The heading give's the rationale for the story, its the thinking process that should be interesting to a discerning reader.

The article is written by an economist I greatly admire in Greg Canavan, when you read this you may pick up some more information about climate alarmism. It is not a climate change article. just like the previous one that has gone unread (so be it) but one that more of the "unwashed" should listen to and understand where we are going.

Why am I publishing these things? because the ignorance around climate alarmism has been lost in the debate about "climate change".Underlined emphasis is mine.

You could see this coming…

I wrote as much in an article for The Insider back in June…

With the coming energy transition, does oil (and other fossil fuel energies) fade off into the sunset, or does it go out with a bang?

Most people I know think the fossil fuel industry is a dead man walking. Demand will relentlessly drop in the years ahead, and prices will fall along with it.

The court rulings and shareholder activism (against fossil fuel companies) will do one thing: make investment in new supply that much harder/more expensive. That wouldn’t be so bad if you think demand was going to drop off a cliff anyway. But it’s not going to happen.

Not unless you believe in fairy tales.

After reading the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) report about how we get to ‘net zero by 2050’, I’m even more bullish on energy prices long term. In my view, the sector will go out with a bang, not a whimper.

Let me explain…

In the document, the IEA provides a few scenarios:

The Stated Policies Scenario (STEPS)

The Announced Pledges Case (APC)

STEPS ‘takes account only of specific policies that are in place or have been announced by governments’. The APC ‘assumes that all announced national net zero pledges are achieved in full and on time, whether or not they are currently underpinned by specific policies’.

It is easy to make a virtue signalling pledge about net-zero emissions by 2050. Especially when you know you’re not going to be around then. But it’s another thing to make it happen.

So the scenario based on ‘announced pledges’ is not realistic. It might sound good, but it’s not realistic to make any investment assumptions based on it.

Let’s look at STEPS, then. This is more realistic because developing nations simply won’t jeopardise their growth by turning away from cheap fossil fuels.

There is strong divergence between the outlook for emissions in advanced economies on one hand and the emerging market and developing economies on the other. In advanced economies, despite a small rebound in the early 2020s, CO2 emissions decline by about a third between 2020 and 2050, thanks to the impact of policies and technological progress in reducing energy demand and switching to cleaner fuels. In emerging market and developing economies, energy demand continues to grow strongly because of increased population, brisk economic growth, urbanisation and the expansion of infrastructure: these effects outweigh improvements in energy efficiency and the deployment of clean technologies, causing CO2 emissions to grow by almost 20% by the mid‐2040s, before declining marginally to 2050.

In advanced economies, energy use falls by around 5% to 2050, despite a 75% increase in economic activity over the period. In emerging market and developing economies, energy use increases by 50% to 2050, reflecting a tripling of economic output between 2020 and 2050.

The global fuel mix changes significantly between 2020 and 2050. Coal use, which peaked in 2014, falls by around 15%. Having fallen sharply in 2020 due to the pandemic, oil demand rebounds quickly, returning to the 2019 level of 98 million barrels per day (mb/d) by 2023 and reaching a plateau of around 104 mb/d shortly after 2030. Natural gas demand increases from 3 900 billion cubic metres (bcm) in 2020 to 4 600 bcm in 2030 and 5 700 bcm in 2050. Nuclear energy grows by 15% between 2020 and 2030, mainly reflecting expansions in China.  

So coal demand falls by 0.5% per year, oil demand grows modestly, while natural gas demand grows 46%! What do you think will happen to prices when activism and regulations make it very hard and expensive to develop new sources of supply?

They’re not going to fall sharply, as the IEA expects, that’s for sure.

Look, long-term forecasts like this are a mug’s game. There are so many moving parts. And it is undeniable that the energy transition is underway in the world’s ‘wealthy’ economies.

But developing economies is another question entirely. China has pledged to be net zero by 2060. Anyone who believes that is an idiot. China has underwritten their growth for the past 20 years by ignoring the West.

Technological breakthroughs will ensure the energy transition continues. But in my view, this will occur with fossil fuel prices rising much higher than anyone thinks possible. That will occur due to robust demand and supply constraints.

Think about it. What better way to force developing nations to join the energy transition than through much higher prices?

***

You’ve seen the initial evidence of this over the past month, with natural gas spot prices exploding in Asia, Europe, and the UK. The desire to replenish supplies ahead of the Northern Hemisphere winter has also seen coal prices surge to record highs.

In addition, both Brent crude and West Texas Intermediate oil prices recently broke out to multiyear highs.

The supply side issue I discussed a few months ago is now a reality. A recent Bloomberg article highlights the extent of the issues:

Oil explorers need to raise drilling budgets by 54% to more than half a trillion dollars to forestall a significant supply deficit in the next few years, according to Moody’s Investors Service Inc.

Crude and natural gas drillers chastened by last year’s unprecedented collapse in demand and prices haven’t responded to the recent market rebound as the industry typically does by expanding the search for untapped fields. While international crude and U.S. gas have risen more than 50% and 120% this year, respectively, drilling outlays are only forecast to increase by 8% globally, Moody’s said in a report Thursday.

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Votes: 0

Replies

    • Geez Keet.  you worry about alot of vapour and bullshit. Get a grip babe!

