Generic Hero BannerGeneric Hero Banner
Latest Market News

Trump to order pipeline, LNG permitting overhaul

  • Spanish Market: Crude oil, Natural gas, Oil products
  • 10/04/19

President Donald Trump will issue two executive orders today seeking changes to rules that have thrown up hurdles to projects such as the Keystone XL crude pipeline and natural gas pipelines in New York.

The executive orders envision overhauling permitting rules for pipelines and LNG facilities. They instruct federal agencies to prioritize updates to water permitting regulations and safety standards that the energy sector says have stalled numerous projects.

But industry officials question whether the orders will provide near-term relief to projects delayed because of litigation.

Trump will sign the orders today near Houston, as he gears up a re-election campaign based in part on his "energy dominance" agenda. Oil and gas production has boomed since Trump took office, but he has failed to deliver on promises to enable pipeline operator TransCanada to start construction on the long-delayed, 830,000 b/d Keystone XL pipeline.

One executive order aims to streamline permitting for cross-border oil pipelines such as Keystone XL, which would cross the US-Canadian border. The order would revoke a policy that gave the US State Department responsibility to permit cross-border oil pipelines, a process that has become a source of delays and litigation for many projects. Instead, that authority would reside exclusively with the president. The State Department could still advise the president but would have to do so within 60 days.

The order appears to align with Trump's decision on 29 March to reissue a presidential permit for the 1,180-mile (1,900km) Keystone XL pipeline. The administration this week asked a court to throw out litigation around an earlier presidential permit that was approved under the previous process.

The other executive order focuses broadly on energy infrastructure. It will attempt to limit the ability of states to use "section 401" water permits to block gas pipelines by ordering regulators to update their rules and guidance. New York has used those water permits to block the 628mn cf/d Constitution and the 500mn cf/d Northern Access natural gas pipelines.

The executive order will also direct the US transportation secretary to update 40-year-old safety standards for LNG liquefaction facilities and revise existing rules that prohibit the transportation of LNG on rail cars. Those rules have "failed to adapt to recognize industry best practices and modern technologies," a senior administration official said.

Industry officials have conceded that revisions to the section 401 water permitting rules would be helpful, by narrowing when states can deny pipeline permits.

But they say without changes to the Clean Water Act, states would still likely be able to use their permitting authority to stop projects they oppose.


Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

11/04/25

Mexico suspends Valero fuel import permits

Mexico suspends Valero fuel import permits

Mexico City, 11 April (Argus) — Mexico's tax authority SAT on 9 April suspended US refiner Valero's fuel import permits, the company said today. The company did not specify why its import license was suspended. "Valero is addressing each administrative observation noted in the suspension to clarify the issues. Additionally, [authorities] mistakenly stated that the company does not have valid import permits, which is incorrect since the permits are valid through 2038," the company said. When consulted, Valero told Argus it has no further information to share at this time. In Mexico, Valero holds gasoline, diesel and jet fuel import permits valid through 2038. The company is one of only a handful of private-sector companies with such permits. Shell, Marathon and ExxonMobil hold permits to import only gasoline and diesel. Valero is the leading private fuel importer in Mexico. On 9 April, its sales accounted for 10pc of Mexico's gasoline and diesel demand, according to the company. Private-sector companies started importing fuel into Mexico in 2016 after the market opened to more competition, but under former president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador's administration, the energy ministry (Sener) cancelled dozens of fuel import permits. Valero is cooperating with the Mexican government and has recently joined a voluntary price cap agreement to keep regular gasoline below Ps24/l ($4.45/USG), the company said, adding that it "implements rigorous traceability and security controls throughout its supply chain." The company stores fuel at four private-sector terminals in Mexico, with over 4mn bl of capacity. The company is also expected to start storing fuel at the new 1.1mn bl OTM terminal in Altamira, Tamaulipas, in the near future. By Cas Biekmann Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Opec+ overproducers cast doubt on compensation pledges


