Climate action or distraction? Sweeping COP pledges won’t touch fossil fuel use

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — A torrent of pollution-slashing pledges from governments and major oil companies sparked cries of “greenwashing” on Saturday, even before world leaders had boarded their flights home from this year’s global climate conference.  

After leaders wrapped two days of speeches filled with high-flying rhetoric and impassioned pleas for action, the Emirati presidency of the COP28 climate talks unleashed a series of initiatives aimed at cleaning up the world’s energy sector, the largest source of planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions. 

The announcement, made at an hours-long event Saturday afternoon featuring U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, contained two main planks — a pledge by oil and gas companies to reduce emissions, and a commitment by 118 countries to triple the world’s renewable energy capacity and double energy savings efforts. 

It was, on its face, an impressive and ambitious reveal. 

COP28 President Sultan al-Jaber, the oil executive helming the talks, crowed that the package “aligns more countries and companies around the North Star of keeping 1.5 degrees Celsius within reach than ever before,” referring to the Paris Agreement target for limiting global warming. 

But many climate-vulnerable countries and non-government groups instantly cast an arched eyebrow toward the whole endeavor.

“The rapid acceleration of clean energy is needed, and we’ve called for the tripling of renewables. But it is only half the solution,” said Tina Stege, climate envoy for the Marshall Islands. “The pledge can’t greenwash countries that are simultaneously expanding fossil fuel production.” 

Carroll Muffett, president of the nonprofit Center for International Environmental Law, said: “The only way to ‘decarbonize’ carbon-based oil and gas is to stop producing it. … Anything short of this is just more industry greenwash.”

The divided reaction illustrates the fine line negotiators are trying to walk. The European Union has campaigned for months to win converts to the pledge on renewables and energy efficiency the U.S. and others signed up to on Saturday, even offering €2.3 billion to help. And the COP28 presidency has been on board. 

But Brussels, in theory, also wants these efforts to go hand in hand with a fossil fuel phaseout — a tough proposition for countries pulling in millions from the sector. The EU rhetoric often goes slightly beyond the U.S., even though the two allies officially support the end of “unabated” fossil fuel use, language that leaves the door open for continued oil and gas use as long as the emissions are captured — though such technology remains largely unproven.

Von der Leyen was seen trying to thread that needle on Saturday. She omitted fossil fuels altogether from her speech to leaders before slipping in a mention in a press release published hours later: “We are united by our common belief that to respect the 1.5°C goal … we need to phase out fossil fuels.” 

Harris on Saturday said the world “cannot afford to be incremental. We need transformative change and exponential impact.” 

But she did not mention phasing out fossil fuels in her speech, either. The U.S., the world’s top oil producer, has not made the goal a central pillar of its COP28 strategy. 

Flurry of pledges  

The EU and the UAE said 118 countries had signed up to the global energy goals.

The new fossil fuels agreement has been branded the “Oil and Gas Decarbonization Charter” and earned the signatures of 50 companies. The COP28 presidency said it had “launched” the deal with Saudi Arabia — the world’s largest oil exporter and one of the main obstacles to progress on international climate action.

Among the signatories was Saudi state energy company, Aramco, the world’s biggest energy firm — and second-biggest company of any sort, by revenue. Other global giants like ExxonMobil, Shell and TotalEnergies also signed.

They have committed to eliminate methane emissions by 2030, to end the routine flaring of gas by the same date, and to achieve net-zero emissions from their production operations by 2050. Adnan Amin, CEO of COP28, singled out the fact that, among the 50 firms, 29 are national oil companies.  

“That in itself is highly significant because you have not seen national oil companies so evident in these discussions before,” he told reporters.

The COP28 presidency could not disguise its glee at the flurry of announcements from the opening weekend of the conference.

“It already feels like an awful lot that we have delivered, but I am proud to say that this is just the beginning,” Majid al-Suwaidi, the COP28 director general, told reporters. 

Fred Krupp, president of the U.S.-based Environmental Defense Fund, predicted: “This will be the single most impactful day I’ve seen at any COP in 30 years in terms of slowing the rate of warming.” 

But other observers said the oil and gas commitments did not go far beyond commitments many companies already make. Research firm Zero Carbon Analytics noted the deal is “voluntary and broadly repeats previous pledges.”

Melanie Robinson, global climate program director at the World Resources Institute, said it was “encouraging that some national oil companies have set methane reduction targets for the first time.” 

But she added: “Most global oil and gas companies already have stringent requirements to cut methane emissions. … This charter is proof that voluntary commitments from the oil and gas industry will never foster the level of ambition necessary to tackle the climate crisis.” 

Some critics theorized that the COP28 presidency had deliberately launched the renewables and energy efficiency targets together with the oil and gas pledge. 

The combination, said David Tong, global industry campaign manager at advocacy group Oil Change International, “appears to be a calculated move to distract from the weakness of this industry pledge.”

The charter, he added, “is a trojan horse for Big Oil and Gas greenwash.” 

Beyond voluntary moves 

A push to speed up the phaseout of coal power garnered less attention — with French President Emmanuel Macron separately unveiling a new initiative and the United States joining a growing alliance of countries pledging to zero out coal emissions.

Macron’s “coal transition accelerator” focuses on ending private financing for coal, helping coal-dependent communities and scaling up clean energy. And Washington’s new commitment confirms its path to end all coal-fired power generation unless the emissions are first captured through technology. U.S. use of coal for power generation has already plummeted in the past decade. 

The U.S. pledge will put pressure on China, the world’s largest consumer and producer of coal, as well as countries like Japan, Turkey and Australia to give up on the high-polluting fuel, said Leo Roberts, program lead on fossil fuel transitions at think tank E3G. 

“It’s symbolic, the world’s biggest economy getting behind the shift away from the dirtiest fossil fuel, coal. And it’s sending a signal to … others who haven’t made the same commitment,” he said. 

