On FT Energy Source this week:
© The Financial Times Ltd 2015 FT and 'Financial Times' are trademarks of The Financial Times Ltd.
That’s crude on Friday afternoon, the same day BlueGold Capital Management fiercely denied rumours of company-related liquidations in the WTI market. Read more
On FT Energy Source:
- Peak demand: going mainstream
- The nuclear renaissance is not coming soon
- The China-floating oil storage connection
- Peer review and the IPCC under pressure in Energy headlines
- A long week in cap-and-trade
- Strong laws needed for US clean tech
- Sudanese conflict and oil exploration
- The coal element of the US federal energy announcement
- Refining: a cyclical downturn – or a catastrophe?
- People’s power
- Nuclear renaissance not so assured after all
- When windmills don’t spin
- Boosting biofuels, bothering enviros Read more
There are some very intriguing flashes coming out on Reuters regarding the BlueGold hedge fund on Friday:
RTRS-HEDGE FUND BLUE GOLD DENIES IT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR VOLATILITY IN CRUDE OIL PRICES IN LAST FEW DAYS
RTRS-HEDGE FUND BLUE GOLD SAYS OIL OUTLOOK BULLISH FOR 2010, DIFFICULT TRADING ENVIRONMENT
RTRS-HEDGE FUND BLUEGOLD SAYS BUSINESS AS USUAL, DENIES RUMOURS ABOUT ITS CONTINUING OPERATIONS
A few weeks ago Philip Verleger argued that contango, (and by extension, speculators) in heating oil had helped avoid a blowout in home heating costs during this cold, cold northern winter.
Goldman Sachs has theorised something similar may have gone on in oil markets – albeit from a completely different angle. They suggest that big floating oil inventories may have shielded the effect of rising demand from China – and that that shielding effect might be unwinding.
The drawdown in floating storage during January, analyst David Greely estimates, was fairly substantial in January: Read more
Canada’s Center for International Governance Innovation has come out with a rather pessimistic report on the likelihood of a nuclear renaissance in the near future.
The authors say that on balance, an increase in the role for nuclear energy to 2030 is unlikely. Meanwhile new reactor additions will likely be offset by the retirement of older plants. The main reasons are familiar to anyone who follows nuclear: too costly, too slow to build, and inadequate government support:
Globally, while the gross amount of nuclear-generated electricity may rise, the percentage of electricity contributed by nuclear power is likely to fall as other cheaper, more quickly deployed alternatives come online. An increase as high as a doubling of the existing reactor fleet as envisaged in some official scenarios seems especially implausible, given that it can take a decade of planning, regulatory processes, construction and testing before a reactor can produce electricity.
So what are those cheaper, more quickly deployed alternatives? Read more
It’s not over yet, but this has so far been a tumultuous week for the prospects of a US cap-and-trade system. Earlier this week it looked like enough US politicians were giving up on to bin the idea altogether, at least for this Congress.
President Obama was talking about the possibility of splitting cap-and-trade legislation out from other energy initiatives: Read more