11/04/25
11/04/25

Opec+ overproducers cast doubt on compensation pledges

Output is set to rise in the coming months, with Kazakhstan and Iraq unlikely to live up to commitments to rein in production, writes Aydin Calik London, 11 April (Argus) — The Opec+ alliance's planned production increases in April and May should, in theory, be offset by pledges to compensate for past overproduction, particularly by Kazakhstan and Iraq. But there are few signs that either country will significantly reduce output in the coming weeks. If anything, Kazakhstan has signalled that production will continue at or near record levels of around 1.8mn b/d , putting it some 300,000 b/d above its Opec+ target. Opec+ members subject to targets cut output by 90,000 b/d to 33.93mn b/d in March, according to Argus estimates, but this was still 80,000 b/d above the group's collective crude production target of 33.85mn b/d. The decision by a core group of eight Opec+ members to accelerate the return of 2.2mn b/d of production cuts is a key reason for the recent slide in oil prices, alongside US tariff announcements. But Opec+ has stressed that its implied output increase of 137,000 b/d for April and another 411,000 b/d in May should be cancelled out by compensation-related cuts of 249,000 b/d for April and 309,000 b/d in May. In reality, this is unlikely to happen — the group's output is set to rise. Kazakhstan is the main reason why Opec+ has exceeded its target over the past two months. Kazakh production has surged following a major output increase at the Chevron-led Tengiz field in January — part of the field's future growth project (FGP). Tengiz production rose to a record 901,000 b/d in March, compared with previous levels of 600,000-660,000 b/d. The increase came several months earlier than anticipated, Kazakh officials say, and they have subsequently asked international oil companies that operate Tengiz and the Kashagan oil field to reduce output. But the answer has so far been negative. "Unfortunately, we have not yet agreed with them to the reduction, because for them it is a very challenging action, especially Chevron, [which] spent $50bn on the FGP project. They told us it's not possible for them to reduce [output]," deputy energy minister Alibek Zhamauov said this week. Kazakhstan will try to reduce production from smaller fields operated by domestic producers such as state-controlled Kazmunaigaz, Zhamauov said. But any decrease from these fields will not be enough to offset the rise from Tengiz. Target practice Iraq's output dipped below its 4mn b/d target in March at 3.98mn b/d, but this was still well above the country's effective target of 3.88mn b/d under its compensation plan. If Iraq's past production record is anything to go by, its output is unlikely to fall much further in the months ahead. While Kazakhstan and Iraq are unlikely to see much change in their production, members such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE are set to drive the alliance's output higher. The biggest increase is expected from Saudi Arabia, which will see its 8.98mn b/d target rise by 222,000 b/d by May, offset only marginally by its compensation plans. Riyadh has already signalled that it is preparing to increase production after state-controlled Saudi Aramco cut the official formula price of its May-loading crude exports. The largest cut was for buyers in Asia-Pacific, Saudi Arabia's biggest market. Formula prices can indicate intentions on output, as producers fine-tune how affordable their crude is for marginal refiners. The second-largest production increase is set to come from the UAE, which has long been eager to raise output . The UAE will see its target rise by 103,000 b/d by May, which will also only be offset marginally by its compensation plan. Russia is also scheduled to deliver a significant production increase over the next two months, with its target rising by 105,000 b/d. But all of this increase will be cancelled out if the country sticks to its compensation plan. Opec+ crude production mn b/d Mar Feb* Mar target† ± target Opec 9 21.22 21.36 21.23 -0.01 Non-Opec 9 12.71 12.66 12.62 0.09 Total Opec+ 18 33.93 34.02 33.85 0.08 *revised †includes additional cuts where applicable Opec wellhead production mn b/d Mar Feb* Mar target† ± target Saudi Arabia 8.98 8.93 8.98 0.00 Iraq 3.98 4.05 4.00 -0.02 Kuwait 2.42 2.43 2.41 0.01 UAE 2.91 2.93 2.91 -0.00 Algeria 0.92 0.92 0.91 0.01 Nigeria 1.49 1.58 1.50 -0.01 Congo (Brazzaville) 0.26 0.24 0.28 -0.02 Gabon 0.20 0.22 0.17 0.03 Equatorial Guinea 0.06 0.06 0.07 -0.01 Opec 9 21.22 21.36 21.23 -0.01 Iran 3.34 3.38 na na Libya 1.36 1.39 na na Venezuela 0.87 0.84 na na Total Opec 12^ 26.79 26.97 na na *revised †includes additional cuts where applicable ^Iran, Libya and Venezuela are exempt from production targets Non-Opec crude production mn b/d Mar Feb* Mar target† ± target Russia 8.97 8.96 8.98 -0.01 Oman 0.75 0.75 0.76 -0.01 Azerbaijan 0.47 0.47 0.55 -0.08 Kazakhstan 1.79 1.76 1.47 0.32 Malaysia 0.36 0.36 0.40 -0.04 Bahrain 0.18 0.18 0.20 -0.02 Brunei 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.02 Sudan 0.02 0.02 0.06 -0.04 South Sudan 0.07 0.07 0.12 -0.05 Total non-Opec 12.71 12.66 12.62 0.09 *revised †includes additional cuts where applicable Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Participants mostly support IMO GHG pricing mechanism


