Earlier this week, the Guardian supplied a fairly balanced (if brief) review of the 2024 version of what was until recently known as the BP annual energy review. I have provided the link, so anyone interested can read the whole article. For now, suffice it to say that the headline pretty neatly sums up the review’s findings: “Fossil fuel use reaches global record despite clean energy growth – Report finds developing countries are increasing reliance on coal, gas and oil as overall demand for energy rises.”
Paul Homewood also provided a brief analysis, well worth a read if you want a quick take of the main points. Reuters offered up significant detail, and I particularly commend it for a comprehensive summary of the report, which since last year has been provided by the Energy Institute, together with consultancies KPMG and Kearney. The report itself can be downloaded from here. The foreword sets out the 2023 highlights fairly succinctly in a couple of paragraphs. First:
In this second Statistical Review under the Institute’s custodianship, we report on another year of highs in our energy hungry world. Record consumption of fossil fuels and record emissions from energy, but also record generation from renewables, driven by increasingly competitive wind and solar energy.
As we shall see, the bigging-up of renewables is a bit of a stretch. The reality of a world where developed and developing countries see things very differently, and consequently act very differently, is very much to the fore:
The progress of the transition is slow, but the big picture masks diverse energy stories playing out across different geographies.
As we shall see, that’s a rather euphemistic way of telling us that the developing world is very keen on fossil fuels in order to develop, while the developed world is determined to rid itself of fossil fuels, but is struggling to do so. After some key highlights and a regional overview, the report proceeds with a discussion of primary energy and carbon, then separately of carbon, before looking at each fuel type in turn.
Key Highlights
Rather dramatically, 2023 was a year of production and consumption records across the board. Demand for gas remained flat, but oil consumption rebounded strongly, largely thanks to China’s ending of covid lockdowns (which just goes to show the extent to which China dominates – or should dominate – all questions of international energy use, climate change etc). Consumption of crude oil broke through the 100 million barrels per day level for the first time ever and coal demand beat the previous year’s record level.
Consumption of renewable energy grew at six times the rate of total primary energy, and electricity demand grew 25% faster than total primary energy consumption. If you’re a fan of renewables and of the need to decarbonise, that sounds great, until it’s put in context. Renewable energy is so insignificant globally, that despite such an impressive-sounding level of growth, a modest 2% increase in primary energy consumption (over 2022 levels) meant that fossil fuel usage actually grew, and its use as a percentage of global primary energy dropped only 0.4% to 81.5%. Consequently, renewables’ share of primary energy consumption increased by only 0.4%. At this rate, global net zero will take hundreds of years to achieve – forget 2050.
As for “carbon” emissions, greenhouse gas emissions from energy use, industrial processes, flaring and methane (in carbon dioxide equivalent terms) increased 2.1% to exceed the record level set in 2022. For the first time ever, energy-related emissions exceeded the 40 GtCO2e level, with emissions from the direct use of energy breaching 35 GtCO2e for the first time ever. Those COPs are really doing a great job.
As for oil, global production increased by 1.8 million b/d to reach a record level of 96 million b/d in 2023. The US remained the largest producer seeing its output grow by over 8%. So much for Biden. In 2022 the combined consumption of oil and biofuel products exceeded 100 million barrels per day for the first time ever. In 2023, consumption of oil products alone exceeded this level.
Consumption of oil in north America increased by around 0.8%, but (which should surprise nobody except those anti-west campaigners who are always keen to give China a free pass) in China demand for gasoline and diesel rebounded to 15% above 2019 levels. For the first time ever, China’s refining capacity exceeded that of the US. Meanwhile demand for oil in the Asia Pacific region as a whole increased year on year by 5% while in Europe it fell by 1%.
Global gas production remained relatively constant, but demand for LNG increased, mostly (yet again) driven by the Asia Pacific region, with China leading the way and India also playing a significant part. Indeed, China regained its position as the world’s largest importer of LNG, followed by Japan and South Korea. Between them, those three countries accounted for around 45% of global LNG trade.
