Would suggest looking at Australia's NEM review if you haven't done so - a core conclusion is that while RE market value may get more volatile as revenue concentrates at the margins of scarcity, a strong secondary market of appropriate contracts can smooth earnings and keep assets investable
The Calvin's dad explaining records meme. He is explaining that the two kinds of meme are Calvin's dad and Loss. Despite being a meme about Calvin's dad, this one is Loss.
There's a different argument that goes fossil supply shock -> inflationary pressure -> decarb actions delayed/derailed under cost pressures. I think it's implicitly a view of decarb actions as a good-times luxury policy, which seems totally wrong given the realities in Pakistan or China.
Has that argument ever been made in good faith? I can kind of vaguely see how you might do it, but personally can only recall seeing it as deceptive pro-fossil messaging.
Pure American physiognomy on that guy - you simply do not see a head like that anywhere else
Data centres quickly emerging as a focal point of backlash across a range of issues - anti-tech, anti-electricity, anti-inequality, anger at local politics' failure to follow or form democratic sentiment.
Andrew Cockburn on Mossad’s kill list - read it here:
www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v4...
Not at all clear that advanced geothermal is more than an American culture-bound syndrome - other countries lacking the US's massive O&G constituency don't seem hugely interested either.
Might also have different trade characteristics - block trades of LNG for specific diesel or petrol shipped volumes, rather than maintaining standard supply flows at a higher cost? I don't think you can really rule out rationing as a plausible outcome here.
Yeah I'd agree that bilateral deals for LNG are potentially very relevant here (assuming our plants haven't been too banged up by the recent cyclone), but that's a different flavour of argument to "we'll just outpay everyone else on an open and liquid market".
Krugman on oil demand elasticity and proper price outcomes: open.substack.com/pub/paulkrug...
Now thinking on how to treat producers withdrawing traded supply to prioritise domestic demand. Is that effectively a high-WtP inelastic demand signal, or something different and distinctly nonlinear?
"Higher willingness to pay" is definitely true, but it'll be interesting to see how much market liquidity in petrochemicals survives once the supply crisis really starts to bite - producer nations have got to be thinking about export controls to shore up domestic supply.
that said, a little concerned by the though of what lived experience of covid hoarding (hoarders get what they want, rule-abiders do without) might mean for attempts at public-good fuel rationing.
It'd be nice to see a *little* tarring and feathering of social defectors for once, as a treat.
Very boring address from the PM, but would still be good to have these more regularly IMO - anodyne and non-combative is a broadly reassuring combo from any politician under current circumstances
Beautiful stuff
I'm not sure - the messaging is still on reasonableness of pricing, rather than the reality that supply is now below demand and prices will go up until enough people stop driving/flying/fertilising. Still a long way to go, and the government isn't doing much to build the case for what happens next.
Yeah - you've been saying sensible things, but every day I read more well-meaning politicians suggesting demand subsidies to help the worse off manage the cost of living.
The public messaging around this still seems totally unable of grasping that tradeoffs must be made and people *will* suffer. 10% less oil supply doesn't mean "prices rise a bit" - it means prices rise until people can no longer afford 10% of former consumption. There's no way around this!
Some of you will hate to hear this, but Donald Trump has done more for public transit this year than any President in my lifetime.
I've almost given up understanding futures as a prediction - the way you see the whole forward curve shift in lockstep after a big one-off/ uncorrelated event is very strange. Almost feels like the traders only check in when Something Happen
A bit weird to see the strip moving up in unison - not so much marginal price setting by gas in Q1/Q4 these days. Unless that's flowing from a shift in coal futures?
Having the thought this week that there's some tension here between electricity decarb and electrification - renewable integration has more policy support right now, but EVs should arguably be a higher priority. A Cheaper Home Batteries equivalent for EV subsidy could dent fuel consumption fast..
In 1991 the US had a reason to fight. In 2003 it manufactured one. In 2026 it didn’t even bother. Tracing the decay of the unipolar order via three Gulf conflicts. new post
Two parallel drivers:
• Oil crisis = incentive to electrify transport. Investment in EVs will permanently reduce oil demand.
• LNG crisis = incentive to use less LNG for power. Renewables work, but so does coal!
Are we about to see more states adopt China-style policies supporting coal *and* EVs?
With Gulf refineries being hit that could take years to repair, electrification of transport is the only way through this oil shock - there simply won't be enough liquid fuels to meet pre-war demand. Similarly for renewable generation to places currently importing LNG to feed turbines.
I think "direct reduction" here just means a gaseous reductant, rather than a blast furnace using hot air to produce CO from coal as a reducing intermediate (i.e. the carbon is a reductant precursor, not a direct reductant)
Struck by a sudden desire to see if there's any way to play The Impossible Quiz here in 2025
had the riff stuck in my head for years (surely it can't be decades?) but had entirely forgotten it was a rathergood bit - cheers