacity of 100,000 barrels per day. As part of these efforts, we're actively negotiating with rail providers to gain better access to locomotive hauling capacity and track space. We expect the rail situation to improve in Alberta in the second half of 2018, but ultimately, what we need is new pipelines.I want to take a moment to address this critical market access issue. Cenovus will continue to work with industry and government to get the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project built. This pipeline has all of its approvals and has been determined to be in the national interest. This has moved beyond an oil industry issue and is putting in question whether Canada is open for business.Back to our operations. In the Deep Basin, we executed our winter program and have substantially completed our planned capital spend for the year. I know there's a lot of interest in our potential divestitures in the Deep Basin. This Clearwater sale process is proceeding as expected with good interest from capable and qualified buyers. For the broader Deep Basin, we have been evaluating all of our assets in an effort to streamline and focus our portfolio, maximize value and accelerate our deleveraging plan. We expect to have additional divestitures in 2018, assuming we realize value that makes sense for our shareholders.In the downstream side of our business, planned turnarounds were substantially completed in Q1 at the Wood River and Borger refineries, which we jointly own with the operator, Phillips 66. For Wood River, it was the first major turnaround on the new coker project since it was completed in 2011. Both refineries are now back to planned operating levels.As I mentioned earlier, we recorded sizable realized risk management losses in the first quarter of $469 million. This was largely the result of hedging about 80% of our 2018 forecast liquids production for the first half of this year in order to support the company's financial resilience and ensure downside price protection as we work to deleverage our balance sheet. These hedging decisions were made in mid-2017 in a lower commodity price market, before we had certainty around the timing and amount of proceeds from planned divestitures. In the second half of 2018, our hedging commitments dropped off significantly to just under 40% of forecast oil production. Going forward, the company will not implement hedging program on the same scale as we did in the first half of 2018. The best protection for exposure to a volatile commodity price is a strong balance sheet, and that will be our focus. I want to reiterate that despite the financial challenges we face in the first quarter, our facilities in our subsurface performance were exceptional and we expect that to continue.Before we conclude, I'd like to thank Ivor Ruste, our Chief Financial Officer, for all his contributions to Cenovus. Ivor will be retiring at the end this month, and I wish him all the best in his well-earned retirement.Jon McKenzie will be starting at Cenovus next week as our new CFO. Jon has over 20 years’ experience in the energy industry and a diverse background in both finance and operations.I've made a lot of changes in the company since I joined, and going forward, we're going to be focus on stabilizing our organization and engaging our workforce to generate shareholder value.With that, the Cenovus leadership team is ready to take questions.
[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of Greg Pardy with RBC Capital Markets.
Just a couple I want to hit on. The -- you touched on your hedging policy and approach and so forth. I guess, what caught me a little bit is that you've got hedges in[Audio Gap]2019, albeit [indiscernible] about '19.
Sure. I think I've been pretty clear, and you heard me mention it again in my prepared notes, but I really do believe that the best defense for a volatile commodity is a strong balance sheet. And my view is as we get to the balance sheet to the level where I expect it to be, our shareholders should expect to see a much more conservative hedging program. And I would also say that from -- as I've sort of been here for 6 months, I think it's really important, on the hedging strategy, on a go-forward basis, we're going to be more conservative, as I said. I think that going forward, I would also -- our shareholders should not expect us to be hedging significant volumes just WTI or Brent. I think there may be elements of that in our hedging strategy. But I think with the dislocation in correlation between WTI, Brent and WCS, I really don't think we're achieving risk reduction by doing that. So you see a very small collar position in 2019, but I wouldn't expect to see a lot more of that type of activity going forward.
Okay. Great. And second one is, I mean, no impact, obviously, on cash or value per se. But what is the $100 million impairment, just say, about Clearwater?
Hi, Greg. Ivor Ruste here. I think we're required, for accounting purposes, to have a look at the recoverable value of all those assets. That the impairment charge went against the assets we're retaining in the Deep Basin, which are naturally gas -- natural gas primarily focused. And we bought those assets back in 2017 assuming a $3 natural gas price. We're required -- we used stripped pricing at the end of the first quarter to do the recoverable value test at March 31. And then the case of the gas price has actually gone down 7% from the end of December. So we're -- that's where the margin decline went on those assets. And again, natural gas prices, as you know forward, long-term natural gas prices have come down that much, 7%., in the quarter.
