Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. I am Emma, your Chorus Call operator. Welcome and thank you for joining the BW Offshore Conference Call. I would now like to turn the conference over to Marco Bienen, CEO. Please go ahead.
Good morning, and welcome to the Q3 2020 presentation of BW Offshore. In this call, I will give a general update and our CFO, Stol Andreasen, will cover the financial results. Moving to the next slide, our disclaimer, please take note And then moving on to highlights on Slide 3. The Q3 was a challenging quarter from an operational perspective with both the Jurgenkrad Knapp and the Sendy Berge FPSO experiencing shutdowns and that's impacted our commercial uptime and financial results somewhat. Our EBITDA of $98,000,000 and our operating cash flow of $82,000,000 were were therefore a bit lower than previous quarter.
But this is also further explained by a one off settlement of $8,000,000 that we had in Q2 and no such one off revenues occurred in Q3. As expected, we received confirmation of a contract extension of Petroleum Artipa till September 22. Furthermore, we reached an agreement with the New Zealand demobilization out of New Zealand, and this will reverse our voluntary liquidation. During the quarter, we were able to progress various tenders to for new projects. And last but not least, the Board of BW offshore has approved a quarterly dividend as part of the annual $25,000,000 cash dividend program.
Moving to Slide 4 with an update on COVID. As you are all well aware, the COVID-nineteen situation globally is not improving, and it requires proactive risk management, planning and procedures to manage the operational impact. However, we are pleased that there were no new FPSO outbreaks since our quarter 2 reporting. However, the situation remains challenging, in particular in relation to crew logistics. It doesn't come without costs.
The managing COVID costs has cost us about $4,000,000 per month in this quarter. However, with full implementation of PCR testing protocols as well as improvement in the flight availability in several countries, This is now reducing to about $2,000,000 per month towards the year end and going forward. Then operational update on Slide 6. On the right side, you see the HSE statistics with average ratios per 1000000 man hours over the last 12 months. This is in accordance with the IOGP definitions.
We're striving for 0 harm. And the most important metric to achieve this is the orange line, which represents the high potential incidents. And that's trending downwards in a satisfactory way. The left side of the chart shows the fleet uptime, commercial uptime and it displays the dip that is caused by the incidents on Sendiburgia and Jyncapnap as I just explained. Then moving to Slide 8 with further updates on some of the units.
First of all, Catcher, our operation in the U. K. While the production was impacted by the need to remove calcium naphthalate from the produced water systems, our commercial uptime was not impacted as this count as company under production. It does, however, prevent us to capture benefits from excess production. We're working closely with our client Premier Hull to to optimize the management of this issue and to avoid or at least reduce downtimes in connection to this.
Furthermore, it's worthwhile to refer to earlier announcements made by Premier about their merger with and this merger creates the largest London listed independent oil and gas company and that obviously strengthens the KFC field operators' financial position. I already mentioned Petroleum Altipa with the contract extension and Sandeberg is now backing production again since mid October. Also mentioned, Umeroa. So we're very pleased with the recent agreement we made with the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment in New Zealand, as that will now cover all our costs till departure from New Zealand. And then Fritsante, the contract was ended in quarter 3, and we consider her now for redeployment or recycling in 2021.
Moving on to Slide 8, BW Energy, our associated company doing the field developments in Gabon and Brazil. We're looking forward to restart these new development activities as soon as the COVID restrictions are lifted. In the meantime, the opportunities in the downturn caused by COVID has been captured through acquisition of jackup platforms rather than using newbuild Bellhop platforms for the Hibiscus and Riese development. And this is expected to reduce development costs with about $100,000,000 and it will also reduce time to first oil as well as the environmental impact of cost construction. The strategy of joint value creation to FPSO redeployments allowing for short cycle of phase developments remains unchanged.
We just have some delays in due to COVID in executing those plans. Operations in Dussevoo are still strong. Current production levels are around 40 1,000 barrels per day with an average operating cost of US19 dollars per barrel. And through our 39% ownership, current value in BW Offshore is about SEK11 per BWO share. That brings me to the fleet contract overview on Slide 9.
