Matthew Daly’s Post

Will oil cost $50 in May, 2025 due to Trump's energy policies? Are we waiting for the restart of the global economy? Trump prepares wide-ranging energy plan to boost gas exports, oil drilling, sources say. The Trump's plan includes lifting Biden's pause on LNG export licenses, speeding up drilling permits on federal lands, boosting offshore oil drilling license sales. The energy checklist largely reflects promises Trump made on the campaign trail, but the plan to roll out the list as early as day one ensures that oil and gas production will rank alongside immigration as a pillar of Trump's early agenda. Trump, a Republican, also plans to repeal some of his Democratic predecessor's key climate legislation and regulations, such as tax credits for electric vehicles and new clean power plant standards that aim to phase out coal and natural gas, the sources said. In a symbolic gesture, Trump would seek to approve the Keystone Pipeline, an issue that was an environmental flashpoint and which was halted after Biden canceled a key permit on his first day in office. But any company looking to build the multibillion-dollar effort to carry Canadian crude oil to the U.S. would need to start from scratch because things like easements have been returned to landowners. Trump would also call on Congress to provide new funding so he can replenish the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve, established as an emergency crude oil supply and which was depleted under Biden to help manage price spikes caused by the Ukraine crisis and high inflation during the pandemic. Replenishing the reserve would boost short-term oil demand and encourage U.S. production. Trump is also expected to put pressure on the International Energy Agency, the Paris-based energy watchdog that advises industrialized countries on energy policy. Republicans have criticized the IEA's focus on policies to reduce emissions. Trump's advisers have urged him to withhold funding unless the IEA takes a more pro-oil position. to be continued... https://lnkd.in/dXd5RMyp

Will oil cost $50 in May, 2025 due to Trump's energy policies? Are we waiting for the restart of the global economy? Trump prepares wide-ranging energy plan to boost gas exports, oil drilling, sources say. The Trump's plan includes lifting Biden's pause on LNG export licenses, speeding up drilling permits on federal lands, boosting offshore oil drilling license sales. The energy checklist largely reflects promises Trump made on the campaign trail, but the plan to roll out the list as early as day one ensures that oil and gas production will rank alongside immigration as a pillar of Trump's early agenda. Trump, a Republican, also plans to repeal some of his Democratic predecessor's key climate legislation and regulations, such as tax credits for electric vehicles and new clean power plant standards that aim to phase out coal and natural gas, the sources said. In a symbolic gesture, Trump would seek to approve the Keystone Pipeline, an issue that was an environmental flashpoint and which was halted after Biden canceled a key permit on his first day in office. But any company looking to build the multibillion-dollar effort to carry Canadian crude oil to the U.S. would need to start from scratch because things like easements have been returned to landowners. Trump would also call on Congress to provide new funding so he can replenish the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve, established as an emergency crude oil supply and which was depleted under Biden to help manage price spikes caused by the Ukraine crisis and high inflation during the pandemic. Replenishing the reserve would boost short-term oil demand and encourage U.S. production. Trump is also expected to put pressure on the International Energy Agency, the Paris-based energy watchdog that advises industrialized countries on energy policy. Republicans have criticized the IEA's focus on policies to reduce emissions. Trump's advisers have urged him to withhold funding unless the IEA takes a more pro-oil position. to be continued... https://lnkd.in/ddwUSuEf

Let me try and explain the monumental incompetence of the mismanagement of Australia's gas resources. Vast amounts of gas is exported from Australia, but not by Australians. Its exported by a handful of predominantly foreign owned multinational gas corporations. Unfortunately successive Australian governments have chosen to support the interests of foreign owned gas corporations instead of the interests of Australians. The Australian government lets these foreign gas corporates export as much gas as they like, even when it creates potential shortages in Australia. They are allowed to price gouge us for our own gas, and the Australian governments gives the them most of the gas for free...failing to charge royalties. Obviously if we allow these companies to export 80% of our gas, we will run out more quickly, which is exactly what's happening. Its a disgrace that successive Australian governments have let vast quantitates of our gas sail away without with so little return for Australians. Unbelievably, no gas export company has paid any Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) ever (according to Treasury), and over half the gas is given away royalty free, 73% in WA. https://lnkd.in/dUQYUK9M Then gas corporations use the gas shortages they are creating to pressure governments to allow their new EXPORT projects that will do nothing to increase domestic supply even if some gas goes to the domestic market, because they just export more domestic gas from elsewhere. On the east coast, the government gives gas producers an exemption to the "price cap" if the gas is for the domestic use. But its a shell game. Even if gas from new fields goes to domestic market, the LNG exporters diver other domestic gas for export. Its a zero sum game! Other big gas producing nations like Qatar and Norway would never be so stupid. They ensure they have plentiful gas, tax the hell out of them and their citizens are rich as a result. https://lnkd.in/dCEEtVyi New gas mega-projects being approved by Australian Governments are some of the largest new fossil project in the world. Emissions from Woodside's Burrup Hub alone will will be greater than all Australia's coal power stations, making Australia hotter, drier and more fire prone.

