Emissions

Anne Hidalgo (left), Mayor of Paris,  and French energy minister Segolene Royal celebrate the Paris COP21 climate accord.

Anne Hidalgo (left), Mayor of Paris, and French energy minister Segolene Royal celebrate the Paris COP21 climate accord.  © Getty Images

The Paris agreement on climate change has been ratified, earlier than most people expected. Some believes that means the issue is on its way to being resolved. That is absolutely not the case.

Donald Trump’s election as president is a major setback because it removes any sense of American leadership on the issue. But that is not the only cause for concern. The inconvenient truth is that the use of coal in growing emerging economies continues to outpace anything being achieved elsewhere. The global energy market is changing; oil demand is coming to a peak and renewables are getting cheaper. But that, however important, is as yet having no more than a minor effect on the climate issue. We have to be realistic and prepare accordingly. Read more

Simon Henry, Royal Dutch Shell CFO

Simon Henry, Royal Dutch Shell CFO  © Getty Images

On November 2 Simon Henry, the chief financial officer of Royal Dutch Shell and one of the most respected figures in the industry, told analysts on a conference call for the Shell results presentation that he believed “oil demand will peak before supply and that peak may be between five and 15 years hence”. I think he is right, and that the peak of demand will come within five years and possibly by 2020. The reasons for what sounds like a very radical challenge to the conventional wisdom are clear and the advance warning signs are already evident in the data.

Oil demand in the developed OECD world has already peaked and is 9 per cent below the level reached in 2005. In Europe, oil demand is down 17 per cent over the same period. Read more

Energy demand in China appears to have decoupled from GDP

Energy demand in China appears to have decoupled from GDP  © Getty Images

The changes taking place in the world energy market are not just a matter of oversupply or the unwillingness of Saudi Arabia to rein in production. Demand has stagnated and in some areas is falling. The fall is unexpected — all the standard projections still cheerfully predict ever rising demand driven by population growth and the spread of prosperity in emerging economies. That assumption, however, begins to look too simplistic. The reality is more complex and, for producers, much more challenging. Forget the old debate about peak oil. Now it seems we are approaching peak energy. Read more

  © Getty Images

After two years of unrelenting gloom it is good to see that at least one part of the global energy business is booming. The price of lithium carbonate in China has risen by 253 per cent in the past year and there is intense takeover activity among the limited number of companies that control lithium production. Goldman Sachs has called lithium “the new gasoline”. Is the hype justified?

Lithium is a soft white metal that provides a small but for the moment essential element in battery technology. Production comes from mineral rock or from salt water, with supplies concentrated in Argentina, Australia, China, Chile and the US state of Nevada. That production is controlled by a very small number of companies, led by Albemarle, FMC and Chile’s Sociedad Quimica y Minera (SQM) in Chile. Between them they produced 90 per cent of total supplies outside China last year. Read more

FRANCE-CLIMATE-WARMING-COP21-DEMO

Climate change demonstrators during the Paris conference  © Getty Images

Two papers published in the last few weeks provide a sobering reality check after the rhetorical success of the Paris climate change conference in December. Getting any agreement was a diplomatic triumph but producing real change on the scale necessary will be much more difficult. The two documents are very different but both excellent pieces of work. Their calculations and assumptions are detailed, transparent and, most important of all, evidence based. Both, however, reflect a degree of unjustified optimism. Read more

FRANCE-POLITICS-GOVERNMENT

Emmanuel Macron  © Getty Images

The most interesting comment at Davos this year came from the French economy minister Emmanuel Macron who said that he simply did not believe for a second the figures put out by the Chinese government claiming that their economy had grown by 6.9 per cent in 2015. To anyone familiar with Chinese statistics the comment is welcome because it brings into sharp focus the fact that no one can trust the data being produced by what is now one of the world’s largest economies. The doubts are not limited to macro economic numbers. Chinese data on the energy sector also deserve to be regarded with great scepticism.

There are three reasons why Chinese data might be inaccurate. The first is that it is simply extremely hard to gather reliable data across a country which is so vast. Good data is hard to come by. In Nigeria gross domestic product was revised upwards in 2013 by 89 per cent because the old basis of calculation was inaccurate. There are many issues even in much smaller and more developed countries. Read more

National Tribute to The Victims of The Paris Terrorist Attacks At Les Invalides In Paris

Laurent Fabius  © Getty Images

The agreement on climate change in Paris will satisfy no one. The complaints are predictable and have already begun.

The commitments made are not legally binding and political decisions could be altered by future elections or regime changes. The funds available for adjustment are too limited and, of course, there is no carbon price.