Okay. Great. But obviously, nothing to read into in terms of the disposition process, which I think you've already answered.
That's correct.
Your next question comes from the line of Ben Wong with Morgan Stanley.
Hey., Alex, was wondering if you could give us an update on your targeted cost reduction. Maybe some color for how the progress is in each bucket? And if you see any upside in any of those?
Sure. Thanks, Benny. I think if you look at our corporate deck, you can see, and if you look at our -- the guidance that we put forward and we have added to, you can see where we've got to in terms of our sustaining capital, operating costs. I think that we have -- still have material opportunity to reduce operating costs in the Deep Basin. And I think one of the things you're going to see with this plan, streamlining of the Deep Basin, is fewer, more geographically concentrated areas of focus with -- and a lot of what I hope to achieve here is the ability, ultimately, going forward, to move a lot more of our own barrels to our underutilized facilities, which should go a long way to helping the per barrel cost on the Deep Basin. With respect to the oil sands, as I said, I think you can see in our guidance where we think we expect to get to. I think that's industry-leading. We probably have a little bit of opportunity to continue to drive cost savings at Foster Creek. Christina Lake is already, I would argue, best-in-class. And if you look at sustaining capital on Christina G, we are -- we really think we are delivering probably at or near the very top of the best capital performance that we think any, say, the company has delivered. So that's kind of that side. On the G&A side, I've obviously made very significant changes corporately. We've reduced our headcount already by about 15%. I think there will probably continue[Audio Gap]once again, when I compare our non-rent G&A to our peers. I think that is actually a pretty good story right now. So I think there's some more to come. Hopefully, we're going to be able to sublease some of this excess office space that is presently an overhang for us. And to the extent we do that, that also will obviously go to our G&A bottom line.
Great. Appreciate that color. And just in regards to your prior operational update, I think it was mentioned you guys are looking at opportunities to optimize oil sands maintenance. Is that just in referring to dialing up volumes up and down in response to differentials? Or are there anything else that you guys are looking at? And if you can, can you give us an update of what -- where your current maintenance schedule stands right now?
Yes. Sure, Benny. It's Drew here. I'll just give you a quick update. So the operational update we gave here a number of weeks back has basically turned out exactly as planned. We are back up to full rates now. During that time, though, we actually did do some maintenance and took one of the HRSGs down at Christina, as an example, and did some maintenance on it. We have been reviewing whether we're going to move our current budgeted and planned turnaround at Christina Lake that's kind of scheduled for late Q3 September time frame. We have reviewed and we have moved some of that maintenance here into the spring but we are going to still plan to run that turnaround in September as originally budgeted and planned, and it's all within guidance. What we see happening here in May and June in Alberta is probably the biggest single turnaround season that I think we've probably ever experienced in Western Canada. So right now, we think that there's going to be some substantial volume come off the market here in May-June. And the amount of activity and service level availability is going to be pretty stretched. And so we're going to stick with our current plan and budget of September for Christina Lake.
Your next question comes from the line of Phil Gresh with JPMorgan.
First question is just on your production management strategy that you executed in the first quarter. Just wondering, longer term, if we get to a wider differential scenario in the second half of the year once we bypass this big industry maintenance that you're just referring to, how much capacity do you have to execute on a strategy like this? And how long can you maintain it without causing any reservoir issues?
Yes. Thanks, Phil. It's Drew again. So this is the first time we've probably done this on a kind of prolonged period of time, like 1.5 months, so to speak. We've obviously done this quite a bit when we had normal turnaround activity over the last number of years. So going forward here, we dialed down upwards of 70,000 to 80,000 barrels a day here over certain weeks. I think a comfortable range for us is probably better -- closer to the 30,000 to 50,000 barrels a day and -- because then we can actually truly target different pad configurations in Foster Creek and Christina and -- but again, from a timing standpoint, we'd react and be able to do this like quarter-to-quarter. And so with that, we don't see any fundamental risk in the reservoirs at all if you just look at it from a month-to-month basis. And in that kind of volume range, we're able to move to different parts of pads in different parts of the reservoirs to manage that type of volume for a longer period of time. But again, you're only going to do this on a month-to-month basis in certain pads. But we think it's a great new tool for us now to respond to different pricing environments. And as the markets move, obviously we've proven to ourselves, and hopefully the markets' realizing that we have some elasticity in production volume coming out of the oil sands and we've got a great tool now in our toolkit to use.