The U.S. also unveiled new restrictions on methane emissions for its oil and gas sector on Saturday — a central plank of the Biden administration’s climate plans — and several leaders called for greater efforts to curb the potent greenhouse gas in their speeches. 

Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley called for a “global methane agreement” at COP28, warning that voluntary efforts hadn’t worked out. Von der Leyen, meanwhile, urged negotiators to enshrine the renewables and energy efficiency targets in the final summit text. 

Mohamed Adow, director of the think tank Power Shift Africa, warned delegates not to get distracted by nonbinding pledges. 

“We need to remember COP28 is not a trade show and a press conference,” he cautioned. “The talks are why we are here and getting an agreed fossil fuel phaseout date remains the biggest step countries need to take here in Dubai over the remaining days of the summit.”

Sara Schonhardt contributed reporting.



Source link

#Climate #action #distraction #Sweeping #COP #pledges #wont #touch #fossil #fuel

Kamala Harris at climate summit: World must ‘fight’ those stalling action

DUBAI — The vast, global efforts to arrest rising temperatures are imperiled and must accelerate, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris told the world climate summit on Saturday. 

“We must do more,” she implored an audience of world leaders at the COP28 climate talks in Dubai. And the headwinds are only growing, she warned.

“Continued progress will not be possible without a fight,” she told the gathering, which has drawn more than 100,000 people to this Gulf oil metropolis. “Around the world, there are those who seek to slow or stop our progress. Leaders who deny climate science, delay climate action and spread misinformation. Corporations that greenwash their climate inaction and lobby for billions of dollars in fossil fuel subsidies.” 

Her remarks — less than a year before an election that could return Donald Trump to the White House — challenged leaders to cooperate and spend more to keep the goal of containing global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius within reach. So far, the planet has warmed about 1.3 degrees since preindustrial times.

“Our action collectively, or worse, our inaction will impact billions of people for decades to come,” Harris said.

The vice president, who frequently warns about climate change threats in speeches and interviews, is the highest-ranking face of the Biden White House at the Dubai negotiations.

She used her conference platform to push that image, announcing several new U.S. climate initiatives, including a record-setting $3 billion pledge for the so-called Green Climate Fund, which aims to help countries adapt to climate change and reduce emissions. The commitment echoes an identical pledge Barack Obama made in 2014 — of which only $1 billion was delivered. The U.S. Treasury Department later specified that the updated commitment was “subject to the availability of funds.”

Meanwhile, back in D.C., the Biden administration strategically timed the release of new rules to crack down on planet-warming methane emissions from the oil and gas sector — a significant milestone in its plan to prevent climate catastrophe.

The trip allows Harris to bolster her credentials on a policy issue critical to the young voters key to President Joe Biden’s re-election campaign — and potentially to a future Harris White House run. 

“Given her knowledge base with the issue, her passion for the issue, it strikes me as a smart move for her to broaden that message out to the international audience,” said Roger Salazar, a California political strategist and former aide to then-Vice President Al Gore, a lifetime climate campaigner. 

Yet sending Harris also presents political peril. 

Biden has taken flak from critics for not attending the talks himself after representing the United States at the last two U.N. climate summits since taking office. And climate advocates have questioned the Biden administration’s embrace of the summit’s leader, Sultan al-Jaber, given he also runs the United Arab Emirates’ state-owned oil giant. John Kerry, Biden’s climate envoy, has argued the partnership can help bring fossil fuel megaliths to the table.

Harris has been on a climate policy roadshow in recent months, discussing the issue during a series of interviews at universities and other venues packed with young people and environmental advocates. The administration said it views Harris — a former California senator and attorney general — as an effective spokesperson on climate. 

“The vice president’s leadership on climate goes back to when she was the district attorney of San Francisco, as she established one of the first environmental justice units in the nation,” a senior administration official told reporters on a call previewing her trip. 

Joining Harris in Dubai are Kerry, White House climate adviser Ali Zaidi and John Podesta, who’s leading the White House effort to implement Biden’s signature climate law. 

Biden officials are leaning on that climate law — dubbed the Inflation Reduction Act — to prove the U.S. is doing its part to slash global emissions. Yet climate activists remain skeptical, chiding Biden for separately approving a series of fossil fuel projects, including an oil drilling initiative in Alaska and an Appalachian natural gas pipeline.

Similarly, the Biden administration’s opening COP28 pledge of $17.5 million for a new international climate aid fund frustrated advocates for developing nations combating climate threats. The figure lagged well behind other allies, several of whom committed $100 million or more.

Nonetheless, Harris called for aggressive action in her speech, which was followed by a session with other officials on renewable energy. The vice president committed the U.S. to doubling its energy efficiency and tripling its renewable energy capacity by 2030, joining a growing list of countries. The U.S. also said Saturday it was joining a global alliance dedicated to divorcing the world from coal-based energy. 

Like other world leaders, Harris also used her trip to conduct a whirlwind of diplomacy over the war between Israel and Hamas, which has flared back up after a brief truce.

U.S. National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said Harris would be meeting with “regional leaders” to discuss “our desire to see this pause restored, our desire to see aid getting back in, our desire to see hostages get out.”

The war has intruded into the proceedings at the climate summit, with Israeli President Isaac Herzog and Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas both skipping their scheduled speaking slots on Friday. Iran’s delegation also walked out of the summit, objecting to Israel’s presence.

Kirby said Harris will convey “that we believe the Palestinian people need a vote and a voice in their future, and then they need governance in Gaza that will look after their aspirations and their needs.”

Although Biden won’t be going to Dubai, the administration said these climate talks are “especially” vital, given countries will decide how to respond to a U.N. assessment that found the world’s climate efforts are falling short. 

“This is why the president has made climate a keystone of his administration’s foreign policy agenda,” the senior administration official said.

Robin Bravender reported from Washington, D.C. Zia Weise and Charlie Cooper reported from Dubai. 

Sara Schonhardt contributed reporting from Washington, D.C.