All true, but politics is the art of the possible and what has been agreed is a triumph for French diplomacy and for the French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius personally. Many deserve credit but success depends on leadership. He is the Energy Personality of the Year because he has played a crucial role in changing how the sector will evolve worldwide for decades to come. Read more

FRANCE-ENERGY-HYDRO-ALSTHOM

A pump turbine at Alstoms' global technology and hydropower centre in Grenoble, France  © Getty Images

Storage — whether of grain or of knowledge through the printed word — has been a crucial element in human development. Of all the many technical advances that are transforming the energy business none is potentially more important than storage: it give us the ability to control the way, and crucially the timing, of energy consumption. Used on a major scale it could help to make heat and light available to those outside the commercial economy and could radically alter the energy mix.

Two excellent recent research reports summarise the current state of the art in the field and offer some predictions. The first is from Lazards and is the latest in a series assessing trends in the costs of different mechanisms. The second is from Moody’s and concentrates on the advances being made in reducing the cost of batteries.

In discussing storage it is important to demolish two myths. First, the technological advances are not about to transform the energy system to the point where a major proportion of consumers defect from existing distribution systems. Second, it does not require a dramatic breakthrough for making it on a significant scale to become economic. Read more

FRANCE-ENERGY-NUCLEAR-COMPANY-EDF-ELECTRICITY

Construction at EDF's EPR project in Flamanville, France  © Getty Images

Strong and capable energy ministers are rare but the UK government appears to have found one in the person of Andrea Leadsom. Ms Leadsom is nominally the Minister of State in the Department of Energy and Climate Change (ie the number 2) but that is a detail. She is not crippled by self-doubt and initially hesitated for many hours before taking the job. Perhaps energy did not seem important enough. Perhaps number 2 was the wrong number.

Unsurprisingly, however, she has rapidly mastered the brief and appears to be finding that the subject is more interesting and the policy issues more complex and important than she had imagined. The question now is whether she can use her authority to force a better bargain for energy consumers by negotiating a new and improved deal with the owners of the long-planned and much-postponed Hinkley Point nuclear power station. Read more

Scottish Windfarm Starts Producing Electricity

The Braes of Doune windfarm, Scotland   © Getty Images

Organisations, especially those that are doing well, can easily get stuck on narrow views of the future and their own role within it. It can be useful and creative in those circumstances to give people the opportunity to think more widely. One method that I have seen used to great effect is to ask people to imagine the world in 10 years’ time and suggest what might have changed, particularly against the expectations of the conventional wisdom. The process can provide a useful counterweight to long-term forecasts, which tend to do no more than roll forward recent history.

In that spirit, and for the holidays, here are a few stories on the energy sector from the FT in 2025. These are not forecasts — just possibilities. Readers would be welcome to suggest additions to the list.

1. In Moscow, ShellGaz — the world’s largest energy company as measured by its listing on the FTNikkei 250 — announces that it is proceeding with Eaststream3, the latest in a series of export projects from eastern Siberia. Eaststream3 will take gas by pipeline to the rapidly growing cities of northern India. ShellGaz was formed in 2017 through the merger of Royal Dutch Shell and Gazprom and represented the first fruit of the reset of European-Russian relations after the agreed federalisation of Ukraine. Read more

VATICAN-POPE-AUDIENCE

  © Getty Images

The shocking thing about the papal encyclical Laudate Si is not that it was leaked in advance nor even that it embraces the idea that most emissions of greenhouse gases are the result of human activity. The thing that should shock readers is its attack on science and technology — the very tools, indeed the only tools, which offer a solution to climate change.

I am not a student of theology and therefore do not claim to understand the subtleties of the Catholic Church’s teaching on science. But since the Pope has moved outside his own natural territory and into energy policy, some response seems appropriate.

From a distance, Pope Francis seems to embody decency. He is modest, frugal, concerned for the poor and hostile to the creepier side of the church hierarchy in Rome and beyond. That makes him stand out in a world of shallow and cynical “leaders”. He commands millions of followers and his words deserve to be taken seriously whether one is a Catholic or not. Read more

 

An employee poses with a pipe used to ca

  © Getty Images

Carbon capture and storage is one of the key elements in the various plans for keeping total emissions within safe limits. Different projections give slightly different numbers but the broad consensus is that the process of sequestration — taking the carbon out of hydrocarbons before they are burnt and then burying it — should account for between a sixth and a fifth of the net reduction needed by 2050 if we are to keep global warming to 2C or less. If CCS doesn’t happen on the scale required, either the level of emissions and the risks of climate change will be higher or some other solution must be found. Sir David King, the former UK government chief scientist, puts it more dramatically: “CCS is the only hope for mankind