Phil, it's Alex. And just one comment I should mention. When Drew is talking like that, 70,000 barrels, you're talking blend as opposed to just pure bitumen.
Yes.
Okay. Got it. Second question was, I saw some recent news flow about Cenovus looking for a partner to help fund infrastructure spending at Narrows Lake. So I just wanted an update as to where you stand in Narrows Lake. Is this a project that you'd be considering sanctioning at some point soon? And I'm just trying to tie this back to your cash flow and balance sheet priorities, where you stand today.
Sure. Phil, it's Alex. I mean, here's, I think, the number one most important point. Regardless of what other opportunity or values of future developments might bring to Cenovus, we will not be considering any material new additions until we have -- until we see clear line of sight to increase pipeline takeaway capacity out of the province. And so that would be number one. And number two is any of those development opportunities have to wait for material improvement in our balance sheet. We think we're going to start seeing that material improvement as these hedges roll off. And I think the market starts to see the true cash flow-generating capability of the company absent these onetime items. But all -- whether it's Foster H or Narrows, they're all going to wait for pipeline certainty and for a stronger balance sheet.
That actually just led to my next question, which was if you run the numbers at the strip, just curious how you think about when you might hit that target leverage level of some 2x?
Sure. I continue to think that 2x is kind of the minimum -- the point at which I think we get our leverage to the level which I really think we start having some options. I think my preference would probably ultimately be to be in mid-cycle pricing to probably be lower than 2. But 2 is the point at which we have options. And when I -- we obviously don't give guidance on our cash flow. But I note that the consensus among our analysts is that in 2018, give or take, at a $60 WTI and a high-teens WCS, we are producing -- sorry, 2019, we -- our analysts would expect that we'll be producing over $3 billion of adjusted funds flow and somewhere north of $1 billion of free cash flow. And at that level, and if all we do is in terms of asset divestitures, as the East Clearwater divestiture, then I think it is entirely achievable that we can get to that 2.0 threshold by the end of next year.
Okay. Last question is just on the comment that the refineries are running back at normal speed right now. But I know there's also been some news out there about order and that there's some timing factors on that start up at the sulfur recovery unit, is it's impacting product deliveries. I also believe I've heard it might even be affecting the refinery run. So I just wanted to just follow-up on that point very quickly.
Yes. Thanks for the question, Phil. It's Keith Chiasson. Obviously, both refineries went through some very major turnarounds in the quarter. Wood River had the largest refinery turnaround in its history and the first since starting up the coker units in 2011. Just to give some context, over 3,900 people at the Wood River refinery and 2,500 people at the Borger refinery turnaround. Wood River finished on schedule and on budget. Borger had a little bit of startup challenges with some foaming and the aiming system. They flushed that and are now nearing normal operation rates.
Your next question comes from the line of Neil Mehta with Goldman Sachs.
Alex, you got a unique perspective on takeaway and market access given your background. But just curious in your thoughts with the Enbridge Line 3, potentially, are you getting some resistance in this? We decided to see what's happening in trends -- with trends now in the British Columbia. How does -- do you think this ultimately plays out? And from a differential standpoint, how do we think about the impact of IMO if, come 2020, some of these pipes aren't online, particularly some of the slippage that we're seeing here in the U.S? And then a follow-up.