Source link

#Kamala #Harris #climate #summit #World #fight #stalling #action

The state of the planet in 10 numbers

This article is part of the Road to COP special report, presented by SQM.

The COP28 climate summit comes at a critical moment for the planet. 

A summer that toppled heat records left a trail of disasters around the globe. The world may be just six years away from breaching the Paris Agreement’s temperature target of 1.5 degrees Celsius, setting the stage for much worse calamities to come. And governments are cutting their greenhouse gas pollution far too slowly to head off the problem — and haven’t coughed up the billions of dollars they promised to help poorer countries cope with the damage.

This year’s summit, which starts on Nov. 30 in Dubai, will conclude the first assessment of what countries have achieved since signing the Paris accord in 2015. 

The forgone conclusion: They’ve made some progress. But not enough. The real question is what they do in response.

To help understand the stakes, here’s a snapshot of the state of the planet — and global climate efforts — in 10 numbers. 

1.3 degrees Celsius

Global warming since the preindustrial era  

Human-caused greenhouse gas emissions have been driving global temperatures skyward since the 19th century, when the industrial revolution and the mass burning of fossil fuels began to affect the Earth’s climate. The world has already warmed by about 1.3 degrees Celsius, or 2.3 degrees Fahrenheit, and most of that warming has occurred since the 1970s. In the last 50 years, research suggests, global temperatures have risen at their fastest rate in at least 2,000 years.  

This past October concluded the Earth’s hottest 12-month span on record, a recent analysis found. And 2023 is virtually certain to be the hottest calendar year ever observed. It’s continuing a string of recent record-breakers — the world’s five hottest years on record have all occurred since 2015. 

Allowing warming to pass 2 degrees Celsius would tip the world into catastrophic changes, scientists have warned, including life-threatening heat extremes, worsening storms and wildfires, crop failures, accelerating sea level rise and existential threats to some coastal communities and small island nations. Eight years ago in Paris, nearly every nation on Earth agreed to strive to keep temperatures well below that threshold, and under a more ambitious 1.5-degree threshold if at all possible. 

But with just fractions of a degree to go, that target is swiftly approaching — and many experts say it’s already all but out of reach.

$4.3 trillion  

Global economic losses from climate disasters since 1970  

Climate-related disasters are worsening as temperatures rise. Heat waves are intensifying, tropical cyclones are strengthening, floods and droughts are growing more severe and wildfires are blazing bigger. Record-setting events struck all over the planet this year, a harbinger of new extremes to come. Scientists say such events will only accelerate as the world warms. 

Nearly 12,000 weather, climate and water-related disasters struck worldwide over the last five decades, the World Meteorological Organization reports. They’ve caused trillions of dollars in damage, and they’ve killed more than 2 million people.  

Ninety percent of these deaths have occurred in developing countries. Compared with wealthier nations, these countries have historically contributed little to the greenhouse gas emissions driving global warming – yet they disproportionately suffer the impacts of climate change.  

4.4 millimeters  

Annual rate of sea level rise

Global sea levels are rapidly rising as the ice sheets melt and the oceans warm and expand. Scientists estimate that they’re now rising by about 4.4 millimeters, or about 0.17 inches, each year – and that rate is accelerating, increasing by about 1 millimeter every decade.

Those sound like small numbers. They’re not.  

The world’s ice sheets and glaciers are losing a whopping 1.2 trillion tons of ice each year. Those losses are also speeding up, accelerating by at least 57 percent since the 1990s. Future sea level rise mainly depends on future ice melt, which depends on future greenhouse gas emissions. With extreme warming, global sea levels will likely rise as much as 3 feet by the end of this century, enough to swamp many coastal communities, threaten freshwater supplies and submerge some small island nations.  

Some places are more vulnerable than others. 

“Low-lying islands in the Pacific are on the frontlines of the fight against sea level rise,” said NASA sea level expert Benjamin Hamlington. “In the U.S., the Southeast and Gulf Coasts are experiencing some of the highest rates of sea level rise in the world and have very high future projections of sea level.”  

But in the long run, he added, “almost every coastline around the world is going to experience sea level rise and will feel impacts.”

Less than 6 years

When the world could breach the 1.5-degree threshold

The world is swiftly running out of time to meet its most ambitious international climate target: keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius. Humans can emit only another 250 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide and maintain at least even odds of meeting that goal, scientists say. 

That pollution threshold could arrive in as little as six years.

That’s the bottom line from at least two recent studies, one published in June and one in October. Humans are pouring about 40 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year, with each ton eating into the margin of error.  

The size of that carbon buffer is smaller than previous estimates have suggested, indicating that time is running out even faster than expected.  

“While our research shows it is still physically possible for the world to remain below 1.5C, it’s difficult to see how that will stay the case for long,” said Robin Lamboll, a scientist at Imperial College London and lead author of the most recent study. “Unfortunately, net-zero dates for this target are rapidly approaching, without any sign that we are meeting them.”

43 percent 

How much greenhouse gas emissions must fall by 2030 to hit the temperature target

The world would have to undergo a stark transformation during this decade to have any hope of meeting the Paris Agreement’s ambitious 1.5-degree cap. 

In a nutshell, global greenhouse gas emissions have to fall 43 percent by 2030, and 60 percent by 2035, before reaching net-zero by mid-century, according to a U.N. report published in September on the progress the world has made since signing the Paris Agreement. That would give the world a 50 percent chance of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees. 

But based on the climate pledges that countries have made to date, greenhouse gas emissions are likely to fall by just 2 percent this decade, according to a U.N. assessment published this month

Governments are “taking baby steps to avert the climate crisis,” U.N. climate chief Simon Stiell said in a statement this month. “This means COP28 must be a clear turning point.” 

$1 trillion a year 

Climate funding needs of developing countries

In many ways, U.N. climate summits are all about finance. Cutting industries’ carbon pollution, protecting communities from extreme weather, rebuilding after climate disasters — it all costs money. And developing countries, in particular, don’t have enough of it. 

