Generic Hero BannerGeneric Hero Banner
Latest market news

US keeps arctic leasing date despite seismic delay

  • : Crude oil, Natural gas
  • 19/02/08

President Donald Trump's administration is sticking with plans to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to development this year despite a delay in gathering new seismic oil and gas survey data.

The US Interior Department's senior adviser for Alaska affairs, Steve Wackowski, at a public meeting this week announced there would not be any seismic testing in the Alaska refuge this winter, the only season when the tundra is frozen enough to support the heavy equipment needed to conduct the surveys.

That means plans to gather three-dimensional seismic data that would indicate which parts of the refuge's coastal plain are most likely to hold oil and gas will not be ready until 2020 at the earliest. If a lease sale is still held this year, it would force producers to rely mostly on less detailed two-dimensional seismic data gathered more than 30 years ago.

Interior said it would still hold a lease sale this year so long as it is able to finalize an environmental impact statement (EIS) that it released in draft form in December. The coastal plain has long been targeted for development because it holds an estimated 5.7bn-10.4bn of technically recoverable crude and is close to existing infrastructure in Prudhoe Bay.

"There is no requirement that we have to use seismic before a lease sale," Interior said. "If we are able to complete the EIS, we will still hold the lease sale in 2019."

Surveying company SAExploration and two Alaska native corporations last year jointly sought permits to begin seismic testing last December. The companies called for deploying on the tundra a dozen rubber-tracked seismic trucks, each weighing 90,000 pounds, along with personnel carriers, worker camps and a temporary airfield.

But administration officials last year warned the seismic surveys might not happen this winter. Interior assistant secretary for land and minerals management Joe Balash in December said regulators were waiting on permits for polar bears, which build hard-to-spot dens in the snow that could be crushed during surveying. The 35-day government shutdown delayed work on the permits and in seeking comment on the draft EIS.

Taxpayer groups say the plans to lease with out-of-date seismic data make it even less likely that a lease sale will raise the $2bn the Republican-controlled US Congress said it would when opened the refuge to drilling through a 2017 tax cut bill. If every tract in the 1.56mn-acre were leased, it would require an average price of nearly $1,400/acre to generate that amount of revenue.

"We absolutely think taxpayer dollars are at risk, and the accelerated schedule make it all the more problematic for us," Taxpayers for Common Sense vice president Autumn Hanna said.

Oil and gas producers, beyond seismic data collected in 1984-85, can also use data gathered on top producing areas in the Prudhoe Bay and extrapolate it to the refuge based on geologic field data. BP, Chevron and two Alaska native corporations also have data about a well drilled in the refuge in 1986.

But producers still lack robust data on locations of oil, its economic recoverability and the size of the reservoirs holding the resource. That creates the prospect that producers might bid on large amounts of the refuge and wait to start drilling until more data is collected. Environmentalists say they plan to oppose seismic testing because of the effects on the environment.

"The arctic refuge is a near pristine area," Wilderness Society arctic program director Lois Epstein said. "As soon as you are starting to do things, whether it is seismic or surveying, you are going to have an area where wildlife is affected, and perhaps permanently."


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.

25/04/10

EIA slashes WTI outlook by $7/bl on trade uncertainty

EIA slashes WTI outlook by $7/bl on trade uncertainty

Calgary, 10 April (Argus) — The US light sweet crude benchmark will be nearly $7/bl lower this year than previously expected, with an ongoing trade war stifling global demand by nearly 500,000 b/d, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) said today. WTI at Cushing, Oklahoma, is expected to average $63.88/bl in 2025, the agency said in its latest Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO), lower by $6.80/bl from its March forecast. It will fall further to $57.48/bl in 2026, or $7.49/bl lower from the prior STEO. Brent prices saw similar downward revisions and is now forecast at $67.68/bl in 2025 and $61.48/bl in 2026. The latest STEO was to be released on 8 April, but the EIA said it needed more time to rerun its models in light of last week's sweeping tariff action by US president Donald Trump and subsequent retaliation by China. The protectionist measures have led major banks to cut oil price forecasts amid growing concerns over a stagnating US economy. The EIA completed its analysis on 7 April meaning it did not incorporate the most recent developments, including Trump's 9 April pause on the highest levels of punitive tariffs against key US trading partners and an increase in Chinese tariffs . The latest forecast is "subject to significant uncertainty," said the EIA. Global consumption of oil and liquid fuels is now expected to average 103.64mn b/d in 2025, lower by 490,000 b/d from the previous forecast. Consumption in 2026 is forecast at 104.68mn b/d, lower by 620,000 b/d. Global production meanwhile was lowered by to 104.1mn b/d for 2025 and to 105.35mn b/d for 2026. These are lower from the prior forecast by 70,000 b/d and 43,000 b/d, respectively. In the US, domestic consumption is projected to average 20.38mn b/d in 2025, lower by 70,000 b/d compared to last month's STEO. Consumption was lowered for 2026 by 110,000 b/d at 20.49mn b/d. Domestic production will come in at 13.51mn b/d in 2025 and 13.56mn b/d in 2026, the EIA said. This is lower by 100,000 b/d and 200,000 b/d, respectively, compared to the March STEO. By Brett Holmes Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Norway plans to cut GHGs, but remain oil, gas producer