11/04/25
11/04/25

Participants mostly support IMO GHG pricing mechanism

London, 11 April (Argus) — International shipping organisations and market participants mostly support the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism approved today at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting, but some raised concerns. The structure approved by the IMO establishes that ships must reduce their fuel intensity by a "base target" of 4pc in 2028 against 93.3 gCO2e/MJ, the latter representing the average GHG fuel intensity value of international shipping in 2008. Emissions above this target will be charged at $380/tCO2e. The levels defined by the approved regulation are achievable, according to a market participant, who said the gradually increasing targets may allow the market to properly adapt to the transition. The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) secretary general Guy Platten said the sector is already investing billions of dollars in 'green' technology, so the agreement gives certainty that sustainable marine fuels producers need. "The world's governments have now come forward with a comprehensive agreement which, although not perfect in every respect, we very much hope will be formally adopted later this year," he said. The European Shipowners (ECSA) secretary general Sotiris Raptis agreed the draft "is not perfect", but he celebrated progress towards a net zero emissions target, saying "it is a good starting point for further work" and pointing out that it may ensure the necessary investment in production of clean fuels. During a press briefing, IMO secretary general Arsenio Dominguez said ships operating in international waters will be obliged to comply with the regulations after adoption, despite the US' refusal to engage with the discussions . Adoption of the pricing mechanism will be discussed and voted on in October. Offering a counterview, the Global Maritime Forum said the agreed measures may not be strong enough to reach IMO targets. "The GHG intensity targets create uncertainty as to whether the strategy's emissions reduction checkpoints for 2030 and 2040 will be met," it said. "As currently designed, measures are unlikely to be sufficient to incentivise the rapid development of e-fuels such as e-ammonia or e-methanol , which will be needed in the long run due to their scalability and emission reduction potential." It said that failure to invest in these fuels would put at risk the target of at least 5pc zero- and near-zero emission fuel use by 2030 and the industry's entire 2050 net-zero goal. The World Shipping Council's vice president Bryan Wood-Thomas praised the agreement and said one benefit of it is the pricing system that is "more aggressive" if a vessel fails to meet the GHG intensity standard. "But you also have a fee system that gives investors more confidence in actual revenue [from using cleaner fuels]," he said. The Brazilian representative told Argus the fact that some countries thought the agreement was too ambitious while others indicated it was not ambitious enough show the group may have reached a balance that can be possible to comply. About the Brazilian position, the representative said the country "was never against an agreement". "We were only against some aspects of the agreement, and we think that the membership has heard our concerns, and that's why we ended up pretty happy with the results", he said. Brazil voted in favour of the agreement today. By Hussein Al-Khalisy, Madeleine Jenkins, Natália Coelho, and Gabriel Tassi Lara. Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US tariffs cast a shadow on global gas market


