web analytics

The other War

By Patrick Van Roy On September 12th, 2019

(Bloomberg) — The U.S. briefly became the world’s No. 1 oil exporter as record shale production found its way to global customers, and there are prospects for more.

Surging output from shale helped America ship almost 9 million barrels a day of crude and oil products in June, surpassing Saudi Arabia, the International Energy Agency said in a report, citing gross export figures. There’s room to send even more supply overseas as companies add infrastructure to transport the burgeoning production from fields in Texas and New Mexico to the coast.

Gains in U.S. supply are undermining efforts by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies, whose production cuts are in their third year in a bid to drain stockpiles. The swelling American output, as well as deepening concerns over global demand fueled by a prolonged U.S.-China trade war, have prompted a drop of almost 20% in benchmark Brent crude from an April high.

The expansion in America’s exports in June was helped by a surge in crude-oil shipments to more than 3 million barrels a day, the IEA said. At the time, Saudi Arabia was cutting its exports as part of the OPEC+ agreement, while Russian flows were constrained by the Druzhba pipeline crisis.

The Saudis reclaimed the top exporter’s spot in July and August as hurricanes disrupted U.S. production and the trade dispute “made it more difficult for shale shipments to find markets,” the IEA said.

The tussle for the No. 1 slot could remain tight in the months ahead. As Saudi Arabia continues to curb production, the IEA said America’s crude exports could rise by a further 33% from June levels to as much as 4 million barrels a day as new export infrastructure gets built in the fourth quarter of this year.

To contact the reporter on this story: Rakteem Katakey in London at rkatakey@bloomberg.net

Oil, LNG, and Coal are the real weapons in modern war. Our wars have evolved more and more into the realm where War belongs… the economic battlefield.

As my cousins across the pond have Elections over the next decade one of the main questions that should be asked of each and every person running is this. “Are you going to push for our Energy needs to be met by the US, or are you going to allow us to be held hostage by two hostile regimes, the Soviets, and the Saudi’s ?”

58 Responses to “The other War”

  1. What makes amurica less hostile then Saudi Arabia to the UK’s goals?

  2. one of the main questions that should be asked of each and every person running is this. Are you going to push for our Energy needs to be met by the US, or are you going to allow us to be held hostage by two hostile regimes, the Soviets, and the Saudi’s ?”

    What a ridiculous question to ask any political candidate in the UK. This may come as a surprise Pat, but most voter’s concerns in the UK and in wider Europe don’t revolve around the USA.

    Russia & SA are hostile regimes?

    When’s the invasion?

  3. Coal is in rapid, terminal decline in the US, and the rest of world, at a lesser rate.

    It is a dirty 17th century technology.

    The fetish on coal is counterproductive to everything that this country should be doing.

  4. EIA: U.S. coal production to fall to 40-year low in 2019
    FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrintShare
    S&P Global Market Intelligence ($):

    The U.S. Energy Information Administration projected lower U.S. thermal and metallurgical coal exports in 2019 and 2020 than it estimated in June.

    The administration forecast that U.S. thermal coal exports will sink by 17.6% to 44.6 million tons this year and by another 12.6% to 39 million tons in 2020, according to its July 9 “Short-Term Energy Outlook.” The administration had projected in its June report that steam exports would total 46.3 million tons in 2019 and 41.3 million tons in 2020.

    The EIA projected that total U.S. coal exports will fall by 16.9% to 96.1 million tons this year and by another 8.6% to 87.8 million tons in 2020. Export prices dropped and have remained low through the first half of 2019, which may hinder certain producers’ ability to compete internationally as their contracts roll off.

    U.S. coal miners are expected to produce 684 million tons of coal this year, a 9.5% decrease from 2018. Output may drop by another 6.5% in 2020 to 639.4 million tons as domestic utilities consume less coal and seaborne demand for U.S. coal weakens.