What is worth noting is Petroleum Nautipa, beyond 2022, we're having discussions with our client, VAALCO, to enter into a new contract beyond that. Porvoo expected to come off contract mid-twenty 21 and we can consider her as a very good candidate for the Maroma field development by BW Energy. And then Abo further down, discussions are ongoing for further extension. This is a situation we are facing every year. And I find it quite likely that this contract will further extend beyond the end of this year.
Moving to the next slide, Slide 10. Our solid backlog provides long term financial visibility. We have a total backlog of about $4,200,000,000 by the end of Q3. Firm backlog is about 2,600,000,000 euros and 80% of that backlog is delivered through the 3 main units we have in the fleet, and that is Ketscher, Pioneer and Adolo. And again, the Ketscher partnership, operated by Premier Oil, is the largest customer.
And I mentioned the merger with Chrysler, which has significantly strengthened the balance sheet of that counterparty. With that, I give over to Stora Andreasen to run us through the financial results.
Thank you, Marco. Then we move to Slide 12. And as usual, we're starting with an overview of the key financial figures for the quarter. As you can see and also earlier mentioned, we achieved an EBITDA contribution from our operations of SEK98 1,000,000 in Q3. It is a reduction of about 15% from what was achieved in the quarter.
Firstly, we did expect Q3 to come in somewhat lower than the second quarter as a result of the SEK1 1,000,000 positive one off settlement we received in the Q2 for the outstanding claims related to the former project for FPSO P63. We had, as Marco mentioned earlier, we had some downtime on Yunkac now. The units operating for permits was hit by a tanker during offloading, and this led to approximately 1 month shutdown of the unit. We have not been paid by PMICs for this period. And although we are disputing this, have not recognized any revenues for the quarter, and this has impacted our EBITDA negatively.
On top of this, we continue to battle with COVID. We are investing quite highly to manage COVID costs related to crude and related, which has an impact on our results for the quarter. When you look at the revenues, it's mainly reduced due to the 2 assets I mentioned before, the settlement we had in Q2 and then the downtime we had for YKM in Q3. Moving on to Slide 13. As you can see, depreciations were pretty much similar to previous quarter at SEK 63,000,000.
This overall gave us an EBIT or operating result of SEK 35,100,000 for the quarter. Net interest expenses came in at SEK 13,200,000, which is down from SEK 15,200,000 in Q2. This was as expected as we continue to amortize on our debt and also as we have done an additional repayment on the corporate facility in Q3, reducing our gross debt and consequently also some the interest expense. We had a gain on financial instruments of SEK 8,300,000 in the quarter. This came as a result of positive mark to market adjustment on our FX hedges as well as our interest rate swaps as both U.
S. Dollar as a currency has strengthened against NOK and also as we see U. S. Dollar swap rates have increased quarter on quarter. Other financial items were negative by SEK 3,300,000, And this is predominantly due to revaluation of our Nordic high yield bond law, which is denominated in NOK.
And as we see, the Norwegian kroner has strengthened against U. S. Dollar in quarter, we'll have to take a mark to market loss on that. And note, any negative effect from valuation or revaluation of the Nordic High Air bond will have a positive effect on financial instruments as the loan is fully hedged. But for presentation purposes, we have to show this on 2 separate lines.
We recorded a loss from equity accounted investments of SEK4,700,000 during Q3. This is coming from VWO's 38.8% net share of the results from our investment in BW Energy.
Income tax expense
was SEK 7,600,000 for the quarter, more or less in line with our expectations and within ordinary fluctuations quarter on quarter. And overall, we had a net profit at SEK 14,600,000 for quarter 3. Moving on to Slide 14 and the cash flow overview. As you can see, we started the quarter with a total cash position of NOK 206,000,000 Operating cash flow was NOK 82,000,000 for the quarter. This was slightly behind our target.