"Recall that in January President Biden, prodded by White House climate adviser John Podesta, announced the Administration was pausing approvals for new LNG projects in order to study their impact. Now we know the “pause” was a political ruse. The study by the Energy Department was released this week, and Secretary Jennifer Granholm makes clear she thinks it justifies a permanent ban. Her problem is that the study’s facts are at war with her conclusions. DOE can approve permits for LNG exports to countries without a U.S. trade agreement only if they are in the “public interest.” The study essentially finds they are, but Ms. Granholm disagrees. Her main argument is that exporting more LNG would boost U.S. natural gas, electricity and product prices. But U.S. gas prices are hovering near record lows...."!! Don't you just get tired of the Dems, Left and fake news lies -- so much so, it is very easy to just tune them out. MSNBC, CNN are two whose listeners have mostly folded up their tent and went elsewhere. Trump has it "drill baby drill and export fossil fuel energy and start paying down our national debt with the proceeds". In the meantime, when supply exceeds demand, any first-year college student can tell you what happens (hint: a repeat of Trump's first term).

🚀President-elect Trump's LNG policies could herald a "golden era" for the US natural gas industry, with the potential to double exports to 22 Bcf/d by 2030. However, Rystad Energy cautions against the risk of a market glut from too rapid an expansion. Key points include: • Accelerated permitting and more federal land leases for gas production • Advancement of major projects such as Texas LNG and Calcasieu Pass • Anticipated global LNG demand reaching 600 MMmt/year by 2030 • Geopolitical ramifications for relations with the EU and China • The danger of an oversupply causing price declines and diminished competitiveness The challenge lies in balancing domestic growth with the stability of the global market to secure the long-term viability of the LNG sector. #LNG #EnergyPolicy #GlobalEnergy

Sixteen states filed a suit last week challenging the Biden administration's pause on LNG export permit approvals, arguing that the Energy Department overstepped its authority under the Natural Gas Act. Clark Mindock has the story for Reuters.   "The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Lake Charles, Louisiana, by the Republican attorneys general of a coalition of states including Texas, Louisiana and Florida that claim the U.S. Department of Energy's pause on exports will harm the U.S. economy and undermine efforts to supply foreign allies in Europe with steady supplies of LNG as the region seeks to wean itself off piped gas from Russia." #pipelineindustry #energyindustry #naturalgasindustry #naturalgas #exports #natgas #cleanenergy #lngindustry #lng #lngshipping #pipeline #infrastructure #permitting #criticalinfrastructure #construction #contactors #energyindependence #energysecurity #economicimpact #APCA https://lnkd.in/enPeW_fv

As Steve Everley outlines in detail below: USLNG exports drive US economic competitiveness, and lower global emissions - while keeping prices low and stable for American families and businesses. See our chart in comments