    The administration expects coal consumption to drop 14.3% this year to 589 million tons and then 3.7% to 567 million tons in 2020. The domestic power sector has retired nearly 18 GW of coal-fired capacity since the beginning of 2018, and another 4 GW and 3 GW are slated for retirement by the end of this year and 2020, respectively.

    “The 2019 forecast production of 684 [million tons] would be the first time U.S. production would be less than 700 [million tons] in more than 40 years,” the EIA said.

    More ($): EIA projects lower U.S. coal exports in 2019-2020 compared to June estimate

    Posted in: Energy Markets, Global Coal Markets, News, Newsletter Daily, Newsletter News Weekly, US Coal Mark

    http://ieefa.org/eia-u-s-coal-production-to-fall-to-40-year-low-in-2019/

    The same company ( Blackjewel ) that closed the mine in Kentucky closed two mines in Gillette Wyoming when it went bankrupt

    The outlook is exceptionally bleak for coal, for internal consumption or exports.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/coal-mine-closures-shake-wyoming-11567589404

  5. //Coal is in rapid, terminal decline in the US, //

    Same story in the EU. Coal as a source of power generation has fallen in all of the past 7 years, and now accounts for less than 20% of power, while the share from renewables increased to 30%. About 7 or 8 industrial countries in the EU are aiming to end use of coal completely over the next 10 years.

  6. The US coal index of stocks ( DJUSCL ) was about $500 in March 2011

    It’s about $34 today

    Republican political activists may pretend to be bullish on coal, but the business community has written off the technology completely.

    It is possible that the last US coal powered plant was built earlier this year.
    https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060140743

  7. So lets see we have one person who believes the US is hostile to great britain, another one that thinks it’s ridiculous to ask his elected officials about whether they support buying fuel from an enemy or an ally and the final one who lives in a fantasy world where Coal is not the worlds number one fuel when it comes to creating electricity…..

    Take coal away and the lights go out all around the world, the US is Benevolent and would never shut off anyone’s fuel, just as we did not stop food sales to the Soviets during the Cold War.

    And I forget the peasants of the EU would never deem it their right to question who their politicians are tying the fate of their nations to….. peasants!

  8. Coal plays a vital role in electricity generation worldwide. Coal-fuelled power plants currently fuel 38% of global electricity and, in some countries, coal fuels a higher percentage of electricity. Apr 25 2019

  9. Why are coal stocks down 93% if coal has a future

  10. Why are coal stocks down 93% if coal has a future

  11. It’s ridiculous to ask his elected officials about whether they support buying fuel from an enemy or an ally

    Whose enemy? Whose ally?

  12. I guess we can change a third of the worlds energy needs within the ten years before we all die….. lmao

  13. Coal isn’t going away

    It will be burned 100 years from now

    But is an undesirable and dirty technology of the past, anyone who can afford to move from it is doing it now.

    Including electric plants in coal states like Kentucky and Pennsylvania.

  14. Phantom, on September 12th, 2019 at 3:12 PM Said: Edit Comment
    Why are coal stocks down 93% if coal has a future

    Perfect example of reading what you want to see in others words….

    I NEVER said coal was the future I said it is currently impossible to shut down a third of the worlds electrical production with coal. There is no way to do that in the ten years we have left before we all die….. according to the people you support there is no future.

  15. Whose enemy? Whose ally?

    LMAO…….

    Paul believes the Russians and OPEC are not the enemy of every western nation, but the US is…

    Dude you should not be drunk this early in the day.

  16. Phantom,

    Coal is in rapid, terminal decline in the US, and the rest of world, at a lesser rate.

    It is a dirty 17th century technology.

    The fetish on coal is counterproductive to everything that this country should be doing.

    Well said mate. I agree 100%.

  17. Including electric plants in coal states like Kentucky and Pennsylvania.

    and what are they being replaced with….. LNG from Fracking…. so when the left bans fracking what will replace the LNG ?

    Coal, Solar, or Wind…… since coal is the only thing that can I guess as soon as the fracking ban goes in coal futures will skyrocket…..

