Latest market news

Von der Leyen faces new Green Deal challenges

  • : Biofuels, Electricity, Hydrogen, Natural gas
  • 24/07/19

The president promises a ‘clean industrial deal', but will need to make compromises over climate policy, writes Dafydd ab Iago

Ursula von der Leyen's re-election by the European Parliament as president of the European Commission on 18 July promises to see a doubling down on climate and energy policy, with her 2024-29 mandate stipulating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions cuts of at least 90pc by 2040 compared with 1990.

"I have not forgotten how [Russian president Vladimir] Putin blackmailed us by cutting us off from Russian fossil fuels. We invested massively in homegrown cheap renewables and this enabled us to break free from dirty Russian fossil fuels," von der Leyen says, promising to end the "era of dependency on Russian fossil fuels". She has not given an end date for this, nor specified if this includes a commitment to ending Russian LNG imports.

Von der Leyen went on to detail political guidelines for 2024-29. She has pledged to propose a "clean industrial deal" in the first 100 days of her new mandate, albeit without giving concrete figures about how much investment this would channel to infrastructure and industry, particularly for energy-intensive sectors. The clean industrial deal will help bring down energy bills, she says.

Von der Leyen told parliament that the commission would propose legislation, under the European Climate Law, establishing a 90pc emissions-reduction target for 2040. Her political guidelines also call for scaling up and prioritising investment in clean technologies, including grid infrastructure, storage capacity, transport for captured CO2, energy efficiency, power digitalisation and a hydrogen network. She plans to extend aggregate demand mechanisms beyond gas to include hydrogen and critical raw materials, and notes the dangers of dependencies and fraying supply chains — from Putin's energy blackmail to China's monopoly on battery and chip raw materials.

Majority report

Passing the necessary legislation to implement her stated policies will now require approval from EU states and parliament. Unless amplified by Germany's election next year, election victories by far-right parties in France and elsewhere appear not to threaten EU state majorities for specific legislation.

Parliament's political centre-left S&D and liberal Renew groups, as well as von der Leyen's own centre-right European People's Party (EPP), have elaborated key policy requests. These broadly call for the continuation of the European Green Deal — a set of legislation and policy measures aimed at 55pc GHG emissions reductions by 2030 compared with 1990.

A symbolic issue for von der Leyen to decide on — or compromise on — is that of internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. EPP wants to stick to technological neutrality and revise the current mandate for sales of new ICE cars to be phased out by 2035, if they cannot run exclusively on carbon-neutral fuels. The EPP wants an e-fuel, biofuel and low-carbon fuel strategy. Von der Leyen's guidelines reflect the need to gain support from centre-right, centre-left and greens. She says the 2035 climate neutrality target for new cars creates investor and manufacturer "predictability" but requires a "technology-neutral approach, in which e-fuels have a role to play". She has not mentioned carbon-neutral biofuels.

It will be impossible for von der Leyen to satisfy all demands in her second mandate. This includes policy requests put forward by the EPP, ranging from a "pragmatic" definition of low-carbon hydrogen and market rules for carbon capture and storage, to postponing the EU's deforestation regulation.

EU member states are expected to propose their candidates for commissioners in August, including for energy, climate and trade policy, with von der Leyen's new commission subject to a final vote in parliament in late October.


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.

