The United States announced a release from its Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) on Tuesday, saying at the same time that it hopes OPEC+ would continue to add 400,000 barrels per day (bpd) to its production every month as per the plan outlined in July.
While the U.S. Administration wants the OPEC+ alliance to pump more oil and thus help lower high oil and gasoline prices, the group dominated by Middle Eastern oil producers and Russia can’t do much more than it’s already doing—even if its only goal were to help U.S. consumers pay much lower prices for gasoline (which it is not).
The key reason lies in the diminishing spare capacity of OPEC+ to pump oil, concentrated in just a few major producers in the Middle East. The OPEC+ group as a whole has been struggling with pumping to its overall quota for months as African OPEC members have been significantly underperforming because of a lack of spare capacity and investments.
Analysts say that the spare capacity is even lower than official estimates.
We conducted a professional poll in May with Environics looking at Indigenous people living in rural/reserve communities and their attitudes to resource development. Indigenous people in BC had the highest support for oil & gas development of any province – 65%.
BC First Nations have been discussing the pros and cons of natural gas and CGL for YEARS. There have been referendums, multiple election cycles, negotiations, consultations. And hard work to train community members and build business structures in order to benefit properly.
It’s difficult to watch “allies” talk about supporting Indigenous sovereignty & rights but dismiss the majority who want that development.
You don’t have to support natural gas. But maybe think about how you’re using the Wetsuweten Nation to further your agenda, not theirs.
In a surprise corporate overhaul which the Dutch government branded an “unwelcome surprise”, Royal Dutch Shell said on Monday it would scrap its dual share structure and move its head office to Britain from the Netherlands, pushed away by Dutch taxes and facing climate pressure in court as the energy giant shifts from oil and gas. The company, which long faced questions from investors about its dual structure and had recently been hit by a Dutch court order over its climate targets, will also drop “Royal Dutch” from its name – part of its identity since 1907 – to become Shell Plc.
The Anglo-Dutch firm has been in a long-running tussle with the Dutch authorities over the country’s 15% dividend withholding tax, which Shell sought to avoid paying with its two share classes. Its new single structure would resolve that issue and allow Shell to strike swifter sale or acquisition deals.
“The current complex share structure is subject to constraints and may not be sustainable in the long term,” Shell said, as it announced its plan to change the structure. The move requires at least 75% of votes by shareholders at a general meeting to be held on Dec. 10, the company said. […]
In response to the effective divorce, the Dutch government said on Monday it was “unpleasantly surprised” by Shell’s plans to move to London from The Hague. The decision will, meanwhile, be seen as a vote of confidence in London after Britain’s exit from the European Union triggered a shift in billions of euros in daily share trading from the UK capital to Amsterdam.
Via reader Adrian, who comments;
But … they are sucking up to the “activists” and so history will repeat itself and I would imagine there are two outcomes longer term. First. Shell remembers that they are fundamentally a provider of hydrocarbons and gets on with it OR they become relegated to a history book along with the likes of ICI.
Ironically if they had left companies alone like Enterprise, to name but one, the industry as a whole would have been much more resilient. The reason they had to keep buying upstarts like Enterprise is the same as Schlumberger (to name but one) keeps buying companies, because they run themselves as governments – they stifle the initiative and risk which others less choked with layers of management take.
There was a fact that back in the 80’s Shell re-discovered that they were an oil exploration business and during one brave move they got rid of either 5 or 8 layers of management (I can’t remember the exact details) … and no one noticed. I do remember the time as it was when they suddenly went from screwing drilling contractors on footage contracts and went to day rates.
Anyway, I am sure lots of people will interpret this in many ways.
It was only a matter of time, really. In a globalized world, energy crunches can hardly remain regionally contained for very long, especially in a context of damaged supply chains and a rush to cut investment in fossil fuels. The energy crunch that began in Europe earlier this month may now be on its way to America. For now, all is well with one of the world’s top gas producers. U.S. gas exporters have enjoyed a solid increase in demand from Asia and Europe as the recovery in economic activity pushed demand for electricity higher. According to a recent Financial Times report, there is a veritable bidding war for U.S. cargos of liquefied natural gas between Asian and European buyers—and the Asians are winning. […]
All this should be good news for U.S. producers of fossil fuels. But it may easily become bad news as winter approaches. The Wall Street Journal’s Jinjoo Lee wrote earlier this week high energy prices could be the next hot import for the United States. Lee cited data showing gas inventory replenishment was running below average rates for this season, and gas in storage in early September was 7.4 percent below the five-year average.
But last week more than 500 organizations across Canada and the U.S., from Environmental Defence to Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream, signed a letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, contending that ‘carbon capture’ would actually delay the transition away from fossil fuels and ultimately increase CO2 emissions.
“Carbon capture is a dangerous distraction,” the letter states. “We don’t need to fix fossil fuels, we need to ditch them.”
A new study has found that if the world were to meet the targets set out in the Paris Agreement, there would be eight million more jobs globally by 2050.
But in this scenario, researchers say some fossil fuel-dependant economies such as Canada would actually see fewer energy jobs.
Because most of those eight million jobs would be in manufacturing wind turbines and the like, and not in actual energy generation. And nobody sane is going to manufacture that crap in high cost jurisdictions like Canada. It seems they’re just figuring that out now.
You know, there’s a Nobel Prize awaiting the first economist who successfully explains to mainstream journalism that when a system creates “eight million more jobs” than would be otherwise required, it’s a flashing red siren that energy generation has become vastly less efficient, and that vastly less efficient translates into vastly more expensive for consumers and industry alike.
Good luck keeping manufacturing plants in northern latitudes when winter heating costs go through the roof. Adios Amigos.
(There’s a lesser prize awaiting the first person to explain why there’s a hyphen between “fuel” and “dependant”).
Using various code names – and operations “marmalade” and “peanut butter” being of particularly high risk, according to the Washington Post – the protesters planned to descend on an undisclosed location along a pipeline route known as “Line 3.”
Perhaps there’s still hope for the Conservative Party. The grassroots are showing some muscle. It remains to be seen whether O’Toole acts on this message or continues down the Liberal Lite path.
“Efforts to get official Conservative policy to recognize that climate change is real have failed.”
It may seem like a minor point, but it’s worth noting how the tone of the story would change if the writer had framed things this way: “Efforts to get official Conservative policy to recognize the damaging effect that climate change measures have on the economy have succeeded”.
The standard narrative sees Conservatives embracing failure. Change a few words, and they are embracing success. It’s all about the narrative.
It (Discovery of Brent) was responsible for building Europe not the UK , the whole reason that the experiment of Europe supposedly succeeded was because it was bankrolled by the UK’s oil and gas, plain and simple it could never have happened without it. Meanwhile the UK gave up any idea of sovereign wealth funds or becoming the Saudi Arabia of Europe.
The whole fucking lot squandered on a miserable ungrateful set of communist wannabe politicians.
If you remained in Alberta during the first major cold snap of the year and are alive to read this article, you owe your continued existence to fossil fuels; coal, oil and natural gas.
Using Red Deer as an example, from January 12 to 18 the average daytime high was -25.9oC and the nighttime low -34.7oC. It was a bit warmer in the south and colder in the north, but high/low ranges for the entire province were similar.
Without heat from carbon-based plants and animals – either long dead in the form of coal, oil or gas or not yet fossilized wood or grass – we’d all have frozen to death.