And although we had a recently steady quarter, our cash flow was affected by the incident on YKN. And we also see that we had higher cash outflow as we've been building some working capital, buying additional spares and building on our inventory due to higher maintenance activity on the FPSO fleet. And just worth mentioning, if you compare operating cash flow this quarter to 2nd quarter, which was roughly SEK 120,000,000, it's important to remember we did receive a one off settlement from Petrobras in Q2. And another thing in Q2 was that we received back SEK 17,500,000 related to cash collateral, which we have put up in Q1 due to extreme FX movements. We saw where the U.
S. Dollar strengthened significantly against NOK. And this required us to put up some cash collateral on our hedging instruments. But due to the reversal of the U. S.
Dollar versus NOK in the second quarter, this was all received back. So it's just important to note that there was some one off movement in Q2 that gives an artificially high variance quarter on quarter. We did spend SEK 10,000,000 on maintenance CapEx on fleet and some other investments related to some pre FEED activities we are performing, which overall gave a total free cash flow of SEK 72 million for the quarter. We reduced our debt position quite significantly in Q3, NOK 35,000,000 of a total of NOK 109,000,000 was scheduled installments on the Kachler and P and A facilities. The remaining SEK 75,000,000 was a one off repayment we did on the corporate facility.
We had a quite large cash position at the beginning of the quarter, and we used this to trim our balance sheet by repaying on the revolver, which will reduce our interest costs going forward, but which retains our liquidity as the revolver the down payment just decreases our available draw on the revolver. We paid SEK 12,000,000 in interest on our facilities. We continue to pay dividend with SEK 6,000,000 paid also in Q3. And we paid SEK 8,000,000 in relation to the preference share agreement we have for Catcher. So total, we ended the quarter with SEK 142,000,000 in cash.
Moving on to slide number 15. And as you can see, there's no surprises when it comes to the financial position of the company and shouldn't be as key units in the fleet are on long term contracts and results are relatively steady. We did continue to reduce our net debt, which stood at SEK 976 million by end of Q3. The leverage ratio continued to trend more or less flat. It stood at 2.1x last 12 months reported EBITDA for the quarter.
And I want to say, although this has trended flat, we expect it to continue to trend in a downward projection as we continue to deleverage and amortize off our debt as we go. The equity ratio increased by 1.7% in the quarter to 37.5%. And although there is a positive effect from the net result this quarter, the main impact is coming from the reduction in our cash position as we repaid on corporate loan facility and effectively reducing gross debt and the balance sheet costs. Moving to Slide 16. It's a well known slide.
We have shown this before. And again, we want to emphasize that with this, as you can see, we have no major debt maturities before late 2023. We have refinanced all our capital market debt late 2019, and that gives us flexibility
from a
balance sheet point of view. We continue to amortize on our debt. As I mentioned on the previous slide, we are amortizing approximately SEK 120,000,000 per annum for the next couple of years, while this will gradually increase as we get into 2023. Overall, it does give us ample time to plan our financing needs and also flexibility for any opportunities that comes around. Going to Slide 17.
We have basically 2 priorities, one being to maintain financial flexibility towards any growth opportunities, while the second one being providing flexibility sorry, providing predictability when it comes to returning value to our shareholders. As you've seen on the previous slides, we continue to deleverage as long as we have no new projects. We have a strong liquidity. We have almost NOK 390,000,000 in available liquidity when you're adding together available credit lines and cash. As mentioned earlier, we continue to incur costs related to COVID.
However, as Marco mentioned earlier, we do expect that we will be able to drive down the cost of this going forward, reduce it by approximately 50% as we can do our own PCR testing and as we see borders opening, which allows to more effectively move on the sorry, on the existing fleet. That we think will continue both for the remaining part of 2020 and also throughout 2021. Overall, we are predicting CapEx to be in the range of 25,000,000 and that includes any investment in BW opportunity. We now come to the point where we have been able to conclude on termination for the contract for Sidar and Dussemer, which was this unit operating for Petrobras. The settlement for this has been more or less final for quite some time, and we are fully provided for any payments here.
