Meet EVA — the latest racing car. EVA has an elegant shape, with aerodynamics worthy of any of the cars which race in Formula One. The difference is that EVA is solar powered. Read more

  © Matt Cardy/Getty Images

One of the many lessons to be learnt from the dramatic developments in the world energy market over the past six months is that outcomes are driven primarily by economics – often at the micro level. Another is the extent to which the market, in its rough and ready way, is linked globally and across the range of fuels. In the oil market, for example, a mild downturn in China upset expectations and started to pull down oil prices across the world because China has been the main engine of demand growth. Once the fall began, it turned out that no one had the power to call a halt. The result has been a fall beyond all expectations, with consequences across the world – from Libya to Angola, from Russia to Mexico and Venezuela. In the coal market, prices fell globally because shale gas was pushing coal out of the US power sector and because of Chinese import tariffs. Politicians in one country or another can try to cut themselves off from the underlying economics, but they rarely succeed for long. The economic impacts are not limited to the oil and coal markets. A set of changes beginning in the US is set to transform the global petrochemical business. A surplus of ethane, driven by shale gas development, is undermining the status quo. Read more

View inside the Hunterston B nuclear power station

Inside the Hunterston B nuclear power station in Scotland  © Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images

2015 will be a crucial year for the nuclear industry across the world. Japan is expected to start bringing its nuclear reactors back on stream — four years after the Fukushima disaster. Elsewhere, a dozen different countries are considering whether or not to commit to new plants, with the decisions further complicated by the fall in the price of competing fuels such as coal and natural gas. Much depends on what happens in the UK, where the progress of proposed new developments will signal whether nuclear can be competitive as a long term source of energy. Read more

The process of adjustment in the energy market is far from over. After the dramatic halving of the oil price since June there is now every chance that natural gas will follow suit. Indeed the fall has already begun. During December, US natural gas prices fell below $3 per million British thermal units for the first time since 2012. But that is just the beginning.

Two further factors suggest a continued, and worldwide decline in 2015. First, in Europe in particular, gas supply contracts — for instance from Gazprom into Germany — are tied to the oil price. The link is historic and is gradually giving way to direct gas-to-gas competition. But the older, longer term contracts remain in place for now and that means that a radical downward shift in prices will occur through the coming year.

Secondly, after years of uncertainty since the 2011 Fukushima disaster, there are signs that Japan is ready to accept the gradual reintroduction of nuclear power. The initial steps will be small — perhaps just one or two reactors at first. But even that will be sufficient to undermine gas prices in Asia which rose at times to almost $20/mmbtu as Japan was forced to substitute imported gas for nuclear. Each nuclear station brought back online will reduce demand for gas, and just as prices surged in 2011 now they will slip back. A Reuters survey of some serious analysts, including Wood Mackenzie, forecast a fall of up to 30 per cent in Asian natural gas prices in 2015. Read more

Wind turbines in Peitz, Germany.

Wind turbines in Peitz, Germany © Sean Gallup/Getty Images

Forget Opec. If cartels can’t control output, they can’t control prices and in due course they fall apart, usually with a great deal of ill will in the process. The evidence of the last six months is that Opec can’t control the market — ask yourself how many Opec members want to see a price of $60 a barrel for their oil. Some in Saudi Arabia think a low price can squeeze out competing suppliers, but that feels like a justification after the fact of a fall which they can’t control. The question now is how the process of adjustment to the new price level will work. Read more

  © Samuel Kubani/AFP/Getty Images

There were two contenders for this year’s award. The most obvious, and certainly the man who has won the most coverage in this (and every other) publication, is Vladimir Putin. Mr Putin has certainly been highly visible, but he has actually changed very little in the energy market. Russian gas still flows to Europe and to Ukraine, helped by western payments of outstanding debts. Europe may be rethinking its energy mix and opening new and more diverse sources of supply, but any change will be very gradual. Russia will trade more with China and India, but that was coming anyway and is a natural and logical balancing of supply and demand. Read more

Russian president Vladimir Putin greets Chinese president Xi Jinping at the Apec meeting in Beijing last month © AFP

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin heads to New Delhi next weekend and will sign a deal with India on energy supply, marking the latest step in a remarkable set of developments that will reshape the international energy business and particularly the natural gas market for years to come. Read more

As Martin Wolf has noted in the Financial Times, world oil prices have fallen 38 per cent since the end of June. A Martian listening to George Osborne’s Autumn Statement would have no idea of this. For consumers lower oil prices can have positive effects but for mature producing provinces they are very damaging and could be fatal.

Mr Osborne proposed a cut in the supplementary charge on oil company profits by 2 percentage points from 32 per cent to 30 per cent. There is to be a “cluster” area allowance to help the development of small fields which sit next to each other. The ringfence expenditure supplement is to extended from six years to 10. Wow! That will really keep the investment flowing. Read more

One of the most exhilarating aspects of working in the energy business – at least for a humble economist such as me – is that companies think and act on a timescale measured in decades. Projects are built to last for 30-40 years, and often longer still. This is in sharp contrast to the government where timescales are measured in hours and where long-term means the not-too-distant horizon of the next election. It is also in contrast to sectors such as telecommuications where the pace of change is so fast that thinking more than five years ahead makes no sense. But, as the current slide in oil, gas and coal prices demonstrates, a long-term perspective does not make investment judgments easier.