  18. Paul believes the Russians and OPEC are not the enemy of every western nation, but the US is

    I don’t believe anything of the sort I want you to clarify your claims regarding Russia & SA being ‘two hostile regimes’

  19. My prediction is that nuclear, albeit a much more modern and safer version, will make a big comeback.

  20. Patrick

    Your fake president said that it was ” government regulations ” that was holding back the coal industry and its jobs

    Which was a lie.

    He never once spoke straight to those miners, never addressed the fact that the industry was in decline no matter what was done, a technology caused decline that won’t be reversed.

    The industry decline has continued through the Trump administration.

  21. I don’t believe anything of the sort I want you to clarify your claims regarding Russia & SA being ‘two hostile regimes’

    that statement proves that you don’t think they are…. I can’t fix ignorance, sorry.

  22. Dave Alton, on September 12th, 2019 at 3:26 PM Said: Edit Comment
    My prediction is that nuclear, albeit a much more modern and safer version, will make a big comeback.

    Never in the US.

  23. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/23/trump-says-the-coal-industry-is-back-the-data-say-otherwise.html

    Trump says coal is back.

    The business press says that he is a liar.

    Investors are voting with their wallets – they do not think that coal is back at all.

  24. No one wants a nuke plant in their neighborhood.

    Approvals would be very difficult, even if the technology improves.

  25. and Nuclear is the most polluting form of energy that exists.

  26. Patrick

    My prediction is that nuclear, albeit a much more modern and safer version, will make a big comeback.

    Never in the US.

    You’re wrong. Companies in the US at the forefront of new reactor designs. It will be a Resurgence in safer nuclear power generation using modular reactors which produce far less waste, and cannot enter meltdown.

  27. Patrick

    and Nuclear is the most polluting form of energy that exists.

    Do you have some evidence to back that up?

  28. Phantom,

    No one wants a nuke plant in their neighborhood.

    Approvals would be very difficult, even if the technology improves.

    I agree, but I think the world is going into a situation where it’s either nuclear power or not enough power. When the shit hits the fan, I think you’ll find the people will start reluctantly accepting new generation nuclear plants.

  29. That statement proves that you don’t think they are

    Except it doesn’t.

    I want you to clarify your claims regarding Russia & SA being ‘two hostile regimes’. It was youur claim, I want you to put some meet on the bones.

    Unless of course you’re just making things up?

  30. Vogtle nuclear power plant. The last new nuclear power plant project was the “River Bend” plant in Louisiana, which became operational in 1986. Its construction began more than 30 year ago, in March of 1977.

    the waste of Nuclear power Plant both coolent water and fuel rods stay radioactive.

    Nuclear Waste. Nuclear waste is both extremely toxic and very long lasting. Most nuclear waste takes at least 10,000 years to decrease in radioactivity to the point where it will have minimal impact on the environment, and some materials may be hazardous for millions of years.

    Pollution from no other fuel does as much damage or lasts as long. Where do you live Dave I’m sure you won’t mind if they bury that stuff next to you….

  31. I want you to clarify your claims regarding Russia & SA being ‘two hostile regimes’.

    lol…. so you don’t believe they are or I wouldn’t have to explain it to you….

  32. Explain to me your claims. I have my own opinions but I want you to explain your claims to me first.

    What exactly is it that makes Russia & SA ‘two hostile regimes?’

  33. Russia under Putin is the Soviet Union just smaller every action they take is against the west and when they need to they will cut the Fuel to Germany and every country depending on them for fuel to pressure them politically.

    And as you yourself say…. Saudi Arabia is a Terror Supporting nation whose fuel wealth is given to those trying to kill everyone in the west.

  34. Patrick

    the waste of Nuclear power Plant both coolent water and fuel rods stay radioactive.

    Actually they don’t stay radioactive Patrick, but they do take a long time to decay.
    That radioactivity was already in the ground, all we’ve done is concentrate it in one place and put it back in the ground.