As we expect now all formalities to be closed relatively shortly, we want to highlight this settlement and our planned payment of SEK 40,000,000, which we have estimated to be paid in early 2021. As I said, it will not have an impact on our P and L, but it will have a liquidity impact of SEK 40 million. And when it comes to shareholder returns, again, as mentioned before, we will continue to pay a quarterly dividend as I've said. But we want to emphasize again, when you look at year to date, when you add up the Visa Energy shares that we dividended in kind in the Q1 this year, the share buyback program that's executed in Q2 and dividends paid so far this year, plus plan paid now into Q4, we will have returned almost SEK 130,000,000 back to our shareholders in 2020. And we believe this stands as a strong commitment to returning value to shareholders.
So with that, I'll hand it back to Marco for strategy and outlook.
Yes. Thank you, Stolle. I will now provide an update on strategy and outlook. Moving to Slide 19. We continue to capture the value from the existing fleet through the extensions on the fields where we operate and also through redeployments of units which come available, ideally with BW Energy.
This segment, the redeployment is, however, a bit slow, given the low oil price environment we're currently in. We expect this will rebound when the oil price recovers. But in addition to that, we are selectively pursuing new projects with leading E and P companies. And we're currently focusing on Australia and Americas. We're progressing well to be able to take an FID during 2021.
Moving to the next slide, which will explain a bit more about these investments. We're aimed to build new and different type of backlog, which is based on firm contracts of 15 years plus options, which excludes residual value risks. And it means we're targeting infrastructure like projects with investment grade counterparties. And that enables us to secure equity partners pre construction. So for the benefit of doubt, there's no need and no intention to raise equity in the markets to be able to undertake such investments.
The type of new project backlog will meet strict investment criteria, which is our 50% return on equity, which needs to be met during the firm period of the contract. That ensures access to competitive financing. We have received positive feedback so far from extensive sounding with banks and equity partners for the prospects that we are currently looking at. And we minimized project execution risk to basically replicating the success factors of the Catcher Apriso delivery using the same team, leveraging our experienced project execution organization and also working with known suppliers and yards using our existing relationships and experiences. We also want to use the rapid framework newbuildable concepts, which we have developed during FEEDS in the past years.
With that, I'll move to summary. Last slide, Slide 20 sorry, Slide 21. We continue to manage the COVID-nineteen pandemic proactively as the situation lingers, but we also expect that this will improve during 2021. Protecting our people and operations remains the priority. We continue to deliver stable EBITDA performance and that provides strong operational cash flow as well as the required financial flexibility.
And we target a new FID in 2021, and we're also looking at energy transition opportunities where we can apply our offshore engineering and operations competence. With that, I would like to conclude this 3rd quarter update, and we would be happy to take any questions.
The first question comes from the line of Frederik Lunde of Carnegie. Please go ahead.
Hi, good morning, guys. And thanks for giving some more details on how to look at investing in new projects. I was curious on when you mentioned taking partners, if they come in as the sort of equal partners fully sharing equity risk growth in upside and downside in any projects?
Yes. Thank you, Fredrik. I can answer this question. No, typically, those partners will not take EPC risk, but will provide equity during the EPC phase.
So then the sort of cost overruns or delays that you have to be at your risk that they will provide liquidity. Is that the way to think about it during the construction?
Yes. So we are responsible for the EPCI delivery of the project. But as I said, we're you can say we're kind of derisking that because there is, of course, a profit element in such the EPCI phase.
Okay, great. And then I just did some calculations here looking at the comp and since listing in 2006. And on my numbers, return on equity was negative 3 percent. And I think accumulated EBITDA is about negative $500,000,000 So investors are obviously spooked by the prospects of new conversions as that has typically increased risk historically. And then obviously, the market is now difficult.
There's probably no pressure on the supply chain, both suppliers and shipyards have ample capacity. So you could say risk reward looks better. But then again, if you look at investing in your own shares, I calculated copper capital 19%, which would have obviously much less risk as well than taking on a new conversion. I'm just curious to know to what extent to actually hold up investing or evaluate investing in more buybacks versus any projects. You see it as totally different investment decisions?