As financing needs grow, pressure is mounting on richer nations such as the U.S. that have produced the bulk of planet-warming emissions to help developing countries cut their own pollution and adapt to a warmer world. They also face growing calls to pay for the destruction wrought by climate change, known as loss and damage in U.N.-speak. 

But the flow of money from rich to poor countries has slowed. In October, a pledging conference to replenish the U.N.’s Green Climate Fund raised only $9.3 billion, even less than the $10 billion that countries had promised last time. An overdue promise by developed countries to deliver $100 billion a year by 2020 to help developing countries reduce emissions and adapt to rising temperatures was “likely” met last year, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said this month, while warning that adaptation finance had fallen by 14 percent in 2021. 

As a result, the gap between what developing countries need and how much money is flowing in their direction is growing. The OECD report said developing countries will need around $1 trillion a year for climate investments by 2025, “rising to roughly $2.4 trillion each year between 2026 and 2030.”

$7 trillion 

Worldwide fossil fuel subsidies in 2022

In stark contrast to the trickle of climate finance, fossil fuel subsidies have surged in recent years. In 2022, total spending on subsidies for oil, natural gas and coal reached a record $7 trillion, the International Monetary Fund said in August. That’s $2 trillion more than in 2020. 

Explicit subsidies — direct government support to reduce energy prices — more than doubled since 2020, to $1.3 trillion. But the majority of subsidies are implicit, representing the fact that governments don’t require fossil fuel companies to pay for the health and environmental damage that their products inflict on society. 

At the same time, countries continue pumping public and private money into fossil fuel production. This month, a U.N. report found that governments plan to produce more than twice the amount of fossil fuels in 2030 than would be consistent with the 1.5-degree target. 

66,000 square kilometers

Gross deforestation worldwide in 2022

At the COP26 climate summit two years ago in Glasgow, Scotland, nations committed to halting global deforestation by 2030. A total of 145 countries have signed the Glasgow Forest Declaration, representing more than 90 percent of global forest cover. 

Yet global action is still falling short of that target. The annual Forest Declaration Assessment, produced by a collection of research and civil society organizations, estimated that the world lost 66,000 square kilometers of forest last year, or about 25,000 square miles — a swath of territory slightly larger than West Virginia or Lithuania. Most of that loss came from tropical forests. 

Halting deforestation is a critical component of global climate action. The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warns that collective contributions from agriculture, forestry and land use compose as much as 21 percent of global human-caused carbon emissions. Deforestation releases large volumes of carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere, and recent research suggests that carbon losses from tropical forests may have doubled since the early 2000s.  

Almost 1 billion tons

The annual carbon dioxide removal gap 

Given the world’s slow pace in reducing greenhouse gas pollution, scientists say a second approach is essential for slowing the Earth’s warming — removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

The technology for doing this is largely untested at scale, and won’t be cheap.  

A landmark report on carbon dioxide removals led by the University of Oxford earlier this year found that keeping warming to 2 degrees Celsius or less would require countries to collectively remove an additional 0.96 billion tons of CO2-equivalent a year by 2030.

About 2 billion tons are now removed every year, but that is largely achieved through the natural absorption capacity of forests. 

Removing even more carbon will require countries to massively scale up carbon removal technologies, given the limited capacity of forests to absorb more carbon dioxide. 

Carbon removal technologies are in the spotlight at COP28, though some countries and companies want to use them to meet net-zero while continuing to burn fossil fuels. Scientists have been clear that carbon removal cannot be a substitute for steep emissions cuts. 

1,000 gigawatts 

Annual growth in renewable power capacity needed to keep 1.5 degrees in reach  

The shift from fossil fuels to renewables is underway, but the transition is still far too slow to meet the Paris Agreement targets. 

To keep 1.5 degrees within reach, the International Renewable Energy Agency estimates that the world needs to add 1,000 gigawatts in renewable energy capacity every year through 2030. By comparison, the United States’ entire utility-scale electricity-generation capacity was about 1,160 gigawatts last year, according to the Department of Energy.

Last year, countries added about 300 gigawatts, according to the agency’s latest World Energy Transitions Outlook published in June. 

That shortfall has prompted the EU and the climate summit’s host nation, the United Arab Emirates, to campaign for nations to sign up to a target to triple the world’s renewable capacity by 2030 at COP28, a goal also supported by the U.S. and China.

“The transition to clean energy is happening worldwide and it’s unstoppable,” International Energy Agency boss Fatih Birol said last month. “It’s not a question of ‘if’, it’s just a matter of ‘how soon’ – and the sooner the better for all of us.”

This article is part of the Road to COP special report, presented by SQM. The article is produced with full editorial independence by POLITICO reporters and editors. Learn more about editorial content presented by outside advertisers.



Source link

#state #planet #numbers

Energy crisis: Who has the priciest electricity and gas in Europe?

The pre-tax prices of electricity and natural gas soared after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, but they’re now on the decline. Although slightly higher than the second half of 2022, the final prices for customers, including taxes, reached their peak in the first half of 2023.

ADVERTISEMENT

Electricity and gas costs, which experienced a sharp increase after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, are now steadying in Europe, after peaking in the first half of 2023.

While pre-tax prices are decreasing, some countries have already frozen the support measures they offered households, resulting in higher consumer prices. 

The EU appears to be more ready for winter this year now that it has largely replaced Russian energy, but it’s worth noting that there’s disparity between electricity and natural gas prices among individual countries both within and outside the bloc.

Which countries have the highest and lowest prices in Europe, and by how much have electricity and natural gas prices increased since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine started in February 2022?

In the first half of 2023, average household electricity prices including all taxes in the EU rose from €25.3 per 100 kWh to €28.9 per 100 kWh, compared with the same period in 2022. 

Average natural gas prices also climbed from €8.6 per 100 kWh to €11.9 per 100 kWh in the same period. These are the highest prices recorded by Eurostat, the EU’s official statistical office.