Keeping global warming to 2C means that the amount of CO2 captured and stored must rise steadily to well over 7,000 Mt per annum by the year 2050. Is CCS on this scale likely to happen? As Simon Evans and Rosamund Pearce point out in an excellent article for Carbon Brief, the industrial scale of the operation required to capture and store that amount of CO2 is far greater than the scale of the current international oil industry. Looking objectively at the current state of play the answer must be that it is very, very unlikely. Why? And what can do done about it? Read more

FRANCE-ENERGY-NUCLEAR-COMPANY-EDF-ELECTRICITY

  © Getty Images

“I am convinced that the nuclear industry has a future, that it is a strength of our country.” The fact that Manuel Valls, the prime minister, had to make such a statement in the National Assembly in Paris two weeks ago is a dramatic indication of the depths of the problems the nuclear sector in France is facing. Read more

  © Getty Images

The conflict at the heart of Germany’s energy policy is finally coming to a head. Can Germany claim to be an environmental leader while continuing to burn more coal than any other developed country apart from the US?

The issue is easier to describe than to resolve. Germany has led the EU in adopting “green” policies, including the promotion and subsidy of renewables. Energy consumers, including industry, have tolerated ever-rising energy costs. Electricity in Germany costs over 90 per cent more than in the US. The country has begun the process of closing its nuclear power stations — the last will be closed in 2022, although a vexed question remains over how the decommissioning will be paid for. Energy policy enjoys support across the political spectrum. The Green party won just 7.3 per cent of the vote in the last federal election but green ideas permeate the thinking of all the other parties. The grand coalition between the Christian Democrats and the Social Democrats is committed to reducing emissions by 40 per cent by 2020, 70 per cent by 2040 and 80 to 95 per cent by 2050. The whole plan is explained in a post by Mat Hope on the CarbonBrief website. The German approach is now being exported to Brussels with a determined effort under the new European Commission to shape an EU energy policy along the same lines. Read more

British Government Signs A Deal For New Nuclear Power Plant

  © Getty Images

The election is over and against all expectations we have a clear result. When it comes to energy policy, however, the agenda will be set not by what the Conservative party has promised in its manifesto but by external events. A number of looming issues are already obvious and the government will have no control over most of them.

The first is the further postponement of the plans for nuclear development starting at Hinkley Point in Somerset. Two new reactors capable of supplying some 7 per cent of total UK electricity demand are planned. The first was originally supposed to be on stream in time to cook Christmas dinner in 2017. But despite the prospect of a lavish price — index linked for 35 years regardless of what happens to global energy prices – and £10bn of even more generous financial guarantees, funding for the investment required is not in place. The reluctance of investors to commit will not be helped by the technical problems in the reactor vessels, which are now under investigation by the French nuclear regulator. This problem has widespread implications for the companies involved (Areva and EDF) and for nuclear development in many countries across the world, starting with France itself. Read more

Downturn In Oil Prices Rattles Texas Oil Economy

  © Getty Images

Almost all the major oil and gas companies I know are undertaking substantial reviews of their policies on climate change. That is true in Europe and in the US. Why now, and what will be the outcome ?

First, it is important to stress that the rethinking is not being driven by the recent attacks on the companies. Describing Shell and its chief executive Ben van Beurden as “narcissistic, paranoid and psychopathic” is just childish and reduces what should be a serious debate to playground abuse. The reviews began before the latest media campaigns and are driven by corporate strategic concerns. Read more

CHILE-ENERGY-RENEWABLES-SOLAR

  © Getty Images

I have never given much credence to the idea that an international agreement on climate change capable of establishing a global carbon price was likely to be reached – either in Paris this December or anywhere else – anytime soon.

If Europe, which is way ahead of the rest of the world when it comes to climate policy, can’t set its own carbon price, what hope is there that the US, India and all the others will?

As a result I’ve never taken seriously the view that a vast amount of energy investment by the oil and gas companies will be left stranded as carbon-generating fuels are priced out of the market. The argument has always felt like wishful thinking. If everyone obeyed the Ten Commandments there would be no prisons and the police forces of the world would be redundant.

But, and it is a very important qualification, change doesn’t come just through legislation and international treaties. Technology is arguably much more important and there is growing evidence that some fundamental changes are coming that will over time put a question mark over investments in the old energy systems. Read more

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

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

  © 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