Thanks, Neil. I'll talk a little bit about the pipeline situation, and then I might get Keith to comment on IMO. But I think, from the pipeline perspective, and I've said this from the start, I remain an optimist that ultimately, most, if not all of those 3 major pipeline projects would go, I think clearly, a bit of a complication has been thrown into the Line 3 project with that decision from the administrative law judge. It's a really big decision. We're taking a look at it, and I know that Enbridge is taking a look at it. And I don't understand at this point what their response would be. But I would just say that the logic of replacing an old pipeline with reliability problems with a brand new, state-of-the-art pipeline with state-of-the-art leak detection seems to be a very prudent thing for the state of Minnesota. And I hope that there's a win-win resolution. I -- we're obviously in the middle of a process with TMC and Kinder Morgan. I remain in close conversation with both Kinder Morgan Canada, the Alberta government and the Canadian government. And I take a lot of comfort that I think those 3 parties are all very committed to finding a resolution that will allow that project to proceed. And I -- once again, we're just waiting to see where that gets to. And then on Keystone XL, it obviously continues to proceed. And I know the company is acquiring land on the new right-of-way. So I do ultimately believe that, that project is going to proceed also. In the interim, as production grows in Alberta, we obviously are going to need rail to balance production and takeaway. And as I've said in my remarks, there's been a bit of a slow start in getting this oil moving. I think that is overwhelmingly attributable to the lack of spare capacity that the rail companies had when faced with this issue, probably earlier than I think everyone anticipated. But I'm really confident that as we move into the second half of this year and into the first half of 2019, we're going to be seeing very material volumes of oil moving by rail. And I would expect once you -- once that situation prevails, we would expect to see WTI/WCS differentials probably persist in the high teens, being reflective of the cost of rail to get oil from Alberta down to the Gulf Coast. But why don't I have Keith just talk about the IMO issue.
Yes. Thanks, Neil. Just building on kind of Alex's comments, obviously the Line 3 timing could then bring back in the differentials. So if that gets pushed out past kind of the third, fourth quarter of 2019, we could see some pressure with regards to widened differentials associated with the rail transportation as well as the IMO coming in. But specifically on the IMO, there's still a lot of questions with regards to the implementation and the response to the changing regulation. Whether or not refineries will have sufficient capacity or how much sufficient capacity they will have to increase coking utilization, how fast the shipping industry can respond to putting scrubbers on their vessels as well as how well the regulations will actually be enforced and even if the timing of the regulation sticks to the 2020 implementation. So lots of unknowns. We are obviously watching that space. We do have our heavy oil integration with our Wood River and Borger refining capacity. But we'd also look at, do we want to bring new production growth into that market if we start seeing kind of Line 3 deferred and delayed as well as kind of the IMO impact coming.
Great. And sorry, the follow-up question. Just as you think about rail and the negotiations that are going, recognizing there's commercial sensitivities, what -- any limit -- what are -- what do you think are really the stumbling blocks in terms of getting this to the finish line? Is it conversation around margin? Is it conversation around duration? And can you give us a little bit of color of what gives the confidence that we'll see some momentum there?
Yes. So Neil, it's Alex. I'll kind of maybe talk at the strategic level, and Keith may provide some color on specifics. But my perspective on the rail. I have been closely involved with Keith in dealing with the rail companies, really, for the better part of a few months now. And my experience with the rail companies, and I might have said this earlier, but I don't detect there is any philosophical concern on the part of the rail companies about moving the product. I think they feel that the last time they ramped up their capacity to move oil, I think they felt they spent a lot of time and resources and then they lost that business in very short order once pipeline solutions became available. So I think -- I'm not surprised nor distressed by the pricing that we're seeing. I think it is -- I think we'll be able to achieve fair pricing. I think that there is going to be some term to these deals to deal with this issue that the rail companies have. And I think there's going to be -- they probably desire to have some element of take or pay, which might have been lacking in the past. So -- but I don't -- as I said, I mean, our discussions with the rail companies are very productive. From our perspective, I mean, we really see the importance of getting a rail deal more towards the end of this year, and that's where we're targeting to start seeing our barrels move by rail. But there is -- I'm not seeing anything that is significantly worrying me that we're not going to be able to achieve that goal. I don't know, Keith, if you have any color.