Looking at the percentage changes year-over-year, the electricity prices in the EU increased by 14.5% in the first half of 2023, and gas prices rose by 37.9%. These figures are lower than the second half of 2022, when the percentage changes year-over-year reached their peak.

The figures suggest that electricity and gas prices are stabilising in the EU, according to Eurostat, even though the final consumer prices with taxes are slightly higher than in the second half of 2022: Pre-tax prices on electricity and natural gas are decreasing, yet countries are partly withdrawing their energy price support measures, explaining the increase.

In the first half of 2023, electricity prices including taxes for household consumers in the European Economic Area (EEA) ranged from €11.4 per 100 kWh in Bulgaria to €47.5 per 100 kWh in the Netherlands.

The Netherlands was followed by Belgium (€43.5), Romania (€42) and Germany (€41.3).

Electricity prices were higher in nine EU Member States than the EU average. 

As France has the highest share of nuclear in its electricity mix (68.9% in 2021) in the EU, its electricity prices were significantly below the EU average, with €23.2 per 100 kWh in the first half of 2023.

This was not the case for Belgium, where the share of nuclear in its electricity production was 50.6%. Belgium came in second on the most expensive electricity price list.

EU candidate countries had the cheapest electricity

When the EU’s candidate countries are also included, Turkey recorded the cheapest electricity prices with €8.4 per 100 kWh. The six countries at the bottom were all EU candidates, with prices fluctuating little between them.

The average household gas prices in the first half of 2023 were lowest in Hungary (€3.4 per 100 kWh), Croatia (€4.1) and Slovakia (€5.7), and highest in the Netherlands (€24.8), Sweden (€21.9), and Denmark (€16.6).

The EU average was €11.9. Gas prices were higher in eight EU member states than the EU average, suggesting households in these countries paid substantially more.

Gas prices were lowest in Turkey (€2.5) when EU candidate countries are included. Contrary to electricity prices, the candidates didn’t have the cheapest gas prices, as shown by the likes of North Macedonia (€10.4) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (€5.9).

In the first half of 2023, the Netherlands had the most expensive electricity and gas prices in the EU.

ADVERTISEMENT

Electricity and gas prices rose in almost all EU countries

Household electricity prices increased in 22 EU countries in the first half of 2023 compared with the first half of 2022, according to the Eurostat data, and gas prices climbed in 20 out of the 24 EU members.

Why did Dutch electricity prices skyrocket by almost 1000%?

The Netherlands recorded the largest increase year-over-year in electricity prices by a country mile, at 953%. According to Eurostat, this extraordinary rise is related to several factors: not only were tax relief measures from 2022 discontinued in 2023, but at the same time, household electricity taxes doubled. 

However, the government is due to incorporate a price cap which will lower prices at all levels quite significantly in 2023.

The Netherlands was followed by Lithuania (88%), Romania (77%) and Latvia (74%).

On the flipside, electricity prices fell in five EU member states, with Spain recording a significant decrease of 41%, followed by Denmark at 16%.

ADVERTISEMENT

Gas prices climbed more than 100% in some countries

Natural gas prices rose substantially in several countries across Europe, climbing more than 100% per cent in Latvia, Romania and Austria. They were followed by the Netherlands (100%), Turkey (92%) and Ireland (73%).

EU countries Italy, Estonia and Croatia saw decreases less than 1%. North Macedonia, an EU candidate, showed the largest fall overall by 14%. All these changes are based on national currencies.

EU energy imports from Russia dramatically fell

Eurostat has recorded a dramatic shift in the amount of energy the EU has imported from Russia since it launched its war against Ukraine. A huge growth in renewables, as well as gas from Norway and the US, has helped to make up for the dramatic drop in Russian energy.

The most striking change can be seen in natural gas. 

EU natural gas imports from Russia made up almost 50% of the total before the war. This decreased significantly in 2022, down to 12% in October.

ADVERTISEMENT

It remains to be seen whether the recent outbreak of the Israel Hamas war will have a similar, lasting effect on European energy supplies and prices.

Source link

#Energy #crisis #priciest #electricity #gas #Europe

Why Exxon and Chevron are doubling down on fossil fuel energy with big acquisitions

Prices at a Chevron Corp. gas station in Fontana, California, on Thursday, July 8, 2021.

Kyle Grillot | Bloomberg | Getty Images

On Monday, Chevron announced plans to acquire oil and gas company Hess for $53 billion in stock.

Less than two weeks prior, Exxon Mobil announced it is acquiring oil company Pioneer Natural Resources for $59.5 billion in stock.

On Tuesday, the International Energy Agency released its annual world energy outlook report that projects global demand for coal, oil and natural gas will hit an all-time high by 2030, a prediction the IEA’s executive director Fatih Birol had telegraphed in September.

“The transition to clean energy is happening worldwide and it’s unstoppable. It’s not a question of ‘if,’ it’s just a matter of ‘how soon’ — and the sooner the better for all of us,” Birol said in a written statement published alongside his agency’s world outlook. “Taking into account the ongoing strains and volatility in traditional energy markets today, claims that oil and gas represent safe or secure choices for the world’s energy and climate future look weaker than ever.”

But based on their acquisitions, Chevron and Exxon are seemingly preparing for a different world than the IEA is portending.

“The large companies — nongovernment companies — do not see an end to oil demand any time in the near future. That’s one of the messages you have to take from this. They are committed to the industry, to production, to reserves and to spending,” Larry J. Goldstein, a former president of the Petroleum Industry Research Foundation and a trustee with the not-for-profit Energy Policy Research Foundation, told CNBC in a phone conversation Monday.

“They’re in this in the long haul. They don’t see oil demand declining anytime in the near term. And they see oil demand in fairly large volumes existing for at least the next 20, 25 years,” Goldstein told CNBC. “There’s a major difference between what the big oil companies believe the future of oil is and the governments around the world.”