25/04/10
25/04/10

Norway plans to cut GHGs, but remain oil, gas producer

London, 10 April (Argus) — Norway's government has proposed a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction of a minimum 70-75pc by 2035, from a 1990 baseline, but has also committed to the country remaining "a stable and predictable supplier of oil and gas produced with low emissions". The government today set out plans for a 2035 GHG reduction target, as well as a wider climate plan for the country. The 2035 GHG reduction targets build on Norway's 2030 goal of "at least" a 55pc reduction in GHGs, again from 1990 levels. Norway has a legislated goal of "a low-emission society" by 2050 — GHG reductions of 90-95pc from the 1990 baseline. Norway's government underlined its commitment to Paris climate agreement goals and phasing out the use of fossil fuels "towards 2050", but also said that it would "not prepare a strategy for the end phase of Norwegian oil and gas". "The government's plan is about phasing out emissions, not industries", it said, noting that Norway is "a significant contributor to Europe's energy security". Norway is the largest producer and only net exporter of oil and gas in Europe. "The government will further develop the petroleum industry and facilitate the future provision of fields… production will continue to be efficient and with low emissions," the government said. It aims for the country's oil and gas sector — the country's highest-emitting industry — to bring emissions from production to net zero in 2050. The bulk of oil and gas emissions are from downstream use — known as scope 3. Norway plans to achieve the majority of its proposed 70-75pc GHG cuts through national measures, including reduced fossil fuel use and both technical and nature-based carbon removals. It also plans to purchase emissions reductions from outside the EU and European Economic Area. This refers to internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs) — emission credits — under Article 6 of the Paris climate agreement. Norway's parliament will consider the proposals. Once legislated in the country's climate act, Norway plans to communicate its updated plans to the UN. Signatories to the Paris climate agreement are expected to submit updated climate plans — known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) — to UN climate body the UNFCCC every five years. The deadline for NDCs setting out climate goals up to 2035 was in February, but many countries have yet to submit plans . By Georgia Gratton Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Trump coal plant bailout renews first term fight


25/04/09
25/04/09

Trump coal plant bailout renews first term fight

Washington, 9 April (Argus) — President Donald Trump's effort to stop the retirement of coal-fired power plants is reminiscent of a 2017 attempt that faltered in the face of widespread industry opposition. Trump, in an executive order signed on Tuesday, directed the US Department of Energy (DOE) to tap into emergency powers to stop the retirement of coal-fired plants and other large plants it believes are critical to grid reliability. The order sets a 30-day deadline for DOE to decide which plants are critical based on a new methodology that will analyze if reserve margins, or the percent of unused capacity at peak demand, are at an "acceptable" level. The initiative shares similarities to Trump's unsuccessful effort in his first term to bail out coal and nuclear plants. In the 2017 effort, Trump backed a "grid resiliency" proposal to compensate power plants with 90 days of on-site fuel. But an unusual coalition of natural gas industry groups, manufacturers, renewable producers and environmentalists united against the idea, warning it would upend power markets and cost consumers billions of dollars each year. The US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission voted 5-0 to reject the proposal. It remains unclear if a similarly sized coalition will emerge to fight Trump's latest proposal, under which DOE would use emergency powers in section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act to keep some coal plants and other large power plants operating. Industry groups have largely been avoiding taking positions that could be seen as critical of Trump. Environmentalists say they strongly oppose keeping coal plants operating using emergency powers. Doing so would mean more air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, they say, and higher costs for consumers. Environmental groups say they are hoping other industries affected by the potential bailout will eventually speak out against the initiative. "The silence from those who know better is deafening," Center for Biological Diversity climate law institute legal director Jason Rylander said. "I hope that we will start to see more resistance to these dangerous policies before significant damage is done." DOE said it was "already hard at work" to implement Trump's executive order, which was paired with other orders that were meant to support coal mining and coal production. US energy secretary Chris Wright said today that reviving coal will increase the reliability of the electrical grid and bring down electricity costs, but he has not shared further details on the 202(c) initiative. Trying to litigate the program could be "tricky", and section 202(c) orders have never successfully been challenged in court, in part because they are usually short-term orders, Harvard Law School Electricity Law Initiative director Ari Peskoe said. But opponents could challenge them by focusing on "numerous legal problems", he said, such as not allowing public comment or running afoul of a US Supreme Court precedent that prohibits agencies from attempting to decide "major questions" without clear congressional authorization. "Here DOE would use a little-used statute explicitly written for short-term emergencies in order to PREVENT a change in the US energy mix," Peskoe said. A projected 8.1GW of coal-fired generation is set to retire this year, equivalent to nearly 5pc of the coal fleet, the US Energy Information Administration said last month. Electric utilities often decide which plants to retire years in advance, allowing them to defer maintenance and to forgo capital investments in aging facilities. Keeping coal plants running could require exemptions from environmental rules or pricey capital investments, the costs of which would likely be distributed among other ratepayers. By Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Colombian crude gains on US tariff uncertainty