    Pollution from no other fuel does as much damage or lasts as long. Where do you live Dave I’m sure you won’t mind if they bury that stuff next to you….

    They don’t need to bury the stuff next to me Patrick, that’s not yet another one of your silly straw man arguments. Many countries such as Norway are developing stable underground disposal facilities. And new processes mean a lot of this waste can be processed and the nuclear material recovered for reuse.
    And by the way I live less than 25 miles from a nuclear power station that stores huge amount of fuel.

    You still haven’t answered my question Patrick. You claimed that nuclear power is the most polluting of all the ways we have a generating energy. Where is your evidence to backup this claim?

  35. lol…. that is the most unscientific ridiculous thing you’ve ever said……

    Actually they don’t stay radioactive Patrick, but they do take a long time to decay.
    That radioactivity was already in the ground, all we’ve done is concentrate it in one place and put it back in the ground.

    LMAO…. OMG…..

  36. Explain why it’s ridiculous Patrick.

  37. Saudi Arabia is a Terror Supporting nation whose fuel wealth is given to those trying to kill everyone in the west

    So why is it okay for the advocates of the ‘War on Terror’ to sell billions of $s of arms and import oil from a terror financing hostile regime yet other nation’s electorate must lobby their politicians to import energy from the nation that does this?

  38. Because Dave the Water was not radioactive…. refined uranium fuel rods are thousands of times more radioactive than the raw ore…. the water takes 10,000yrs to start reaching safe levels…. normal background radiation unless you are standing on a vein of uranium won’t kill you, exposure to either of these Items will kill you and rather painfully and quick but slow enough that you will suffer pure agony for days before you bleed out of every orifice.

    Wherever this material is dumped will remain deadly FOREVER.

    and just think Dave if someone blew up that waste storage near you…. 25 miles away… your dead, and your dead from microscopic particles floating on air currents….

    One of the issues about the deep storage waste is that it will deadly for so long that one of the issues is how to design these facilities so that 100,000 years from now even if you don’t know what is stored down there that the structures themselves need symbols that even a caveman would know means death.

    When they recycle the material it creates one less new load that needs to be made, but the material can only be recycled once and then it still needs to be disposed of.

    Nuclear fuel is the most dangerous dirty fuel man has ever used and hopefully will ever attempt to use.

  39. //Oil, LNG, and Coal are the real weapons in modern war. //

    That’s a completely laughable statement. You aren’t preparing for the last war, but for the one before that.

    Coal was the “real weapon” in World War 1,
    Oil perhaps in World War 2, and, well, we all known about the roles gas played.

    If oil was such a valuable weapon, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states would have conquered the world back in 1973.

    The weapons of modern warfare are high-tech, intelligence and clever use of diplomacy.

  40. I knew this was where you were going…..

    So why is it okay for the advocates of the ‘War on Terror’ to sell billions of $s of arms and import oil from a terror financing hostile regime yet other nation’s electorate must lobby their politicians to import energy from the nation that does this?

    Simple we are at war, the Saudi’s are our fodder in this war. We are still buying their Oil so they have the money to buy our arms that we want them to have so they can kill our enemy for us.

    Paul we have combated the Saudi’s and Won. The Saudi’s power comes from oil…. until now it’s been illegal for the US to export our own fuel other than coal. The day that changed the Saudi’s lost…. we at less than 25% of production have already matched their output. As more and more pipelines and refineries come on line we can cripple Saudi and they know it.

    That is why they have quietly opened military relations with Israel, it was the reason for the purge last year in SA… we don’t need bullets all the time to defeat an enemy.

  41. If oil was such a valuable weapon, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states would have conquered the world back in 1973.

    no they solidified their financing for world conquest then….. what do you think the war that is going on now is about Noel….

    Not to mention that in 1973 if they pulled this crap while both the US and the Soviets were at the height of the cold war both nations would have swatted them like bugs.