So, too, says Ben Cahill, a senior fellow in the energy security and climate change program at the bipartisan, nonprofit policy research organization, Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“There are endless debates about when ‘peak demand’ will occur, but at the moment, global oil consumption is near an all-time high. The largest oil and gas producers in the United States see a long pathway for oil demand,” Cahill told CNBC.

Pioneer Natural Resources crude oil storage tanks near Midland, Texas, on Oct. 11, 2023.

Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Africa, Asia driving demand

Globally, momentum behind and investment in clean energy is increasing. In 2023, there will be $2.8 trillion invested in the global energy markets, according to a prediction from the IEA in May, and $1.7 trillion of that is expected to be in clean technologies, the IEA said.

The remainder, a bit more than $1 trillion, will go into fossil fuels, such as coal, gas and oil, the IEA said.

Continued demand for oil and gas despite growing momentum in clean energy is due to population growth around the globe and in particular, growth of populations “ascending the socioeconomic ladder” in Africa, Asia and to some extent Latin America, according to Shon Hiatt, director of the Business of Energy Transition Initiative at the USC Marshall School of Business.

Oil and gas are relatively cheap and easy to move around, particularly in comparison with building new clean energy infrastructure.

“These companies believe in the long-term viability of the oil and gas industry because hydrocarbons remain the most cost-effective and easily transportable and storable energy source,” Hiatt told CNBC. “Their strategy suggests that in emerging economies marked by population and economic expansion, the adoption of low-carbon energy sources may be prohibitively expensive, while hydrocarbon demand in European and North American markets, although potentially reduced, will remain a significant factor.”

Also, while electric vehicles are growing in popularity, they are just one section of the transportation pie, and many of the other sections of the transportation sector will continue to use fossil fuels, said Marianne Kah, senior research scholar and board member at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy. Kah was previously the chief economist of ConocoPhillips for 25 years.

“While there is a lot of media attention given to the increasing penetration of electric passenger vehicles, global oil demand is still expected to grow in the petrochemical, aviation and heavy-duty trucking sectors,” Kah told CNBC.

Geopolitical pressures also play a role.

Exxon and Chevron are expanding their holdings as European oil and gas majors are more likely to be subject to strict emissions regulations. The U.S. is unlikely to have the political will to force the same kind of stringent regulations on oil and gas companies here.

“One might speculate that Exxon and Chevron are anticipating the European oil majors divesting their global reserves over the next decade due to European policy changes,” Hiatt told CNBC.

“They are also betting domestic politics will not allow the U.S. to take significant new climate policies directed specifically to restrain or limit or ban the level of U.S. oil and gas domestic production,” Amy Myers Jaffe, a research professor at New York University and director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at NYU’s School of Professional Studies, told CNBC. 

Goldstein expects the ever-expanding U.S. national debt will eventually put all kinds of government subsidies on the chopping block, which he says will also benefit companies such as Exxon and Chevron.

“All subsidies will be under enormous pressure,” Goldstein said, the intensity of that pressure dependent on which party is in the White House at any given time. “By the way, that means the large financial oil companies will be able to weather that environment better than the smaller companies.”

Also, sanctions of state-controlled oil and gas companies in countries like those in Russia, Venezuela and Iran are providing Exxon and Chevron a geopolitical opening, Jaffe said.

“They likely hope that any geopolitically driven market shortfalls to come can be filled by their own production, even if demand for oil overall is reduced through decarbonization policies around the world,” Jaffe told CNBC. “If you imagine oil like the game of musical chairs, Exxon Mobil and Chevron are betting that other countries will fall out of the game regardless of the number of chairs and that there will be enough chairs left for the American firms to sit down, each time the music stops.”

An oil pumpjack pulls oil from the Permian Basin oil field in Odessa, Texas, on March 14, 2022.

Joe Raedle | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Oil that can be tapped quickly is a priority

Known oil reserves are increasingly valuable as European and American governments look to limit the exploration for new oil and gas reserves, according to Hiatt.

“Notably, both Pioneer and Hess possess attractive, well-established oil and gas reserves that offer the potential for significant expansion and diversification for Exxon and Chevron,” Hiatt told CNBC.

Oil and gas reserves that can be brought to market relatively quickly “are the ideal candidates for production when there is uncertainty about the pace of the energy transition,” Kah told CNBC, which explains Exxon’s acquisition of Pioneer, which gave Exxon more access to “tight oil,” or oil found in shale rock, in the Permian basin.

Shale is a kind of porous rock that can hold natural gas and oil. It’s accessed with hydraulic fracking, which involves shooting water mixed with sand into the ground to release the fossil fuel reserves held therein. Hydrocarbon reserves found in shale can be brought to market between six months and a year, where exploring for new reserves in offshore deep water can take five to seven years to tap, Jaffe told CNBC.

“Chevron and Exxon Mobil are looking to reduce their costs and lower execution risk through increasing the share of short cycle U.S. shale reserves in their portfolio,” Jaffe said. Having reserves that are easier to bring to market gives oil and gas companies increased ability to be responsive to swings in the price of oil and gas. “That flexibility is attractive in today’s volatile price climate,” Jaffe told CNBC.

Chevron’s purchase of Hess also gives Chevron access in Guyana, a country in South America, which Jaffe also says is desirable because it is “a low cost, close to home prolific production region.”

Don’t miss these CNBC PRO stories:

Source link

#Exxon #Chevron #doubling #fossil #fuel #energy #big #acquisitions

What tie-ups in the U.S. oil patch could mean for players like Coterra Energy

Permian Basin rigs in 2020, when U.S. crude oil production dropped by 3 million a day as Wall Street pressure forced cuts.

Paul Ratje | Afp | Getty Images

Exxon Mobil‘s (XOM) planned deal to buy Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD) has sparked talk of more consolidation in the oil-and-gas industry. While we don’t own companies as mergers-and-acquisition plays, the potential for more tie-ups could have significant implications for our remaining oil name: Coterra Energy (CTRA).