       

    • Don't forget the lizard people. They're here. Already. 

  • Plenty of lithium in Afghanistan no oil. 

  • Parra Tim all news stations  have  crossed over to the darkside.  

    • Lets try harder and forget the biases we already have affirmed,

      There is a balance, lets see if we can argue positively.

      I am not sure what that means, let's everybody try and give  their views of what they think may happen. ???

      • I will be dead before any of it changes too drastically, climate or economy.

      • Poppa If you can change your mind watch the ABC at 8.30 and point out the bias in the presentation.. Would Fox News ever venture into this type of territory. I saw a preview on The Drum .Is it worth putting up these types of awareness  programs in the public interest. 

        • If i can change my mind Tad? I cannot change my mind if I can not rationalize the issues....too many of the discussions on here show the incapacity for people go show this up.

          I have just realised the infiltration of social media when Daz show's the levels of defence he get's to.

          It's now a situation when I listen to his arguments that people should start to question the objectives of people that post here. I have been here a number of years, I am far from being a populat poster but listen to me when I say you people need to understand how you are being infiltrated,

          Tad you are a genuine person who profoundly believes in the rhetoric, I have seen this come through when the antagonists thought they had won the day.....ask yourselves why people like Daz come on here ....a duly effected Proffessor in a recognised University (yes I have checked this out), based in Victoria with no natural allegiences to Parramatta and fullfills an agenda and propaganda to influence people he would never normally talk to.

          There is something rotten in Denmark......think about it and put your biases aside,

          • Mate Play the ball and not the man. That's where progress is. You can look at it as an opportunity rather than a battle 

          • This reply was deleted.
            • Slugg I thought you banned me from communicating with you?

This reply was deleted.

Latest comments

Hell On Eels replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"LB,
If you’re in charge, are you honestly throwing out a multi-million, 4–5-year contract without talking to the player about what they actually want to do for those years? For fun? Because you’ve run out of Sudoku puzzles? Is this the logic you’re…"
1 hour ago
Perpetual Motion replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Dont believe a word Anasta says but its done so hope he plays well while he is here, or Joash steps up and takes his place."
3 hours ago
Eelawarra replied to Eelawarra's discussion THE EELS SUPERTEE
"Here’s the full story from parraeels.com.au
Supertee is proud to announce the launch of the Parramatta Eels Supertee, a new children’s medical garment designed in the colours of one of rugby league’s most passionate and iconic clubs.
This marks the…"
3 hours ago
Darren Munro replied to Eelawarra's discussion THE EELS SUPERTEE
"Wow awesome idea! Great think tanking!"
3 hours ago
LB replied to Eelawarra's discussion THE EELS SUPERTEE
"What a beautiful initiative. Well done Parramatta."
3 hours ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Well he sounded all over the place on the podcast. Maitua asked did Parramatta want him long term and he said of course they did.
He said in the same podcast it was meant to be a loan but also answered we wanted him long term.
So just pumping his…"
3 hours ago
Frank The Tank replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"And if the kids never become what the coach thinks they will become?
New 5 year plan. Wash, rinse, repeat FMD."
4 hours ago
Eelawarra replied to Eelawarra's discussion THE EELS SUPERTEE
"The Eels shirt that the kid is wearing in the below photo is actually the new Eels medical garment worn by children undergoing treatment.
 "
4 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Jodi told me that Braith is full of shit "
4 hours ago
Hell On Eels replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"If we don’t want to develop players who eventually go to other clubs, then we might as well stop recruiting and shut down the juniors, because plenty will.
No club doing their due diligence wastes time on a contract without talking through a…"
5 hours ago
Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐’s discussion was featured
Anasta  24.10 min https://youtu.be/-Ly4UtWcy4g?si=FrcQ6McxrMSjS0icWatch the latest Anasta podcast- Straight from the horses mouth,  " Parramatta - Ryles, never offered Jonah Pezet a long-term deal"   He says Parramatta only ever wanted Pezet for one…
5 hours ago
Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐 replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"That's a load of bs.  Why would Anasta contradict himself and now say we didn't want him long term
That was just Anasta pumping up Pezet's tyres when he agreed with the question.  He was probably on a high after just getting tge deal done 
This time…"
5 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Eelawarra's discussion THE EELS SUPERTEE
"Can you screenshot whatever this blog is about? Zuckerberg and I don't get on"
5 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to LB's discussion Perth Bears GM refuses to rule out play for Zac Lomax
"Who's the daddy?...does Didley squat or Hock?...I hear Hock don't take no for an answer"
5 hours ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Ryles never offered Pezet more than 1 year
"Well we sort of know that now that Parra wanted him for a year, not really a revalation. But Chief, Anasta is going to say what is best for his client, what is best for his client is to keep the clubs he is at happy…"
5 hours ago
LB replied to LB's discussion Perth Bears GM refuses to rule out play for Zac Lomax
"Well not exactly, we can get a player in return.
But technically a transfer fee is nothing, doesn't help us on the cap or anything."
7 hours ago
More…

 

<script src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>
<!-- Sidebar -->
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<script>// <![CDATA[
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
// ]]></script>