Or do you see them as sort of equal opportunities?
Well, I think as Stol explained, we need to strike a balance here. And we do see a very good window of opportunity for, in the coming years, a couple of projects, but hopefully at least one in 2021, where we can make new investments with better returns than what you explained we have had in the past. And the main reasons for that is that we are now at a time where also strong counterparties, major oil companies are finding lease FPSOs for long term contracts, 15 years and beyond, interesting. And that was typically not the case in the past where the lease and operate model, we were kind of forced to take residual value and residual risk. So and that window is now so both on the demand side, there is a window of opportunity.
And also in a way, on the supply side, there is, one can say, constraint because most of the active competition is pretty occupied already. So we think we're in the right window to deliver the returns on investments on those new projects in this window. And then we need to be a bit careful with how much money of our or how much of our capital we allocate to share buyback or cash dividend. We are, however, committed to sustain the dividend levels that we have today in any case. And we also feel that in 2020, we actually have, as Stol also showed, delivered to the promise to return to shareholders.
But it is a balance, and I think that your topics are absolutely valid. And we will continuously monitor and strike that balance. But as we think there will be some investments coming, I think we have to be a bit careful with we prolong and how much capital we allocate to immediate returns.
Okay, Fatim.
Thank you.
At this time, it appears there are no further telephone questions. I hand over to the speakers for any questions from the webcast.
Okay. Thank you. Yes, we have some questions that come in via the web. First question here is from Magnus Olsik from Kepler Cheuvreux. On COVID cost, are you able to pass some of that over to the clients?
Or do we cover all the costs ourselves? Marco, that's probably a question for you to
Yes. Jens, it's relatively simple. We can only recover when we have reimbursable contracts. On the considering COVID as quite an exceptional circumstance. But you I'm sure you realize that the clients are also putting a lot of pressure on us to kind of reduce our rates in view of the low oil price they're facing and putting their revenues under pressure.
So this is a bit of an yes, arm twisting both ways. So we cannot of course, we cannot reduce our our rates in view of low oil price. But equally, that reduces the willingness of our clients to contribute to COVID cost. It is important that we protect our revenues as we have been doing, as you can have seen. And at least now, we're seeing that with to a large extent, the costs were driven by the quarantine periods and not being able to move people out of country.
So basically having 2 crews in country, that improves now. And that's why we're also guiding towards a lower level of cost, kind of 50% of what we have had so far by year end and going forward.
Okay. Thank you, Marco. Next question is from Nick Lene from Seton Place. The question is, will you recover any of your year to date cost on the YumuRoa prior to November agreement date or this agreement only cover costs going forward. Do you want me to take it or
Yes, you can take it.
Yes, yes. I think it's fairly straightforward. The contract is mainly a contract, a forward looking contract. So there is limited cost that will be covered for prior periods. There is an element of a small success fee when you meet the criteria for demobilization if everything goes according to plan in that we're able to get the unit off field there by mid-twenty 21.
But primarily, it's a looking forward agreement. Next question is from Espen Adol. In regards to the low price book pricing in stock market, okay, why invest in new projects versus bigger share buyback programs? I think, Marco, you have already responded to this one. The answer would be the same as you gave to Carnegie on this, unless you want to add anything on this.
No, no. I think it's the same question. It's a valid question. And I think I've answered that.
Yes. Next question from the same person. This was why did we not inform the market regarding the incident for Senneberg and JinkoS now? Well, maybe you can fill in, but in short, we did inform the market about the incident bounce in Bergel. That should be a well known event.
And we also informed the market that there will be downtime as a result of it. And also the incident for YKM was highlighted in previous quarters' presentation. I think you can say with regards to the magnitude of this, we did not see
this as
incidents which would require us to send out separate press releases. And in particular, as we consider these to be one offs and not incidents which could have a lasting impact on our results. Okay. Next question from Magnus Olszczyk again. Kepler Cheuvreux.