  42. Oil, Coal, and LNG still rule the world. Man does not survive without them.

  43. Patrick.

    Because Dave the Water was not radioactive….

    I never said the water was radioactive Patrick, I see you’re up to your usual trick of putting words in people’s mouths. I’m just talking about radioactive, and irradiated waste.

    Wherever this material is dumped will remain deadly FOREVER.

    No it won’t Patrick, it will decay. Different radioactive elements decay at different rates. some of those elements may take hundreds of thousands of years to reach safe levels, but they were still decay they certainly don’t remain deadly forever. For a man who laughs at my scientific knowledge for no reason, you seem to be very badly educated on this Patrick.

    I can’t understand it Patrick if you’re so worried about nuclear waste the why do you support coal fired power stations which produce more nuclear waste than a properly functioning nuclear power plant?

    Nuclear fuel is the most dangerous dirty fuel man has ever used and hopefully will ever attempt to use.

    You keep claiming this without any evidence Patrick. All you do is make assertions without any evidence to back them up again and again and again on ATW.

  44. Of course you know I was going there, everyone know I was going there. I was going there because it is obvious, blatant & shameless hyocrisy.

    Simple we are at war, the Saudi’s are our fodder in this war. We are still buying their Oil so they have the money to buy our arms that we want them to have so they can kill our enemy for us

    Pat, your 4.37 is nothing more than a huge pile of phony steaming horseshit. you can’t wage war on an abstract concept whilr simultaneously contributing to the ‘enemy’s’ economy and they yours. All the Orwellian missrepresentation you can muster won’t change that inherent contradiction.

    Instead of you castigating the Euro nations for importing Saudi oil shouldn’t you be lauding them for contributing to the Saudi economy and enabling them to buy your weapons to kill your enemies?

    Utter & complete balls.

  45. Actually Dave is right but it’s nuclear reactors on such a small scale they are only the size of a couple shipping containers

    They are looking really promising for small remote locations

  46. Emerald Pimpernel

    Actually Dave is right but it’s nuclear reactors on such a small scale they are only the size of a couple shipping containers

    Great minds. Those are actually the reactors I’m talking about mate, when I mention you modular reactors in my post above. It’s really fascinating technology the whole reactor is installed as one unit and decommissioned as one unit. they’re all so much safer than previous reactor designs and cannot enter a meltdown phase.

  47. Most of Europe plans to be carbon neutral by 2050. Given that agriculture isn’t going anywhere quickly that means most of the gains will mostly be from reducing carbon in three areas – electricity, transport and home heating.

    In the later you already see the complete disappearance of coal as a fuel. 40 years ago most homes in the UK and Ireland were heated by coal. Now almost none of them are. Even oil is increasingly disappearing (largely being replaced by natural gas).

    By 2050 I’d imagine most electricity generation in Europe will come via renewable sources, with likely some backup natural gas capacity. The advances in battery and storage technology is what makes this possible. Even 10 years ago you had a problem of what happens when the wind doesn’t blow? Or what happens if peak wind is midday in June? You had a lot of wastage, with the backup coal, oil and gas power plants doing most of the heavy lifting in peak usage times. Now storage technology is coming on leaps and bounds (and who knows where it will be in 2030 never mind 2050).

    Other plans will be to use the excess power at peak generation to do energy intensive things like create hydrogen gas – which can then be used to power vehicles, heat homes etc…

    Coal is on the way out. In fact it is already on life support. Oil likely won’t be too far behind it (certainly as a means of fuel). With more sustainable plastics being developed (especially biodegradable plastics) then even the non power usage of oil will likely decline.

  48. Yes, in the towns in Ireland, you’d see houses warmed by Polish coal. That was interesting to see.

  49. all these magical alternatives rely on batteries….. one of these most poluuting items to manufacture and dispose of…..

