Firstly, an apology. We are still not ready to publish the Q&A session with Josh Fox. I will publish an update with a full explanation tomorrow (Tuesday), but for now, thanks for your patience.
While we wait for Josh’s answers, please start sending in your questions for Terry Duffy (pictured right) and Craig Donohue (pictured left), the chairman and CEO of CME Group, respectively.
The Chicago Mercantile Exchange is the home of the flagship WTI oil contract, and Duffy and Donohue are perfectly placed to answer all your questions about oil pricing: from why the spread between WTI and Brent is so high; to the possibility of a brand new flagship conquering the market; to what role speculators have played in pushing it up so high.
The deadline for questions is Sunday, February 20th, and their answers will be published on Friday, February 25th.
Shell has produced a lengthy update to its Shell Scenarios today, laying out what the company believes will be the themes affecting the energy industry until 2050.
Its core findings are summed up in this article from The Times (£). The general trend is not particularly shocking: emerging market energy demand will outstrip that from the OECD, and diminishing supplies will lead to a potentially vicious squeeze.
But the scale of the problem as far as Shell sees it is stark. It thinks the gap between supply and demand could be equivalent to the global energy industry’s entire output in 2000.
As reported in the FT on Monday, green campaigners in the UK have stepped up their attack on the carbon floor price, calling it a “windfall” for the nuclear industry.
They first made this warning in the immediate aftermath of the electricity market reform announcement, but now Greenpeace and WWF have put some numbers to their arguments.
They say the move could benefit the nuclear industry by up to £3.4bn, which would effectively be a subsidy, and so breach the coalition agreement.