Offshore Energy Opportunities was mentioned in the presentation. Could you elaborate on what you mean by this? Will you enter new business areas outside FPSO Business? I think that question is for you, Marco.
Yes, I can elaborate a bit. I think the offshore energy transition is a fact. That means and we see in particular opportunities arising in on the back of the growth in electrification. So it's I think it's logical to consider what our opportunities are in that space. And that could, of course, be from gas FPSOs contributing to power generation.
It could also be renewable power generation, for instance. On the long run, I see also opportunities in a bit clean fuels for offshore hydrogen with clean fuels for offshore hydrogen productions, but that's further out. But so we're considering where we can capture those opportunities. And logically, you will do that with partners. And then that means with the right partners, you can also enter other business segments.
A bit similar as we've done with BW Energy, where we basically use our global platform that we have as BW Offshore with operations in 10 different countries, more well, 30 to 40 years project execution experience, offshore construction experience, operation and maintenance experience. If you put all that competence together, you can reapply that into new business models and new business segments like we did with BW Energy where we partnered with a small oil company entity and integrated that in a with BW Offshore, and then you create a new business opportunity, new business model. I think we I see opportunities to do similar things in the future in the energy transition space.
Thank you, Marco. Next question. That comes from Hermann Lea in SEB. Can you please provide some insights into potential financial impact of the incident on Catcher in Q4? And operational performance on Catcher in light of the issues in recent quarters.
Do you want to elaborate on that? I think there's a couple of questions which are similar, but we'll get to that.
Yes. So I think there's a couple of questions, right, around Catcher. I can see referring to a fire incident.
Apologies for the interruption. The speaker line has been dropped. We'll be dialing in Ladies and gentlemen, we apologize for the pause in the Q and A session. Please remain on line. You'll be hearing music until the Q and A session resumes.
Ladies and gentlemen, the speaker line has been reconnected and we will now continue with the Q and A session. Please go ahead. Mr. Binan, your line is open. Please continue with your answer for the question.
Yes. Okay. Yes, Stolle, what was the last question? Somehow I dropped out of the call, but I'm back in.
Yes. No, I read it. The question was related to catch up and the incident we had in Q4. So the question was whether we could provide some more insight into the financial impact of this incident and how the market should think about operation performance on Catcher in light of these issues in recent quarters. And just take it as you also mentioned, a similar question came from someone else as well on updates on Catcher following this incident and whether the unit has restarted their production again?
Yes. Now KETZI is fully recovered. There is it was a small fire in the Switzbord. The investigation, the root cause of the fire is still ongoing, but we have so far identified a single component failure in the switchboard as a cause, and we expect to start up very shortly. I don't think it will have a large financial impact on the financial results.
Just a follow-up. The second part of that first question was what should we think about the operational performance of CATG in light of having these issues to be? I think the question is, do we see this as an indication that there are ongoing issues on the unit and that this will impact the financial results from the unit also going forward?
No, no, I don't believe so. This was a stand alone incident. Again, we're having the investigation ongoing, but there's no signs of any systematic issue or concerns about the operations going forward.
Okay. Good. Then yes. I'll move to that. As I said, there was 2, 3 questions, which was about the same thing.
So those are now covered. The next question is from Hakan Andersson from ABG. You mentioned that EBITDA was impacted by increased maintenance activity. Will this impact the cash flow in the coming quarters as well? And if so, can you quantify this?
I can I well, in short, we don't see that this is kind of a consistent higher cost level? We think and so we don't think we will see this as a consistent impact on the cash flow going forward. Naturally, we'll always have some fluctuation to the cash flow as maintenance activities are campaign driven and goes a little bit up and down throughout the quarters. And things also move a little bit, which might impact 1 quarter more than the other because you have a higher kind of isolated activity in that quarter. But the answer is no.
We don't see this as this kind of a shift in maintenance activity driving up our cost and consequently driving down our EBITDA going forward. And next question from Andreas Lee. BW Energy has bought 2 rigs. Has it been discussed whether BW Offshore will operate this? Marco, do you want to add a point on this?