Yes. Thanks, Alex. I mean, we're actually starting to see increased rail capacity happening in our conversations with the heads of the 2 rail companies. It's evident to us that they've hired the crews or just going through the training process now to get them competent and capable. They've indicated that they're reactivating a fair amount of locomotives. So we do see that capacity picking up. As Drew alluded to, there is a fairly heavy turnaround activity happening in the province. And with the new coker startup -- upgrading startup this year as well, we do see the timing for that rail deal to be in the fourth quarter as being more necessary. And we're taking a very disciplined approach to make sure we get the right deal for us and the rail companies.
Your next question comes from the line of Prashant Rao with Citigroup.
If I could just follow-up on that -- on the rail detail there and I appreciate all the color you guys gave. It does feel like both the major Canadian Class 1s are willing to discuss now. And I think recent commentary about one of them is that they [indiscernible] incremental volumes in [ 3Q ] and talked about a ramp in the back half. First, just earlier in the year, I think the expectation was one more than the other. I was wondering is this -- would both now sort of coming on board, would it be qualitatively -- how does this change the discussion on pricing? In turn, you were thinking about this, that we've put all of the parts together, which -- also then the headwind news on both Trans Mountain and Enbridge. And then, also, there's been sort of getting a sense of just the incremental volumes. What Cenovus' share has been, what we've seen in terms of the pickup here in 2Q. I know it's small, but there's been some market indications that it's a little bit evenly spread out, sort of just getting a sense of that as well, it will be helpful.
Thanks, Prashant. Very detailed question there. So maybe I'll just start. We do have the indications. One, I can't comment on specifically our volumes that we're moving by rail. But as I indicated, we are seeing increased activity at the various transportation facilities here on the province. I would say it's both rail companies, both Tier 1 rail companies that we're seeing the ramp-up of activity. They were impacted in kind of the winter months with some significant increased commodity as well as a very challenging winter. So they're just getting their utilization rates back to kind of normal activity, which allows for that kind of ramp-up. And then as they bring on the additional staff and locomotives, that is really where we're going to see the significant ramp up of capacity. And in our conversations with them, that sounds more like early Q3, late Q2 type timing.
Okay. That's helpful. And then there's some news flow as well about, in the meantime, the truck capacity, I know it doesn't give you -- give much in terms of take away for truck. But that -- is that more of a blip or is that part of maybe a small percentage of a solution as well that is being contemplated maybe not just by you or by -- but by the industry as a whole? I just wanted to get your sense or any color around that.
Yes. Prashant, it's Alex. I -- given the kind of volumes we're talking here, the impact -- the safety concerns, impact on roads, I don't see -- I mean, I'm sure there are isolated geographical situations where that might make sense, particularly in a situation where you're just starting a new field. But I don't think that's a practical solution for Cenovus.
Okay. And just one last one. On the asset sales for this year, I think you already covered that, even though changing the outlook despite the [indiscernible] , you do noncash impairment. But in terms of cadence, if I just look at the forward strip and then geopricing, does that mean that we should think about the consummation of asset sales? And the deleveraging that provides to be more back half or closer to the back, like end of the year and into '19? Or is it -- are there too many factors to determine that at this point?
Yes. I mean, it's pretty early days. We have identified the packages and the work in preparing for the due diligence. The virtual data rooms, et cetera. All that work is ongoing. But once again, I mean, this is a very significant undertaking, so I would think of it in the term -- I think we'll be outmarketing these packages in 2, 3 months. And we're going to be very disciplined. We have got a lot of inbound interest from a number of groups. So our gut feel -- and we do a lot of work on our own internal valuation. So we think there are some packages that will be accretive to shareholder value to go ahead if we get these valuations. But I want to be clear. We're only doing this with a view of accelerating shareholder value. And if we see that because of present market conditions, that it might be difficult to get that value, we're quite willing to stand down and wait for a better time. But we certainly are getting a lot of indication that some of the assets we're looking at would be highly valued even in the present situation.
Your next question comes from the line of Joe Gemino with Morningstar.
You talked about not pursuing any growth projects until you have a clear line of sight and increased pipeline takeaway capacity. Does that have any impact on Christina Lake Phase G?
