Climate Could Be an Electoral Time Bomb, Republican Strategists Fear
Lisa Friedman, The New York Times, August 2, 2019
In conversations with 10 G.O.P. analysts, consultants and activists, all said they were acutely aware of the rising influence of young voters like Mr. Galloway, who in their lifetimes haven’t seen a single month of colder-than-average temperatures globally, and who call climate change a top priority. Those strategists said lawmakers were aware, too, but few were taking action.
“We’re definitely sending a message to younger voters that we don’t care about things that are very important to them,” said Douglas Heye, a former communications director at the Republican National Committee. “This spells certain doom in the long term if there isn’t a plan to admit reality and have legislative prescriptions for it.”
Our take: We heard it loud and clear at the annual AOGA conference: 47% of Americans care a great deal about climate issues (one of the top 5 issues in looking ahead to the 2020 elections). This article illustrates that bridging the gap between Right and Left to come up with solutions and not just lofty notions (*ahem* Green New Deal) is our best route forward. Once again, we echo the rallying cry of our friends at the American Conservation Coalition—advocating for free-market solutions to environmental woes.
LNG traders consider shipping options, betting on winter demand
Jessica Jaganathan, Reuters, August 2, 2019
With Asia LNG spot cargoes trading at below $4 per million British thermal units, traders may take the opportunity to buy the cargoes now for later use, especially as demand typically increases during winter for heating which in turn pushes up prices, the sources said.
Storing commodity cargoes on ships to sell at a later date to take advantage of the rising price for later-dated supplies, known as the contango carry trade, is common in oil markets but is considered risky for LNG because of high storage costs and because LNG cargoes evaporate over time.
Australia Looks to Siphon U.S. Oil Stockpile to Avoid Running Out of Gas
Rob Taylor, The Wall Street Journal, August 5, 2019
It has more than 640 million barrels of oil stored in its Strategic Petroleum Reserve along the Texas and Louisiana Gulf Coast. In contrast, Australia has mostly relied on oil stockpiles owned by major companies to meet its obligations to the IEA since joining in 1979.
A steep fall in Australia’s oil production and the closure of several refineries have complicated that approach, while lawmakers have balked at the billions of dollars in investment needed to build fuel stocks and storage infrastructure.
“Australia is reliant on traffic through the Strait of Hormuz for a percentage of our oil supplies so we’re doing everything that we can to be a good government and be prudent to make sure that we get a continuity of supply,” Mr. Taylor said.
Related: Iran seizes another foreign oil tanker, state media says
From the Daily on Energy:
THE WORLD WILL STILL THIRST FOR FOSSIL FUELS IN 2040: Fossil fuels will still provide the vast majority of the world’s energy in 2040, according to new projections released by consultancy Wood Mackenzie, leaving the planet far short of the goals of the Paris climate agreement.
“The energy mix is not changing nearly as quickly as the world needs it to,” Wood Mackenzie president Neal Anderson wrote in an op-ed accompanying the report, released Friday.
The report, based on a “conservative” scenario, said coal, oil, and gas will provide 85% of the world’s primary energy supply by 2040.
The forecast illustrates the scale of the ambition in Democratic presidential candidates’ plans for the U.S. economy to reach net-zero greenhouse emissions by 2050, phase out the use of fossil fuels, and expand investments into renewable sources. The U.S. emits about 15% of the world’s carbon pollution.
It also comes after United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres warned countries last week ahead of a major Climate Action Summit in New York on Sept. 23 that they must increase their targets to limit greenhouse gas emissions in order to reach carbon neutrality by 2050.
Our take: More reason to be skeptical about calls for “banning” fossil fuels, or even severely curbing this use, in the short term. The world needs traditional sources of energy today, and for years into the future.