    Batteries powering electric vehicles are forecast to make up 90% of the lithium-ion battery market by 2025. They are the main reason why electric vehicles can generate more carbon emissions over their lifecycle – from procurement of raw materials to manufacturing, use and recycling – than petrol or diesel cars.

    For example, in Germany – where about 40% of the energy mix is produced by coal and 30% by renewables – a mid-sized electric car must be driven for 125,000 km, on average, to break even with a diesel car, and 60,000 km compared to a petrol car. It takes nine years for an electric car to be greener than a diesel car, assuming an annual average mileage of 13,500 km (as was the case in Germany in 2002, compared to 12,700 km in England in 2013). Most consumers will have bought a new car by then. The case is similar in the US, but less pronounced in nuclear-powered France.

    Battery production causes more environmental damage than carbon emissions alone. Consider dust, fumes, wastewater and other environmental impacts from cobalt mining in the Democratic Republic of the Congo; water shortages and toxic spills from lithium mining in Latin America, which can alter ecosystems and hurt local communities; a heavily polluted river due to nickel mining in Russia; or air pollution in northeastern China, as mentioned above.

  50. Patrick

    all these magical alternatives rely on batteries….. one of these most poluuting items to manufacture and dispose of

    More uneducated nonsense from you Patrick. batteries when properly recycled are nowhere near the most polluting power source.

    And I notice you still haven’t answered my question, asking you to provide evidence that nuclear is the most polluting power source.

    And you also haven’t addressed the fact, that coal power stations and more radiation than properly functioning nuclear power stations.

  51. Dave he has to run that past the people who do his thinking for him

  52. your wrong Dave the materials batteries are made of are some of the dirtiest mining operations in the world and take place in the parts of the world where there is no environmental law…

    but f those people as long as you can have solar and wind…. you’ll “feel” better.

    Batteries are the achilles heel to renewable energy…. everything that sounds to good has unintended consequences.

  53. Emerald Pimpernel, on September 12th, 2019 at 11:41 PM Said: Edit Comment
    Dave he has to run that past the people who do his thinking for him

    Is that why you comment so rarely EP….. waiting to be told what to say ?

  54. Yes Pat that’s why my posts are as transparent parroting as yours are

  55. Patrick

    your wrong Dave the materials batteries are made of are some of the dirtiest mining operations in the world and take place in the parts of the world where there is no environmental law…

    That may well be the case Patrick, but exactly the same is true of mining operations resources all around the world, including coal. Batteries and the elements that are used in their construction when properly recycled are actually the cleanest source of energy.
    Go on Patrick, prove me wrong, I dare you, your track record in this is appalling.

    but f those people as long as you can have solar and wind…. you’ll “feel” better.

    We weren’t even talking about solar or wind Patrick. But once again you show your total ignorance. it’s demonstrably provable that solar and wind are by far the least polluting energy sources. You really have no idea what you’re talking about.

    As myself, Phantom and Emerald Pimpernel have all pointed out to you, coal is not the fuel of the future. The future lies in renewables and nuclear power. Even someone with the most basic grasp of scientific understanding, can understand this.

  56. see why did ya have ta answer like a dick…?

    We were having a good conversation.

  57. ok wacko… whose post is it?

    What is the topic of the post…?

    Oil, LNG, and Coal are the real weapons in modern war.

    I can’t help it if your just stupid but you are… The fuels that run the world are Oil, LNG, and Coal… a third of the worlds power is coal fired.

    There is nothing that can change that in the next 50yrs that is the fact of reality. The power grids across the world can’t be changed in that period of time and not everyone is going to go along with your green plans. Do you intend war on those who say no ?

    The US knows how to use the Earths bounty ecologically and we have enough to supply us and the rest of the world with all 3 for the next 100yrs.

    The US is set…. What are your nations going to do ?

  58. There is an increasingly varied type of battery available, including sodium and pattasium based batteries. Also non battery forms of storage such as energy conversion (turning excess energy into power hydrogen production) helps avoid the need for batteries.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.