Source link

#tieups #oil #patch #players #Coterra #Energy

It’s time to hang up on the old telecoms rulebook

Joakim Reiter | via Vodafone

Around 120 years ago, Guglielmo Marconi planted the seeds of a communications revolution, sending the first message via a wireless link over open water. “Are you ready? Can you hear me?”, he said. Now, the telecommunications industry in Europe needs policymakers to heed that call, to realize the vision set by its 19th-century pioneers.

Next-generation telecommunications are catalyzing a transformation on par with the industrial revolution. Mobile networks are becoming programmable platforms — supercomputers that will fundamentally underpin European industrial productivity, growth and competitiveness. Combined with cloud, AI and the internet of things, the era of industrial internet will transform our economy and way of life, bringing smarter cities, energy grids and health care, as well as autonomous transport systems, factories and more to the real world.

5G is already connecting smarter, autonomous factory technologies | via Vodafone

Europe should be at the center of this revolution, just as it was in the early days of modern communications.

Next-generation telecommunications are catalyzing a transformation on par with the industrial revolution.

Even without looking at future applications, the benefits of a healthy telecoms industry for society are clear to see. Mobile technologies and services generated 5 percent of global GDP, equivalent to €4.3 trillion, in 2021. More than five billion people around the world are connected to mobile services — more people today have access to mobile communications than they do to safely-managed sanitation services. And with the combination of satellite solutions, the prospect of ensuring every person on the planet is connected may soon be within reach.

Satellite solutions, combined with mobile communications, could eliminate coverage gaps | via Vodafone

In our recent past, when COVID-19 spread across the world and societies went into lockdown, connectivity became critical for people to work from home, and for enabling schools and hospitals to offer services online.  And with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, when millions were forced to flee the safety of their homes, European network operators provided heavily discounted roaming and calling to ensure refugees stayed connected with loved ones.

A perfect storm of rising investment costs, inflationary pressures, interest rate hikes and intensifying competition from adjacent industries is bearing down on telecoms businesses across Europe.

These are all outcomes and opportunities, depending on the continuous investment of telecoms’ private companies.

And yet, a perfect storm of rising investment costs, inflationary pressures, interest rate hikes and intensifying competition from adjacent industries is bearing down on telecoms businesses across Europe. The war on our continent triggered a 15-fold increase in wholesale energy prices and rapid inflation. EU telecoms operators have been under pressure ever since to keep consumer prices low during a cost-of-living crisis, while confronting rapidly growing operational costs as a result. At the same time, operators also face the threat of billions of euros of extra, unforeseen costs as governments change their operating requirements in light of growing geopolitical concerns.

Telecoms operators may be resilient. But they are not invincible.

The odds are dangerously stacked against the long-term sustainability of our industry and, as a result, Europe’s own digital ambitions. Telecoms operators may be resilient. But they are not invincible.

The signs of Europe’s decline are obvious for those willing to take a closer look. European countries are lagging behind in 5G mobile connectivity, while other parts of the world — including Thailand, India and the Philippines — race ahead. Independent research by OpenSignal shows that mobile users in South Korea have an active 5G connection three times more often than those in Germany, and more than 10 times their counterparts in Belgium.

Europe needs a joined-up regulatory, policy and investment approach that restores the failing investment climate and puts the telecoms sector back to stable footing.

Average 5G connectivity in Brazil is more than three times faster than in Czechia or Poland. A recent report from the European Commission — State of the Digital Decade (europa.eu) shows just how far Europe needs to go to reach the EU’s connectivity targets for 2030.

To arrest this decline, and successfully meet EU’s digital ambitions, something has got to give. Europe needs a joined-up regulatory, policy and investment approach that restores the failing investment climate and puts the telecoms sector back to stable footing.

Competition, innovation and efficient investment are the driving forces for the telecoms sector today. It’s time to unleash these powers — not blindly perpetuate old rules. We agree with Commissioner Breton’s recent assessment: Europe needs to redefine the DNA of its telecoms regulation. It needs a new rulebook that encourages innovation and investment, and embraces the logic of a true single market. It must reduce barriers to growth and scale in the sector and ensure spectrum — the lifeblood of our industry — is managed more efficiently. And it must find faster, futureproofed ways to level the playing field for all business operating in the wider digital sector.  

But Europe is already behind, and we are running out of time. It is critical that the EU finds a balance between urgent, short-term measures and longer-term reforms. It cannot wait until 2025 to implement change.

Europeans deserve better communications technology | via Vodafone

When Marconi sent that message back in 1897, the answer to his question was, “loud and clear”. As Europe’s telecoms ministers convene this month in León, Spain, their message must be loud and clear too. European citizens and businesses deserve better communications. They deserve a telecoms rulebook that ensures networks can deliver the next revolution in digital connectivity and services.



Source link

#time #hang #telecoms #rulebook

Here are all the portfolio moves the Club made in this week’s oversold market

People walk by the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) on February 14, 2023 in New York City.

Spencer Platt | Getty Images News | Getty Images

With the stock market deeply oversold this week, we put cash to work by picking stocks across a range of sectors including energy, technology and materials. We also added a former Club chipmaker to our Bullpen and upgraded a premium beer name to a buy rating. Finally, Friday’s market reversal helped us make good on a pledge to trim a once-downtrodden health-care stock.

Source link

#portfolio #moves #Club #weeks #oversold #market

Oil and natural gas prices are on different paths. Here’s what has been driving the moves

Oil prices eased in Asian as concerns over slow demand from top crude importer China grew after bearish trade and inflation data, outweighing fears over tighter supply arising from output cuts by Saudi Arabia and Russia.

David Mcnew | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Source link

#Oil #natural #gas #prices #paths #Heres #driving #moves

Oil prices near $100 per barrel raise questions over demand destruction

boonchai wedmakawand | Moment | Getty Images

Supply cuts from heavyweight crude producers have helped drive oil prices near $100 per barrel — fueling some to consider the potential for future demand destruction.