Most oil and gas fields, coal mines, nuclear power plants, wind farms and other energy sources are designed to last for decades. The construction time can be long: a liquefied natural gas plant can take six or eight years; a new nuclear power station a decade or more especially if the technology is unproven or excruciatingly complex. Payback only comes when the plants have been on stream for several years. Beyond that, however, the operating costs are usually low and the cash flow is strong and secure. Or, at least it should be. Read more

CEO of energy company Total, Patrick Pouyanne, speaks during the Oil and Money conference in London on October 30

Patrick Pouyanne, the new chief executive of Total, speaks at a conference in London on October 30  © BEN STANSALL / AFP / Getty Images

The guard is changing in the international energy sector. Shell, Total, BG, EDF, Areva and a host of other companies have appointed — or are about to appoint — new leaders. There are more to come, including strong rumours of a change at Gazprom as it struggles to cope with the implications of sanctions, a shrinking market and sector-wide dividend cuts, and as other companies adjust to the sharp fall in prices and realise that there are no contingency plans to cope with sub-$80 oil. Read more

BP oil platform in the North Sea  © Reuters

After 40 years of production that far exceeded original expectations, the North Sea oil and gas industry is in serious jeopardy. At the beginning of the year, there was a degree of optimism following Sir Ian Wood’s report and the establishment of a new, more interventionist regulator considered capable of driving a further wave of activity. But with the fall in oil prices over the past four months, the mood has changed dramatically. Read more

A solar thermal research facility  © Michael Hall/ Getty Images

Given the seriousness of the messages contained in last week’s report from the International Panel on Climate Change, one might expect some sense of urgency around the search for solutions. Regrettably, that is not the case. Governments and campaigners especially in Europe seem rigidly focused on pursuing the holy grail of a global deal, under which the world’s major economies would move together in a synchronised process of decarbonisation. The futility of that approach is evidenced by the fact that Europe itself has been unable to set an effective carbon price and has done almost nothing to advance the technology of carbon capture and storage (CCS), which is one of the few ways in which emissions could be managed. Read more

Russian energy minister Alexander Novak, EU energy commissioner Gunther Oettinger and Ukraine's energy minister Yuri Prodan sign an agreement on October 30 (EMMANUEL DUNAND/AFP/Getty Images)

  © Emmanuel Dunand/AFP/Getty

The deal announced on Friday between Russia, Ukraine and the EU looks to have removed the immediate risk of gas supplies to Ukraine being cut off over the winter. The EU and the IMF will underpin Ukrainian purchases with payment in advance. It is not clear from what has been published so far whether this deal will now become the norm for the future. As it stands for this year at least, the deal is mutually beneficial. The Russians, who need the money, will get paid. The Europeans, who have no wish for an open conflict, are able to buy their way out of trouble at least for the moment. But this is not the end of the story. While the short-term issue of energy supplies may have been resolved, the question of Ukraine’s longer term status has not. Read more

A postwar power cut; London 1947 (Photo by Reg Birkett/Keystone/Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

A power cut in London in 1947 © Reg Birkett/Keystone/Hulton Archive/Getty Images

Developed industrial economies should not be at risk of power blackouts in any but the most extreme and exceptional circumstances. The ability to anticipate demand and to put in place spare capacity may not be available to the poorest economies of sub Saharan Africa but it is certainly available in the UK. The risks of a tightening balance of capacity and demand have been obvious and widely discussed for at least the past three years. To have reached the point where National Grid are having to issue warnings and to tell some consumers that they will have to agree contracts which allow the supplies they need to be interrupted because of potential shortages of supply is shameful. Read more

  © Johner Images / Getty Images

The deal reached at last week’s European summit on climate change will satisfy no one. The non-binding Europe-wide targets place no responsibility on national governments and provide none of the confidence necessary for the essential investments in supply and infrastructure that are yet to be made. Poland may be the short-term winner – reflecting a clear shift in European decision-making to the east – but the summit failed to address the hard reality that current policies are not working. A new approach is needed.

The fractious debate which led up to the summit should be understood as marking the end of the “consensus” on energy policy established in 2008. Anyone wanting to understand the details of the debate should read the excellent summary produced by Carbon Brief which spells out the positions of the key states on major issues. Read more

Conspiracy theories abound around the oil price fall. A 25 per cent drop in less than three months is certainly exceptional and the assumption is that in a politically driven market a political decision by someone, somewhere must have forced prices down. The most popular conspiracy theory is that the US and the Saudis have combined to take money away from their major enemies – Russia and Iran. In both cases, [the argument goes], a shortage of revenue could help to bring President Vladimir Putin and the Supreme Leader, the ailing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to the negotiating table to sort out a deal on Ukraine and Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

In a complicated world anything could be true. I don’t happen to believe the conspiracy theory but I accept that it is a possibility. To me the interesting thing is what happens next, and that is down to the Saudis. The risk for the whole industry, and for many countries dependent on oil revenues, is that Saudi Arabia’s games have led them to lose control of the market. Prices could go a good deal lower with wide and mostly negative consequences, starting with more regional instability and a cutback in investment which can only feed the next cycle. Read more

  © Christophe Lehenaff / Getty Images

How far will the French government go in selling off some of its extensive portfolio of assets? In its last budget, the government said it would sell up to €4bn in shareholdings to raise money to pay down debt, or to invest in other companies. This could foreseeably include selling off parts of the government’s stakes in energy companies such as GDF Suez and EDF. But more may be necessary.

