Analysis by a global consultancy
Each quarter, Vaca Muerta takes center stage in the earnings presentations of the main companies holding concessions in the Neuquén Basin. The combined figures have grown to the point where the debate is no longer whether the sector will invest, but how much and on what timeline.
In that context, a report by Wood Mackenzie estimated that transforming Vaca Muerta into a globally significant export hub will require about $22 billion in additional investment beyond what has already been announced, with the goal of consolidating that position by 2032.
Beyond the headline number, the consultancy, widely followed by international investors, also raised a more uncomfortable question that goes beyond strictly financial considerations: Is what has been committed enough to reach the export target, or is something still missing on top of that? The key variables are infrastructure and resources.
The report, titled “A new chapter for Vaca Muerta,” analyzes the investment plans announced by leading operators and calculates the additional capital needed for Argentina to solidify its export position before the end of the decade.
The sector’s goal is to reach about $30 billion in annual energy exports by 2030, a figure comparable to what Argentina’s agricultural sector generates today, and the consultancy says achieving it will require an additional $22 billion in upstream capital expenditures through 2032, along with the drilling of around 1,000 new wells.
María Eugenia Ditzel, senior corporate analyst at Wood Mackenzie, said these efforts will be critical for the country to consolidate its position as a global energy player.
The calculation no one made — and that Wood Mackenzie reveals
Within that framework, the question raised by Wood Mackenzie cuts to the core: Is what has already been committed enough to meet the target, or is there a structural investment gap the sector has yet to acknowledge?
The short answer is that the figures are not directly comparable. Operators’ plans combine upstream, midstream and infrastructure — including projects such as the VMOS oil pipeline, the Perito Moreno gas pipeline and LNG developments — while Wood Mackenzie’s estimate refers specifically to upstream capital expenditures.
There is also a mismatch in time horizon. Most public commitments cover 2026 and extend to 2028 at best, while the consultancy’s scenario runs through 2032. That implies seven years of sustained investment versus plans that generally have only two to three years of visibility.
At the same time, the geopolitical backdrop has shifted. Conflict in the Middle East has reshaped global energy routes and improved price expectations for Argentine oil and gas, which could accelerate investment decisions that had been on hold.
The additional 1,000 wells represent the gap between what has been committed and what is required to meet the export target — roughly 140 extra wells per year on top of the current pace. In relative terms, that increase appears manageable. In practical terms, it requires more drilling rigs, more skilled labor and expanded logistics infrastructure on top of what the sector already has in its pipeline.
The real question is not whether the inventory of drilling locations exists — it does, and it is abundant. The question is whether execution capacity — rigs, sand, water, hydraulic fracturing equipment and trucking — can keep pace without creating bottlenecks in an industry already operating near its limits.
What operators already have in the pipeline
The industry needs to drill those additional 1,000 wells by 2032 to close the export gap. At first glance, that figure appears modest: the basin is already drilling between 500 and 600 wells per year, meaning it surpasses that threshold in just two years.
The apparent contradiction is resolved by the same logic behind the $22 billion figure. Wood Mackenzie’s baseline scenario already incorporates the drilling plans committed by operators. The 1,000 wells are not the total the industry will drill, but the incremental wells required on top of existing plans to meet the export target.
Horacio Marín, president and CEO of YPF, said in September 2025 that YPF alone needs to drill nearly 2,000 oil wells and 800 gas wells by 2030. That plan is already included in the consultancy’s base scenario.
For 2026, public commitments by the main companies operating in the basin — including upstream, midstream and infrastructure — exceed $10 billion.
YPF, the leading producer in Vaca Muerta, announced a $6 billion investment for 2026, with 70% allocated to shale development following the divestment of its mature assets. The company aims to reach 215,000 barrels per day of its own production before year-end.
Vista Energy, a company built entirely around shale, has committed at least $1.5 billion in 2026 as part of a three-year, $4.5 billion plan.
For its part, Tecpetrol, part of the Techint Group, is deploying more than $2.5 billion aimed at quintupling its oil production, driven by the Los Toldos II Este project in the northern area of Vaca Muerta.
Pluspetrol is also expanding, allocating $800 million annually to the Bajo del Choique–La Invernada block, acquired from ExxonMobil, along with an additional $2 billion ambition tied to a large-scale liquids project. This complements its flagship La Calera field.
Pan American Energy and Shell round out the picture with commitments of roughly $500 million and $600 million, respectively.
Who will execute the investment
Wood Mackenzie highlighted the structural transformation of Vaca Muerta and the broader Neuquén Basin over the past two years, with 18 major transactions reshaping ownership of the most valuable blocks.
International majors have monetized long-held positions — ExxonMobil sold assets to Pluspetrol and YPF, while Shell exited the Argentina LNG Phase 2 project — as domestic players consolidated their presence in the core producing areas.
“These moves reflect international operators' strategic realignment as they prioritise capital allocation toward core assets,” Ditzel said.
Within that reshuffling, foreign participation remains selective. Continental Resources recently entered the basin, bringing extensive unconventional experience from the Permian. Eni and XRG, the investment arm of ADNOC, partnered with YPF in Argentina LNG.
Still, the bulk of the additional $22 billion in upstream investment identified by Wood Mackenzie is, to a large extent, in the hands of Argentine companies.