24/07/19

Trump vows to target 'green' spending, EV rules

Trump vows to target 'green' spending, EV rules

Washington, 19 July (Argus) — Former president Donald Trump promised to redirect US green energy spending to other projects, throw out electric vehicle (EV) rules and increase drilling, in a speech Thursday night formally accepting the Republican presidential nomination. Trump's acceptance speech, delivered at the Republican National Convention, offered the clearest hints yet at his potential plans for dismantling the Inflation Reduction Act and the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law. Without explicitly naming the two laws, Trump said he would claw back unspent funds for the "Green New Scam," a shorthand he has used in the past to criticize spending on wind, solar, EVs, energy infrastructure and climate resilience. "All of the trillions of dollars that are sitting there not yet spent, we will redirect that money for important projects like roads, bridges, dams, and we will not allow it to be spent on the meaningless Green New Scam ideas," Trump said during the final night of the convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Trump and his campaign have yet to clearly detail their plans for the two laws, which collectively provide hundreds of billions of dollars worth of federal tax credits and direct spending for renewable energy, EVs, clean hydrogen, carbon capture, sustainable aviation fuel, biofuels, nuclear and advanced manufacturing. Repealing those programs outright could be politically difficult because a majority of spending from the two laws have flowed to districts represented by Republican lawmakers. The speech was Trump's first public remarks since he was grazed by a bullet in an assassination attempt on 13 July. Trump used the shooting to call for the country to unite, but he repeatedly slipped back into the divisive rhetoric of his campaign and his grievances against President Joe Biden, who he claimed was the worst president in US history. Trump vowed to "end the electric vehicle mandate" on the first day of his administration, in an apparent reference to tailpipe rules that are expected to result in about 54pc of new cars and trucks sales being battery-only EVs by model year 2032. Trump also said that unless automakers put their manufacturing facilities in the US, he would put tariffs of 100-200pc on imported vehicles. To tackle inflation, Trump said he would bring down interest rates, which are controlled by the US Federal Reserve, an agency that historically acts independently from the White House. Trump also said he would bring down prices for energy through a policy of "drill, baby, drill" and cutting regulations. Trump also vowed to pursue tax cuts, tariffs and the "largest deportation in history," all of which independent economists say would add to inflation. The Republican convention unfolded as Biden, who is isolating after testing positive for Covid-19, faces a growing chorus of top Democratic lawmakers pressuring him to drop out of the presidential race. Democrats plan to select their presidential nominee during an early virtual roll-call vote or at the Democratic National Convention on 19-22 August. By Chris Knigh t Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Q&A: Aviation may pull feeds away from marine: BV


24/07/19
24/07/19

Q&A: Aviation may pull feeds away from marine: BV

London, 19 July (Argus) — Biofuel feedstocks could be routed away from marine fuels to meet demand from the aviation sector if the latter is willing to pay higher prices associated with sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), Bureau Veritas (BV) Marine & Offshore's global market leader for sustainable shipping Julien Boulland told Argus. Edited highlights follow: Marine biodiesel has been the largest alternative fuel uptake, with over 1mn t sold in Rotterdam and Singapore last year. But with Argus assessments showing premiums above $225/t to VLSFO dob ARA, how do you see marine biodiesel demand in the medium- to long-term? Shipowners and ship operators have to run an individual cost-analysis on whether the premiums could be offset by potential savings under EU emissions trading system (ETS) and FuelEU Maritime regulations, as well as any future regulations such as the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) economic pricing mechanism . In terms of emissions, biofuels still emit CO2 on a tank-to-wake basis, but less on a well-to-wake basis compared to their fossil equivalents. This will also vary depending on the feedstock for the biofuel as well as the production process. Under the current IMO regulations for energy efficiency, including the Ship Energy Management Plan (SEEMP) and its requirements for fuel reporting (DCS), there might be some indirect commercial benefits for owners, too. For example, a better CII (Carbon Intensity Indicator) score may make a vessel more appealing to charterers and help its owner secure more favourable rates. There are also other factors to consider, such as Scope 3 emissions rights, which can influence demand, as we currently see from voluntary demand from cargo owners seeking those documents. But this will also have a geographic impact on demand, as larger container liner companies usually utilise the east-west route and they might prefer to opt for bunkering the marine biodiesel blend in Singapore due to lower prices. What are the risks associated with bunkering marine biodiesel in relation to conventional ship engines? How significant is the recent FOBAS report that implied a correlation between the use of "unidentified" biofuels and engine pump injector damage? We have supported our shipowner clients in numerous pilots to trial biofuels such as fatty acid methyl ester (Fame) and hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO) in variable blends. Overall, these trials have gone smoothly, but we have learned a few things along the way. Firstly, engines do not need to be modified, but since biofuels have slightly different physical properties, it is necessary to find the right engine adjustments. A very good knowledge of the fuel properties is key in determining the right adjustments, and the new revision of ISO 8217 on marine fuel specifications is crucial in supporting this process. Another key finding is the importance of receiving full information on fuel characteristics from the supplier. Finally, BV plays a key role in ensuring full fuel certification on several aspects, including sustainability and physical properties. Used cooking oil (UCO) can also feed into SAF and with potentially greater refining margins. Do you think some feedstocks will be pulled away from marine? When it comes to methanol, we believed marine would take up more of the feedstock compared with the chemicals industry due to greater willingness to pay larger premiums. But with biofuels, it seems to be the other way around where aviation could end up pulling biofuel feedstocks away from maritime. In terms of fuel consumption, the marine and aviation industries are comparable but if aviation are willing to pay more, then it will likely get more of the feedstocks required to produce SAF. What are the implications of the new ISO specifications, what are the key takeaways for marine biodiesel uptake? More has to be done, but now we have parameters for assessing biofuel blend specifications. It was very well accepted by the industry, and now operators and shipowners have a standard to rely on. But it doesn't resolve the question around feedstock cross-industry competition. However, it does also open the door for off-spec Fame residue blends to become ISO-certified — depending on further testing. With IMO aiming for "global regulations for a global market", how do you see conflicts between different regulations affecting the market? We are closely following the IMO development process for a global economic pricing mechanism. IMO has assigned a working group of technical experts to look at this mechanism from an apolitical perspective. In terms of potential regulatory conflicts , we have the example of the Netherlands, where the Dutch emission authority requires the delivery of Proof of Sustainability (PoS) certificates for applying to the scheme of Dutch renewable tickets (HBE-G) which can be traded, but this PoS cannot be used for other purposes, such as the EU ETS. To circumvent this hiccup, we may see the development of new digital certificates, such as an accompanying ISCC-certified Proof of Compliance (PoC). By Hussein Al-Khalisy Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Japan’s Shizuoka Gas expands Indian gas presence