Yes, I can answer that. The answer to has this been discussed, no, not really. These 2 rigs are will be used as production platforms as part of the field development. BW offshore could operate these as an extension of the FPSO. It's also quite common that oil companies operate their production platforms themselves and that could also be the choice that VWMC makes.
So, yes, I think that discussion may take place in due time when we closer to the operation of these platforms.
Okay. Thank you. The next question is from Nick Lene from Sesen Place. What was the cause of downtime on Jungkook Knab? And did you say you're disputing Paymix decision not to pay during these periods?
Can you give some color on the basis for the dispute? Yes.
Okay. Go ahead.
Yes. Go ahead. Okay, Marco, I'll then So the course of downtime for YKM was that there was an offloading tanker that drifted and touched YKM. There were some damages to the hull, which meant we had to shut down for a period of time to inspect and make the repair this. This led to a shutdown of approximately 1 month for the unit.
When I said that we are disputing this, it's because Pemex has so far not paid off for the month, for that 1 month we were down. And we disputed on the basis that it's not BW Offshore's responsibility to care for the offloading tanker or to make sure that stays adequately with an adequate distance from the FPSO during offloading. So that's the basis for the dispute here. I'm not sure, Marco, you presenting we should add to this, but I'm not sure there's so much more to say at this point in time.
No, I just want to emphasize that this took place in I believe it was August, so we included it in when we reported quarter 2, even though it was a quarter 3 incident. It was mentioned that it was a small collision. And yes, as you said, there is a clear responsibility on the client side for this operation as well. So that's why we have a dispute.
That is so far the last question. I see that that's coming in on the web. I'm not sure if you anything more, maybe if the operator has any other questions from those who are on the line?
Yes. We have a follow-up question from the line of Frederik Lunde with Carnegie. Please go ahead.
Hi, Jan. Moving focus a bit towards the redeployment candidate. You have a handful of idle units now. Could you give an update on the expected if you turn in for example, you move out to recycling, as you call it now? And how many of these units do you see another point in keeping?
I guess it's both an OpEx element and also some cash proceeds from recycling.
You could take it, Saul.
Sort of what so the question was on how much we
How many did you sort of see to take a sensible to keep as 3 deployment candidates versus just recycling some of these units? And also the cash proceeds from recycling?
Well, it's a bit of a strategic question in terms of what we see in the pipeline. I think to start with this, obviously, we want to keep units that are complementary, which means that they have capabilities, for instance, where we have a unit that's a good fit for West Africa project and for a unit that's a good fit for redeployment in, say, Sabre Sill. So we don't necessarily want to keep units with similar characteristics in layup as we think going forward, even though we work closely with BW Energy and they will be they're working to find new prospects, we believe, in the future. There's a limit to how many FPSOs they can redeploy for us in the medium term. As of now, we have Athena, Berglene, and we will have and we have a CSV in Brazil as well as the Guomeroa.
But Guomeroa will not be, as we said, not be available before early summer next year. Coming back, I think I'm not sure what I guess, but you could say that a minimum should keep 2 candidates available for regulatory products in this, which means that maybe 2 of these could be a potential candidate for research. When it comes to the pricing, of course, it's very different depending on the size of this unit, although they are all FPSOs. They're very different. A team has a very, very small unit and resulting value would be very, very small.
For a unit like your lower maybe Berglene, you're talking Berglene, for example, were net closer to a €15,000,000 in today's market. I think steel price on Yumuruwa below 10%. I think, Marco, you're probably better at guessing this, but I think in that ballpark of what you can get from a recycling on this. CSV, Chennisser, of course, which is very far away from any market for recycling in Brazil. So there we are probably down to 5 ish net proceeds if you have to recycle the unit.
Great. Thank you.
At this time, there are no further questions. I hand back to the speakers for any closing comments.
Yes. Okay. Well, thanks for your attention and the interest in BW offshore. And apologies for the technical hiccup along the way. But Jeff, thanks again.
All have a good day.