Here we go again. A highly anticipated “study” from the U.S. Department of Energy on liquefied natural gas (#LNG) exports – supposedly the basis for the White House’s ready-fire-aim strategy to pause new permits, which they rolled out a year ago – will embrace the widely discredited notion that expanding LNG exports will cause domestic #naturalgas prices to spike, at least according to reporting out today from Politico and Reuters. In many parts of the #energy sector, there is a wide berth of interpretation. What is affordable energy? What does reliability really mean? What energy mix makes us the most energy secure? This isn’t one of those cases. We have a decade of data showing that surging LNG exports have not caused any price spikes. Also, because the Internet is forever, we can see countless examples in the past of export critics assuring us in glossy reports and high-profile op-eds that exports would raise prices for consumers. That didn't happen. We know it didn’t happen. And now that politicians are making literally the same argument again… well, we know better. Let’s roll the tape. In February 2012, then-Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass) wrote in The Hill that “industry’s plans” to export 18% of the U.S. natural gas supply “could spike U.S. prices by more than 50 percent.” Ironically, he cited a study from the U.S. Department of Energy for his warning. The same month Markey wrote that, U.S. natural gas prices were $2.51/mmBTU. In February 2024, U.S. natural gas prices were $1.72/mmBTU. Instead of increasing 50%, prices declined by 31%. In 2023, total natural gas exports were approximately 17% of total U.S. production – so essentially the same volume that critics alleged would cause prices to do the exact opposite of what they did. But wait, there’s more. Critics have long claimed that exports would reduce industrial competitiveness because they would drive up domestic energy prices. From 2010 to 2022, chemical manufacturers invested over $200 billion in the United States to take advantage of – you guessed it – affordable natural gas. In 2015, the Center for American Progress warned that exporting large volumes of LNG “could increase annual natural gas bills for residential, commercial, and industrial consumers by at least $7 billion per year by 2020.” From 2015 to 2020, U.S. natural gas prices declined 32%. In January 2022, a Washington Post headline warned: “Europe wants American natural gas. That could drive up U.S. prices.” In January 2024, U.S. LNG exports had increased 12% since that headline was written, and domestic prices had declined 27%. If natural gas exports caused price spikes, then how did the United States go from exporting essentially zero LNG to becoming the world’s largest exporter in less than a decade, while domestic prices remained flat? Again, we have the data. We can all see it and easily find it, and we don’t have to be fooled if we don’t want to be.

What It Means for U.S. Oil Production and the Energy Sector Donald Trump has been re-elected, marking a new chapter as the 47th President of the United States. His campaign promises centered on revitalizing American energy independence by expanding domestic oil and gas production, cutting taxes, and prioritizing tariffs on foreign imports. For the oil industry, this could mean: 🔹 Increased Domestic Production: Trump’s administration is expected to support expanding oil and gas extraction, aiming to reduce U.S. reliance on imports and boost energy independence. 🔹 Deregulation: Potentially relaxed environmental regulations to encourage production, which could lower costs for companies but also raise concerns about environmental impacts. 🔹 Infrastructure Investment: More funds could be directed toward pipelines and other critical infrastructure to support growth in oil production and transportation. As an oil inspector at AmSpec Group in Boston, I’m closely following these shifts, as they directly impact our industry and the future of energy policy in the U.S. #EnergySecurity #OilProduction #USPolitics #EconomicGrowth #OilAndGas #EnergyFuture #DonaldTrump

👨⚖️A🇺🇸US judge, appointed by DonaldTrump, has ruled against President Joe Biden's decision to halt the permitting procedures for the construction of new LNG terminals. US energy strategies continue to influence, and to be influenced, by the run for the White House. With a remarkable decision, a Louisiana judge named James D. Cain Jr. has ruled in favour of 16 states led by the Republican party, most of them located in the South and Southeast of the🇺🇸US, blocking the pause on the permitting procedures to approve new LNG terminals. Needless to say, many of the states are large producers of natural gas, such as: Texas Louisiana Wyoming Oklahoma West Virginia James D. Cain Jr. was appointed as a US district judge by then-President Donald Trump in 2019. He said Biden’s stop "is completely without reason or logic and is perhaps the epiphany of ideocracy." The 16 states issued a lawsuit against the pause decided by the Biden Administration in January 2024. The states argued that the pause harms the economy and the energy industry, given the economic and financial instability. De facto, the pause hit all those projects waiting for an approval to export LNG to countries that did not sign free-trade agreements with the US, meaning most of those countries are now importing US LNG. As mentioned by Judge D. Cain, around $60 billion dollars of investments in new infrastructures were put into jeopardy because of the Biden Administration's decision. As an example, last week FERC green lighted CP2 LNG in Louisiana, projected by Venture Global, and waiting for approval to export LNG to non-signatory parties. The decision comes at a very crucial point in the political campaign towards the next Presidential elections in the🇺🇸US and for global energy geopolitics. 🇺🇸US has recently become the largest exporter of LNG across the world, overcoming the competition of🇦🇺Australia &🇶🇦Qatar. While Australia is struggling to maintain exports, Qatar has in store a huge expansion of LNG production which could mostly double its exports by the end of the decade. If the US is not picking up, it could lose out to Doha the position as the first global LNG exporter. Moreover, this is the last court victory for the Republican party in the process to counter the climate and energy agenda of the Biden administration. The LNG pause was announced by President Biden as an important step to face "the climate crisis for what it is: the existential threat of our time." President Biden is rebalancing domestic economy, foreign policy and his climate agenda by pursuing a perilous redefinition of🇺🇸US LNG exports while regaining votes from left supporters and activists ahead of the next Presidential elections. Could it work?