24/07/19
24/07/19

Japan’s Shizuoka Gas expands Indian gas presence

Tokyo, 19 July (Argus) — Japanese gas distributor Shizuoka Gas has ventured into India's biogas sector, buying a stake in Indian manure-based producer Farm Gas. Shizuoka Gas has bought 10pc of Farm Gas, a joint venture between Indian gas distributor IRM Energy and Indian consultant Eximius Resources, for an undisclosed sum. Shizuoka Gas previously bought a stake in Gujarat-based IRM Energy in 2021 , which supplies natural gas to the industrial sector. Farm Gas has been operating a biogas plant using cow dung and rice straw since December 2022. The manure-derived biogas is sold to auto firms as a vehicle fuel. The organic fertilizer produced as a by-product during the production process is sold to fertilizer companies and nearby farmers. Cow dung and rice straw creates air pollution, which is a huge problem in India, Shizuoka Gas said. It said it will build its experience in biogas production from the Farm Gas acquisition, with an aim to develop biogas plants in India and southeast Asia in the future. But shipping the biogas to Japan is not a current option, as Japan has already established pipeline gas supplies, it added. By Reina Maeda Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Australian Enterprise gas drives Beach’s Apr-Jun output


24/07/19
24/07/19

Australian Enterprise gas drives Beach’s Apr-Jun output

Sydney, 19 July (Argus) — Australian independent Beach Energy produced more gas and liquids during April-June than the previous quarter but ended its 2023-24 fiscal year to 30 June with output down against a year earlier. April-June sales gas production of 20.2PJ (539mn m³) was 10pc higher than the previous quarter's 18.3PJ and up on April-June 2023's 19.6PJ as it commissioned its Enterprise field in Victoria state's Otway basin. Beach's total 2023-24 production of 18.5mn bl of oil equivalent (boe) was 5pc down on the 19.5mn boe achieved in 2022-23, with natural field decline and rainfall resulting in Beach's oil output falling by 11pc from the previous quarter to 7,400 b/d from 8,300 b/d in January-March. The firm shipped a second 79,000t Waitsia cargo from the Woodside-operated 16.9mn t/yr North West Shelf LNG terminal during the quarter, consisting of Xyris gas plant production and third-party surplus gas sourced through swaps. It expects to achieve the first gas at its delayed 250 TJ/d (6.7mn m³/d) Waitsia gas plant in Western Australia's onshore Perth basin in early 2025 ahead of a 3-4 month ramp-up period. The firm has released a wider than usual production guidance for 2024-25 of 17.5mn-21.5mn boe, to account for uncertainty on the timing of Waitsia commissioning and output growth. Beach identified A$135mn ($90.5mn) in field operating cost savings and sustaining capital expenditure reductions as part of its strategic review findings released on 18 June. Beach confirmed it expects to recognise an A$365mn-400mn pre-tax impairment charge in its full-year results following reassessment of its Bass basin assets in Australia and Taranaki basin project in New Zealand. It is targeting new gas supplies of 150 TJ/d over the coming 12-18 months from the Enterprise, Thylacine West and Waitsia fields. By Tom Major Beach Energy results (mn boe) Apr-Jun '24 Jan-Mar '24 Apr-Jun '23 2022-23 2023-24 Production 4.8 4.5 5.0 19.5 18.2 Sales 5.4 4.8 5.7 20.7 21.3 Sales revenue (A$) 433 392 450 1,617 1,766 Realised gas price (A$/GJ) 10.30 9.70 9.50 8.80 9.50 Source: Beach Energy Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US gas producers may struggle to meet LNG demand