Brent crude futures rose 63 cents per barrel from the Thursday settlement to $96.01 per barrel on Friday at 11 a.m. London time and sit well above prices observed in the first half of the year.

The gains could prove short lived, some analysts warn. Sushant Gupta, research director of Asia refining at Wood Mackenzie, on Monday said “there are all signs that we could potentially see $100 per barrel in quarter four,” but warned that global economic fragility and incoming seasonal demand drops in the first quarter would make this unsustainable long term. In a Friday report, ING analysts signaled the oil market is “clearly in overbought territory.”

At the heart of price support are a series of voluntary cuts that fall outside of the official policy of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies, known as OPEC+. First is a 1.66 million-barrel-per-day decline implemented by some OPEC+ members until the end of 2024. Topping this, Saudi Arabia and Russia pledged to respectively remove another 1 million barrel per day of production and 300,000 barrels per day of exports until the end of this year.

This adds to a picture of improving Chinese demand — which analysts say could soon peak — and inventory drops

Some say buyers can weather the storm of high prices. Seven European refiners and traders, who spoke under anonymity because of contractual obligations, told CNBC that local buyers can withstand oil prices veering into triple digits without lowering their output runs. All of the sources pointed to firm refining margins, meaning the difference between the value of refined products and the price of the crude feedstock to generate them is favorable.

Uncertainty lingers over further China fuel export quotas, while Russia’s indefinite ban of its fuel exports — which Europe cannot purchase because of sanctions that followed Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine — has tightened availabilities of refined products and could particularly worsen global diesel shortages. Sanctions-disrupted access to Russian crude and OPEC+ cuts have shrunk availabilities of high-density and high-sulfur crude to Western buyers, encumbering their task to produce certain refined products.

Refinery margins so far have nevertheless been attractive enough that some refiners have lightened their seasonal maintenance to take advantage, one refiner said. Refined oil product demand could yet stay strong in the West, as Thanksgiving and winter vacations boost travel in the U.S. and Europe, and the hurricane season looms — which can historically disrupt both local refining and crude production. 

“We estimate a high-impact hurricane event this year could result in a temporary loss of monthly offshore crude oil production of about 1.5 million barrels per day (b/d) and a nearly equivalent temporary loss of refining capacity,” the U.S. Energy Information Administration said in July.

“Outages on that scale could increase monthly average U.S. retail gasoline prices by between 25 cents per gallon and 30 cents per gallon.”

‘Self-fulfilling prophecy’

Some European market participants polled by CNBC doubted triple-digit oil prices are sustainable in the long term, with three pointing to possible demand destruction — where customers gradually answer persistently high prices with fewer purchases. A fourth said demand destruction is a potential question, once prices hit $110 per barrel.

“Sometimes high oil prices can become a self-fulfilling prophecy,” Indian Energy Minister Hardeep Singh Puri warned in August. “The self-fulfilling prophecy means that at a particular point of time comes a tipping, and then there’s a fall of demand.”

One of the market sources also noted that steep backwardation — where current prices exceed future ones and a key metric to assess the viability of storage — discourages stocking refined products, leaving the market vulnerable to any disruptions.

“OPEC+ production cuts, including the voluntary extra cut by Saudi Arabia, are bearing fruit, lowering oil inventories and supporting prices,” UBS Strategist Giovanni Staunovo said in a Thursday note, pegging the bank’s oil price estimate at $90-100 per barrel over the coming months.

The oil price hike has benefitted Moscow despite sanctions. Under a program by the G7 largest global economies, non-G7 buyers may only use Western shipping and insurance to import Russian crude purchased at or below $60 per barrel.

But Moscow has been deploying its own dark fleet, and traders say Russia’s flagship Urals crude currently sells at roughly $8-10-per-barrel discounts to benchmark oil prices, implying values $25 per barrel above the G7 price cap. The Russian energy ministry did not respond to a CNBC request for comment.

OPEC+ move

An OPEC+ technical committee meets on Oct. 4 to review market fundamentals and individual production compliance. While incapable of adjusting OPEC+ policy, the Joint Ministerial Monitoring Committee can call an emergency ministerial meeting to do so. Three OPEC+ delegates, speaking anonymously because of the sensitivity of the discussions, told CNBC it is unlikely this upcoming JMMC meeting will result in policy tweaks.

The White House has previously vocally entreated OPEC+ producers to hike output, ease prices at the pump and alleviate inflation — but Washington has been largely silent in response to the production declines. In October last year, the U.S. levied accusations of coercion over other OPEC+ members against de-facto group leader Saudi Arabia, which depends on oil revenues for its economic diversification giga-projects.

The White House faces a difficult balancing act, as it pushes for a normalization of ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia, two top allies in the Middle East. Riyadh has also shown signs of steering closer toward China and Russia after rekindling relations with Iran through Beijing-mediated talks and receiving an invitation to join the emerging economies’ BRICS alliance. A spate of high-profile U.S. official visits to Saudi Arabia over the summer suggests ongoing discussions — though it remains to be seen if oil re-enters the diplomatic agenda.

It's not clear where the White House goes next to alleviate oil prices, says RBC's Helima Croft

RBC Head of Global Commodity Strategy Helima Croft, who says “we clearly see momentum” for Brent at $100 per barrel, stressed the absence of many options left in the U.S. toolkit.

“Will there be an energy component of a potential U.S.-Saudi deal? I think the Saudi administration would clearly like more Saudi barrels on the market, because, look, there are not a lot of great options for this administration to get prices down,” she said on Wednesday.

“They’ve already done the big [Strategic Petroleum Reserve] release, the question is are they really going do more … they’ve done deals with Iran, but those barrels are already in the market, so it’s not clear where the administration goes next for additional barrels.”

Source link

#Oil #prices #barrel #raise #questions #demand #destruction