The ongoing conflict with the European Union over France’s persistent deficit, which according to the finance minister Michel Sapin cannot now be closed before 2017, is damaging France’s reputation as well as the all important relationship with Berlin. Some action is needed to buy German acceptance of a new timetable. Selling assets in itself would not solve the problem but could reduce debt levels and produce much needed revenue. As a concept, however, privatisation is still considered toxic in France. The terms of any sale will have to reflect these political constraints.

Any Brit commenting on France has to be careful after the childish abuse from Andy Street, the managing director (for the moment) of retailer John Lewis. France has its problems, as any Frenchman will tell you, but it is not “finished” or a country where “nothing works and nobody cares”. Mr Street should visit the thriving areas of the South West. He should remember that France, supposedly so hostile to globalisation, has 31 companies in the latest Fortune 500 listing against 28 each from Germany and the ultra-global UK. I hope that the Franco British Council, the Colloque and the other institutions that have laboured for years to build good relations with France are evidence that Mr Street speaks for no-one but himself. Read more

The sun sets behind Hinkley Point B, and (R) Hinkley Point A nuclear power stations besides the Bristol Channel near Bridgwater on November 12, 2013 in Somerset, England (Photo by Matt Cardy/Getty Images)

  © Matt Cardy/Getty Images

The EU approval of the nuclear development at Hinkley Point marks an important, if not decisive, chapter in the story of new nuclear in the UK. There are still legal challenges to be overcome and a financing package to be finalised within the constraints set by the EU ruling but this is a good moment to identify winners and losers.

The obvious losers are the UK’s consumers who are trapped into paying a price for electricity that is double the current wholesale price for 35 years after the plant starts up. The deal will go down in history, alongside the privatisation of the Royal Mail, as an example of the inability of the British government – ministers and civil servants alike – to negotiate complex commercial deals. The phrase “rolled over” will enter the French language and be accompanied always with a Gallic smile. Still, one should recognise talent and so chapeau to the French negotiators. Read more

8th June 1939:  Babies in a row of cots brought out for some sun by their nurses at the Duchess of York's Hospital for Babies at Burnage, Manchester.  (Photo by Fox Photos/Getty Images)

  © Fox Photos/Getty Images

A new academic study, the results of which were published last month in the magazine Science, suggests that previous population projections have been understated. Rather than plateauing at 9bn the global population could rise during the current century to 11bn or more. How can the world manage such numbers?

The focus of attention – in politics, markets and companies – is so concentrated on the short term that long-term challenges are easily lost from sight. Tomorrow’s problems are left to tomorrow’s leaders. However understandable when individuals are working under the pressure of 24/7 news cycles and quarterly reporting standards, the result is that some of the most profound challenges are being neglected. Population growth is perhaps the most fundamental challenge of all because its consequences are so widespread.

The issue has been raised again by the publication of a new research paper from the University of Washington. Professor Adrian Rafferty and his colleagues argue that for a variety of reasons (including the success of the fight against Aids and the failure of attempts to spread knowledge on contraception), the global population could now be 2bn or more higher in 2100 than previously anticipated – that is within the lifetime of many of the children alive today. Read more

Mikhail Khodorkovsky at a public meeting on April 27, 2014 in Donetsk, Ukraine

Mikhail Khodorkovsky at a public meeting on April 27, 2014 in Donetsk, Ukraine  © Brendan Hoffman/Getty Images

It might seem strange, even wishful thinking, to question how long Vladimir Putin will remain in power. Mr Putin, who is 61, seems to be in good health and apparently in complete control of every element of the power structure in Moscow – including, through Gazprom and Rosneft, the key levers of the energy sector. He has defied US and European pressure and sanctions over Ukraine, and has begun to restore Russia’s status in the world as a great power which can’t be ignored.

That is the story — but behind the facade the cracks appear. The Emperor has fewer clothes than he pretends. And now from the past comes Nemesis, in the form of one of the few Russians who has dared to challenge Mr Putin openly — Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

In his first public statement about Russia’s domestic politics since leaving prison in December 2013, Mr Khodorkovsky told Le Monde last week that he was relaunching his Open Russia project — not so much a new political party as a horizontal network of social groups seeking change and modernisation across Russia. He said he would not be “interested in the idea of becoming president of Russia at a time when the country would be developing normally… But if it appeared necessary to overcome the crisis and to carry out constitutional reform, the essence of which would be to redistribute presidential powers in favour of the judiciary, parliament and civil society, then I would be ready to take on this part of the task.” Read more