24/07/18
24/07/18

US gas producers may struggle to meet LNG demand

New York, 18 July (Argus) — US natural gas producers looking to become the primary suppliers to increasingly dependent overseas markets may still need to overcome tight pipeline capacity, volatility in oil markets and even growing competition from the US power sector. Large producers such as EQT and Chesapeake Energy are banking that the rapid buildout of LNG export capacity will connect the US to higher-priced markets and provide an outlet for a glut of US supply. At the same time, European buyers are depending on US gas to help wean the continent off Russian supplies since the Russia-Ukraine war broke out in 2022. But questions remain about the ability of US producers to feed the rapid expansion. The US already leads the world in LNG exports and is on pace to double that capacity later this decade. US baseload LNG export capacity was forecast to increase to 21.1 Bcf/d by the end of 2027, about one fifth of today's total lower-48 US gas production, according to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA). By 2030, Shell expects US LNG production will meet about 5pc of global gas demand and 30pc of global LNG demand. But to satisfy a world that much more reliant on US shipments of gas, US producers have to significantly grow output and build the pipelines needed to connect subterranean shale basins to the US Gulf coast, where almost all the US liquefaction capacity will be located. East Daley Analytics director Jack Weixel said regulatory challenges to permitting those pipelines threaten the US' ability to rapidly boost its LNG exports regardless of who is elected president in November. Growing pains There are unique challenges to raising production in all three of the US' biggest gas-producing formations — the Appalachian basins, the Permian basin of west Texas and southeast New Mexico, and the Haynesville shale of east Texas and northern Louisiana. In Appalachia, developers have almost entirely lost faith in their ability to secure the permits necessary to build new interstate pipelines, so incremental LNG demand will probably not be met by Appalachian gas. The Permian is the US' most prolific oil field, making it an unreliable associated gas producer; a dim outlook for crude prices would mechanically slash gas output. And in the less mature Haynesville, there are "a lot of open questions on how deep that inventory is and how much (it) can actually grow," Citi equity analyst Paul Diamond said. The threat to building new pipelines is not solely the domain of regulators, either, but can even come from within the industry itself, as US midstream giant Energy Transfer has shown over the past year by trying to block several new pipelines out of the Haynesville. Some of Energy Transfer's opponents have warned the legal dispute could hamper the gas production growth needed in the Haynesville to meet the US' coming LNG boom. Permitting aside, some analysts consulted by Argus expressed concern about the integrity of the US gas pipeline network itself, whether due to accidents or ransomware attacks, such as that which targeted the Colonial oil products pipeline in May 2021, disrupting fuel deliveries into the eastern US. Powerful competition Meeting booming LNG demand could be even harder if domestic gas needs exceed expectations. Gas producers and power generators eager to serve data centers running emergent artificial intelligence software have indicated that might be the case. EQT, the largest US gas producer by volume, in its most aggressive data center build-out scenario envisioned an 18 Bcf/d (510mn m³/d) increase in gas demand to generate electricity through 2030, while US gas pipeline operator Kinder Morgan forecast an increase between 7-10 Bcf/d. Goldman Sachs and consultancy Enverus forecast more modest increases of 3.3 Bcf/d and 2 Bcf/d, respectively. The US power sector consumed a record-high 35.4 Bcf/d of gas in 2023, the EIA said. About 43pc of US utility-scale electricity was generated by gas. EQT may be biased. But if its forecast is accurate, US gas producers may not be able to meet all that new demand while also exporting double what the US is exporting today, FactSet analyst Connor McLean said. In that case, a high-demand scenario like EQT's could leave the US gas market undersupplied, boosting US gas prices and closing the spot price arbitrage between US pipeline gas and global LNG, which has mostly been wide open for years. In response to elevated prices at the US gas benchmark, Henry Hub, overseas buyers might find themselves canceling US cargoes — if their supply contracts allow for it — eating the requisite liquefaction fee and taking delivery of a cargo from Qatar or Russia instead. Not so fast The caveat to risks of an undersupplied US gas market is that official timelines of when LNG export terminals are expected to enter service on the US Gulf coast may be overly optimistic. Texas' planned 18.1mn t/yr Golden Pass LNG delaying first LNG on the heels of its lead contractor going bankrupt is just one recent example of this. "All that does is give producers a little bit more time to get production to where it needs to be," Weixel said. By Julian Hast Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

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