11/04/25
11/04/25

US tariffs cast a shadow on global gas market

Steel can make up nearly a third of an LNG terminal's pricetag, so the new levies could push up costs and push back start-up dates, writes Xiaoyi Deng London, 11 April (Argus) — US president Donald Trump's volatile tariff policy and some of the countermeasures already announced by large trade partners are unlikely to cause any direct disruption to global gas markets. But they will have a direct impact on future US liquefaction capacity. And the indirect effects on gas supply and demand could be huge, stemming from a weaker macroeconomic outlook, fuel substitution and inflationary pressures on infrastructure development. US LNG developers hailed Trump's return to office, after complaining that his predecessor complicated the issuance of additional export licences. But Trump's imposition of 25pc tariffs on all foreign-sourced steel and aluminum, from 12 March, will increase infrastructure costs in the US' upstream and midstream sectors. These present an immediate risk for US LNG developers, particularly for the five projects under construction and the six others expected to reach final investment decisions (FIDs) this year. Metals account for up to 30pc of the cost of an LNG export plant. A terminal can cost $5bn-25bn to build, depending on its size, with steel used for pipelines, tanks and other structural frameworks. Facilities can be built using some domestically produced metal, but higher prices for this might lead to construction and FID delays for the country's planned liquefaction projects. US tariffs' primary effect on the domestic gas market stems from duties levied on non-energy goods used by the oil and gas industry, including steel and specialised pipeline components such as valves and compressors, which are imported. The US remains a net natural gas importer from Canada , but these flows are unlikely to be affected by trade tariffs, given the lack of alternative supply sources available to some northern US states. Tariff baiting Trump's latest tariff round , unveiled on 2 April, involves a a minimum 10pc on all foreign imports from 5 April,with much higher tariffs on selected countries that briefly came into force on 9 April, before Trump bowed to panic in financial markets and announced a 90-day pause. China is the key exception. It has announced retaliatory tariffs that could disrupt US energy exports, resulting in an escalation that leaves the overall levy at 145pc in the US and 125pc in China. China had already stopped importing US LNG earlier this year. But disruption to trade between the world's two largest economies may weigh heavily on manufacturing activity in China, in turn reducing industrial gas demand. And the ripple effects of disruption to US LPG exports to China may alter fuel-switching economics in the region and beyond. Most other countries in Asia-Pacific have opted not to follow China's lead by retaliating. The Japanese government intends to negotiate a better tariff deal and is considering investing in the US' proposed 20mn t/yr Alaska LNG export project as part of wider efforts to reduce its trade surplus with the US. Countries in Asia-Pacific have been hit with some of the highest of Trump's targeted duties. The EU is keeping retaliatory measures on the table, but these are unlikely to involve US LNG. Europe has become much more reliant on LNG imports after losing the bulk of its Russian pipeline supply, and imposing tariffs on energy imports would only reignite inflationary pressures that European countries have tried to curb over the past three years. The bloc says it is ready to negotiate on possibly increasing its US LNG imports to reduce its trade surplus and would axe tariffs on industrial imports if the US agrees to do the same. But Trump says this is not enough, citing the EU's upcoming Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism as one of the "unfair trade practices" that justifies a tariff response. US LNG project pipeline mn t/yr Project Capacity Expected start/FID Under construction Plaquemines 19.2 2025 Corpus Christi stage 3 12.0 2025 Golden Pass 18.1 2026 Rio Grande 17.6 2027 Port Arthur 13.5 2027 Waiting for final investment decision Delfin FLNG 1 13.2 mid-2025 Texas LNG 4.0 2025 Calcasieu Pass 2 28.0 mid-2025 Corpus Christi train 8-9 3.3 2025 Louisiana LNG 16.5 mid-2025 Cameron train 4 6.8 mid-2025 Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Q&A: IMO GHG scheme in EU ETS could be 'challenging'


11/04/25
11/04/25

Q&A: IMO GHG scheme in EU ETS could be 'challenging'

London, 11 April (Argus) — Delegates have approved the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism proposal at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting. Argus Media spoke to ministerial adviser and Finland's head representative at the IMO delegation talks, Anita Irmeli, on the sidelines of the London MEPC meeting. What is your initial reaction to the text? We are happy and satisfied about the content of the agreed text, so far. But we need to be careful. This week, all member states were able to vote. But in October, when adaption will take place, only those states which are parties to Marpol Annex VI will be able to vote if indeed a vote is called for, and that changes the situation a little bit. Here when we were voting, a minority was enough — 40 votes. But if or when we vote in October, then we need two thirds of those party to Marpol Annex VI to be in favour of the text. Will enthusiasm for the decision today remain by October? I'm pretty sure it will. But you never know what will happen between now and and the next six months. What is the effect of the decision on FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS? Both FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS have a review clause. This review clause states that if we are ambitious enough at the IMO, then the EU can review or amend the regulation. So of course, it is very important that we first consider if the approved Marpol amendments are ambitious enough to meet EU standards. Only after that evaluation, which won't be until well after October, can we consider these possible changes. Do you think the EU will be able to adopt these the text as it stands today? My personal view is that we can perhaps incorporate this text under FuelEU Maritime, but it may be more challenging for the EU ETS, where shipping is now included. What was the impact of US President Donald Trump's letter on the proceedings? EU states were not impacted, but it's difficult to say what the impact was on other states. By Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Generic Hero Banner

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more