Yes, Joe. It's Drew here. So we're continuing to build out the facility right now. As Alex remarked at the start of the call, things have been progressing very well on Christina G. As we look at when it comes on in the second half of '19, it is something we are discussing here in mid-year as far as the progression that the team has been making on construction. And then we will have the discussion here around pipeline and market egress certainty on whether we actually bring it on fully or ramp it up to full rates under the current schedule that we've looked at in the next 3 years. So it is something we will look at, but right now, Christina G is continuing to go very well on the construction side and still on track to come on in the second half of next year. But we will be having a discussion around the timing of egress and the right ability to generate great cash flow from that new production and our ability to get to markets. But right now, Christina G's still going very well.
Great, great. And on your SAP technology, are you still -- everything on track to start implementing it into your sustaining and maintenance processes for 2019?
So currently -- it's Ivor, Joe. We just started it up probably last around November, December. Another one started up earlier this year. So we're getting a lot more information on propane. We already understand butane. And so from these pilots, we'll be making a decision later on this year on how fast to proceed on the commercialization and the timing of it. But right now, our focus is just on the pilots.
Your next question comes from the line of Paul Cheng with Barclays.
Alex, I know you guys probably don't want to talk about specifically for Cenovus from a commercial reason. But can you give us some idea there was the big awards between the industry and the oil company in terms of how much they won or how much the industry is willing to pay on shipping from Alberta down to the Gulf Coast? Any color you can share?
Sorry. Yes, It's a good question. But I think, Paul, you're correct. It's -- given that we are right in the middle of a very sensitive commercial negotiations, I am reticent to share our perspective on that. I think what I can say is, so far, what I've seen, I think there is room for the rail companies to make a very good business out of this and act at rates that allow us to deliver good value for shareholders. So I think they're -- usually, when there's enough room for 2 parties to make money, you can get a deal done, and that's where I feel we are right now.
Okay. And since you joined the company, you made already quite a lot of changes both in the personnel and the organization. So at this point, do you believe that all the major changes is done? Or that you think there's an area that you still need to address?
No, Paul. I certainly, at the senior leadership level, in the midlevel leadership in this company, we are -- I am very happy with where I've got to from the perspective of my senior leadership team. With Ivor's retirement and Jon joining the leadership team, from my perspective, that was really the last puzzle piece. And so I think we're in great shape. And I don't foresee any significant changes in that regard going forward.
Okay. Just a final quick question. Maybe this is for Ivor. On the charges that you put for the contingency payment reevaluation. What future price strip that you are based on? Based on the future strip or there is a different set of prices?
Yes -- no, it's based on future strip prices. So it's treated as a financial option.
Okay. So that's just, simply, that you think the future strip on that? So if the future strip go higher because the curve will become less [ backward date ] then there's another charges that we may see?
That's correct. We'll value that, fair value, each quarter-end. So you'll see volatility in that.
[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of Ashok Dutta with Platts.
The first one that I had was, Alex, did I hear you saying that the capacity of Bruderheim is 100,000? But I wanted to ask you, in the last quarter, how much are you doing? And with the crude-by-rail shipments expected later this year, you set a targeted figure as to by -- as to how much of volumes you're looking at moving?
Hi, Ashok. I -- that, once again, is -- we consider that fairly sensitive commercial information. So we're -- now we do report in our financial statements, I think we said at the end of Q4 last year, we were moving somewhere in the range of 12,000 or 15,000 barrels a day. We would expect that to increase as the year goes on. And my own personal view about that is that this industry right now has a short-term challenge. We need to get oil moving by rail as a major oil producer in this province. I think it is reasonable for Cenovus to be part of that solution. So nobody should be surprised to see that, as barrels of oil increase in movement by rail, to see that our participation in that increases also.
Okay. And the second question is that both the Canadian and the Alberta government have indicated that if need be, they will join in as equity partners for Trans Mountain expansion. Now is this going to be our taxpayers money? Or would the beneficiary, say, like shippers like you guys, be joining this project?