25/04/09
25/04/09

Colombian crude gains on US tariff uncertainty

Sao Paulo, 9 April (Argus) — Colombian heavy sour crudes have reached their narrowest discounts to Ice Brent in at least four years, supported by uncertainty surrounding US tariffs and tight supplies of similar grades. Castilla's discount to Ice Brent was $3.50/bl on Tuesday and Vasconia's was at $1.45/bl, $4.40/bl and $3.15/bl tighter than on 2 January, respectively. Castilla has not reached that narrow of a level against the benchmark since early 2021 and Vasconia has not since mid-2019. Outright prices were $60.89/bl for Vasconia and $58.84/bl for Castilla on Tuesday. Colombian crude discounts started to narrow in January after US president Donald Trump mentioned plans for a 25pc tariff on all imports from Mexico and Canada, which produce competing heavy sours. Amid the uncertainty, buyers opted to secure supply that might not face tariffs, sources said, despite delays in tariffs implementation in early February and March. But a sweeping executive order last week excluded energy commodities from tariffs, as well as trade covered under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA). Then on Wednesday Trump announced he will pause many of the tariffs on other products for 90 days, but no changes have been announced for energy imports . Despite Trump's tariff exemptions on crude imports to the US, tight availability of heavy supply for US Gulf refiners could still support relative values for Colombian grades. Subbing in Colombian crudes are seen as good substitutes for heavy crude from the US' nearest neighbors, especially Mexican supplies, which are widely used by US Gulf coast refiners. Additionally, Colombia's geographical location makes shipping to the US Gulf coast quicker and less costly compared with other South American countries, such as Ecuador, which also produces heavy sour crude. Further tightening heavy supply for Gulf coast refiners, the US government announced in March that the deadline for the end of Chevron's waiver to produce in Venezuela is 27 May, stopping the flow of crude to the US from its joint venture with state-owned PdV. Chevron brought about 222,000 b/d in Venezuelan crude to the US from January-November 2024. according to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA). Even with the volume representing a fraction of Gulf coast imports, it represents almost 30pc of total Colombian output. Its production reached 760,000 b/d in January, according to oil services chamber Campetrol, citing figures from hydrocarbons agency ANH. Further US tariffs on countries that take delivery of Venezuelan oil and natural gas could also make Colombian barrels more attractive, although Ecuadorean crudes are possible regional supply alternatives too. Meanwhile, Mexico's state-owned Pemex has faced quality issues with its crude production since late last year, which could lead to Gulf coast buyers turning to Colombian barrels as alternatives. Pemex acknowledged issues with salt and water levels in its crude in February but denied that international buyers have rejected shipments because of those concerns. Mexico's policy of expanding domestic refining has also contributed to a decline in crude exports to the US in recent years. Colombian crude values have also likely been supported by firmer competing Canadian crude values at the US Gulf coast. Canadian crude differentials have firmed in part because of upgrader turnaround season in Alberta's oil sands region, slowing production. The shutdown of the 622,000 b/d Keystone pipeline from the region after a spill in North Dakota on 8 April also limited supply, buttressing prices. By João Scheller Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

What do tariffs mean for the global gas market?


25/04/09
25/04/09

What do tariffs mean for the global gas market?

Some countries are considering retaliatory tariffs, while others hope to reduce their trade deficit in order to negotiate lower rates London, 9 April (Argus) — Newly announced US tariffs on goods entering the country and some of the countermeasures already announced by large trade partners are unlikely to cause any direct disruptions to global gas markets. But the indirect effects on gas supply and demand may be huge, stemming from a weaker macroeconomic outlook, fuel substitution and inflationary pressures on infrastructure development. US president Donald Trump on 2 April imposed a minimum 10pc tax on all foreign imports from 5 April,with much higher tariffs on selected countries that briefly came into force on 9 April, before Trump announced a 90-day pause. China is the only exception. It has announced retaliatory tariffs that could disrupt US energy exports, resulting in an escalation that has already brought up the respective levies to 125pc in the US and 84pc in China. These are unlikely to have any direct impact on LNG trade flows, as China had already stopped importing US LNG earlier this year. But disruptions 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 disruptions 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 against US tariffs, even though many have warned about the potential for long-term economic disruption. 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 include any levy on 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 zero out its tariffs on industrial imports if the US agrees to do the same. But Trump says this offer is not enough, citing the EU's upcoming Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism as one of the "unfair trade practices" that justifies a tariff response. Nerves of steel Much greater risks for gas markets may stem from rising infrastructure costs in the US' upstream and midstream sectors, particularly as a result of earlier tariffs imposed on steel and aluminum imports. 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 this year. Metals account for up to 30pc of the cost of building an LNG export plant. An LNG terminal can cost $5bn-25bn to build, depending on its size, with steel used for pipelines, tanks and other structural frameworks. US facilities can be built using some domestic metal, but higher prices for this may lead to construction and final investment decision 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 from overseas. 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. 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.

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