energy

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

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

The Saltire national flag (Ian Forsyth/Getty Images)

  © Ian Forsyth/Getty Images

Devolution max — the home rule option endorsed by the three UK party leaders — could just encourage Scots to vote No next Thursday. For many in the business sector, however, including the energy companies, the idea looks half baked; a proposal adopted in panic because of a solitary poll showing the Yes campaign ahead. The consequence will be an extended period of uncertainty with a new question mark over every prospective investment in Scotland. Read more

Ukraine, to coin a phrase, is a far way country of which we know little. Its geographic misfortune is to be the buffer state between western Europe and Russia. With all eyes on Iran, too little attention is being paid to the fact that Ukraine is being forced back under the control of the Kremlin.

This week’s events send a very negative signal to western investors who had hoped to develop Ukraine’s extensive shale gas resources both for local use and for export to other parts of eastern and central Europe. The assertion of Russian power over President Viktor Yanukovich and Prime Minister Mykola Azarov will also send a shiver across the other former Soviet satellite states in eastern Europe. Some, like Poland and Romania, are safely within the EU. Many others are not, to say nothing of the major energy producers around the Caspian Sea, such as Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. Read more