Other than getting some updates from time to time as to how sort of the general tone of the negotiations, we are not involved as a company in those negotiations. So I can't speculate as to ultimately what the deal would look like or what the participation would look like of the province or the Feds. I just know that those discussions are ongoing. They are both -- all parties are at the table and so we're just waiting and hoping that a positive outcome comes out of this. It is high time. This pipeline has gone through the most exhaustive regulatory and environmental review process of any pipeline in the history of Canada. It has been approved, and it is time for the federal government to take whatever action is necessary to get this project over the line.
Your next question comes from the line of Geoff Morgan with Financial Post.
I wanted to go back to a number about reducing headcount by 15% already. You had mentioned that you think there might be more opportunities. To what extent do you think you would further reduce the headcount at Cenovus?
Yes. When I talk about more opportunities, I'm not necessarily talking about headcount, Geoff. There's obviously lots of costs in this company in different buckets. And as I've said to the employees, I -- the era of major companywide workforce reductions, I think, are behind us for the foreseeable future. Every company always faces situations where some businesses ebb and flow. And you might have to adjust your headcount for that, but we're not contemplating any material companywide workforce reductions going forward.
Okay. And then on the other side of the G&A, the rent costs. You have a lot of real estate available. And currently, vacancy rates in Calgary are almost 25% and up. Do -- have you had any meaningful people or interest in the space that you have?
Yes, yes. Actually, we have had quite a bit and we have been successful in subleasing some of the incremental space that we have to our needs. The one thing that I caution people on our side is, although the real estate market in Calgary is obviously pretty tough market right now, I've been in this business long enough to know that there are cycles and it isn't always going to remain tough. So our goal is to do what we can to sublease at reasonable valuations. But I also want to make sure that we don't go be too aggressive and lock up subleases at lower rates that we might subsequently regret in future periods.
Our next question comes from the line of Dave Winans with Prudential.
Hey, guys. I'm sorry, I'm not a member of the media. I'm a bondholder, actually. But I kind of came in at the tail end of things. Just -- I appreciate your comments around leverage. But can you guys give any kind of guidance as to a range of what you might expect for asset sales in 2018?
Yes. I mean, I am -- this time around, I'm not very interested in setting specific objection or objectives for total value of dispositions or -- and we're even going to be pretty cautious about publicly talking about what assets are for sale. Suffice it to say that everybody who might be interested in the assets that are for sale, they fully know they are for sale, and so we're confident we're going to have a robust process. And as I said, I think we're confident that we're going to get to the end on the East Clearwater assets in the second half of this year. And for the rest of it, as I've said, it's really going to depend on valuation. We think there's a lot of interest in the packages that we're putting together. But these are great assets, and we're not going to -- we're not going to stretch. If the value isn't there, we're happy to keep them. And as I said, just kind of to reiterate it one more time, the cash flow-generating capability of this company going forward, absent these onetime time issues, is very, very significant, and we're going to get to an improved balance sheet whether or not we sell large significant packages of the Deep Basin assets.
Your next question comes from the line of Kevin Orland with Bloomberg News.
One of the main strategies that the province has rolled out for helping push Kinder Morgan through was introducing some legislation that would allow the province to cut oil shipments to British Columbia. So I was curious what would Cenovus' plan be if something like that were to occur? And what have those discussions with the province about that plan been like?
Other than I was advised by the government of what their plans were a little while ago, I -- my expectation is that if anything happened, it would probably be -- were the government to take any action in that regard, my expectation or speculation would be, it would probably be more around refined products than the blend that we produce. But it's kind of -- I don't know that it's really valuable for a producer to speculate on what the province might or might not do. But we'll just wait and see if anything comes out of it.
So just a last follow up, then what kind of planning has Cenovus done to prepare for the possibility of that?
Look, we have -- you've heard me talk about the rail. We do have a number of options. We are a shipper on the Kinder Morgan Canada system, but it is not a huge position. And in the event that there was some disruption on that pipeline, I'm confident that we have other options for that relatively modest amount of transport.
This concludes the Q&A portion of our call. I would now like to turn the call back over to Alex Pourbaix for closing remarks.
Hey, that -- I just want to thank everybody for taking the time to hear us talk about the quarter. Appreciate your questions, and thanks, everyone, again for participating.
This concludes the conference for today. You may now disconnect.