Global coal production, which had seen a record year in 2022, increased to its highest level ever. The Asia Pacific region accounted for nearly 80% of global output with activity concentrated in just four countries, Australia, China, India, and Indonesia. Global coal consumption continued to increase and breached 164 EJ for the first time ever. The increase of 1.6% over 2022 was seven times higher than the previous ten-year average growth rate. While a ten-year decline in coal consumption in Europe and north America continued, China is by far the largest consumer of coal (it beat its own record set in 2022 and now accounts for 56% of the world’s total consumption). Significantly, in 2023 India exceeded the combined consumption of Europe and North America for the first time ever.
Increasing demand for electricity is also being driven by the Asia Pacific region and the Middle East, where it increased by around 5%, compared to falls of 2.4% in Europe and of 1% in north America. Fossil fuels remain dominant globally as sources of electricity, with both coal and natural gas retaining a fairly constant share of production, at 35% and 23% respectively. Globally, renewables share of total power generation rose from 29% to 30%, though it has to be said that growth of renewables in central and south America is substantial (Brazil in particular seeing substantial increases). Nuclear remained static at 9%, with increases in China being offset by plant closures in Germany.
Wind and solar increased rapidly, but a word of caution is needed. Large percentage increases from a small base still represent fairly modest volumes, as is evident from the tiny dent renewables have made in 2023 regarding total proportions of energy supply. Solar is now growing faster than wind, and China is responsible for a quarter of the growth. Almost 2/3 of wind capacity growth was also in China, and its total installed capacity is now equal to North America and Europe combined (though Europe has the highest share of offshore wind in its portfolio, at 12%).
A snippet regarding key minerals – Africa was responsible for nearly 75% of the world’s cobalt production. Within this, the Democratic Republic of Congo was responsible for around 96% (or 56% of the global total). Or so the report says – those numbers don’t seem to add up.
Regional Overview
Global primary energy consumption reached a new record for the second consecutive year with non-OECD countries dominating both the share and annual growth rates. Fossil fuels continue to underpin their development accounting for 84% of their energy mix. This is a very telling paragraph:
The contrasts between the northern and southern hemispheres is quite stark. Consumption of primary energy in the Global South first exceeded that of the Global North in 2014. In 2023 it accounted for 56% of total energy consumed and grew at twice the global average rate of 2%. The Asia Pacific region was responsible for 85% of the Global South’s demand (and 47% of global demand) where the economies of China, India, Indonesia, Japan and South Korea dominated. Whilst Southern & Central America, and Asia Pacific experienced growth rates above the global average, total demand in Africa dropped by 0.4% in 2023 and electricity consumption remained flat. Electricity demand in both North America and Europe experienced falls of -1% and -2% respectively. In these regions, electricity demand in particular is increasingly impacted by energy efficiency regulations, energy-efficient lighting, and changing consumer habits.
Yes, you read that correctly, demand for electricity in Africa actually dropped, despite a rapidly rising population on that continent. Unlike the situation in the developed world, this is unlikely to have anything to do with energy efficiency regulations and changing consumer habits, and more to do with poverty. The report tells us that it is estimated that 750 million people (roughly 10% of the world’s population) do not have access to electricity to light their homes, refrigerate their food, or keep cool in rising temperatures and around 2.6 billion people (around one third of the world’s population) rely on heavily polluting biomass fuels such as charcoal, coal, and animal waste for heating and cooking. Meanwhile the Asia Pacific region is responsible for above average per capita greenhouse gas emissions, primarily due to China, the world’s largest consumer of coal and second largest consumer of oil.
The take on regional energy security is interesting too. After all those COPs, we learn that the total international trade of oil, gas and coal was 53% higher in 2023 than it was in 2000. 78% of the world’s total energy was consumed last year in north America, Europe and the Asia Pacific region. In the past decade north America has gone from being a net importer of energy to a net exporter, whereas since the 1980s Europe has consistently been a net importer. 2023 saw Europe’s biggest deficit, which might cast doubt on its “green energy transition” if politicians were taking any notice. Oil production in Europe in 2023 met only 23% of demand. For gas the figure was 44% and for coal 58%. Yet again the Asia Pacific region is arguably the biggest issue, with by far the greatest energy demands of any region in 2023 (at 47% of the world’s total). It has also been a net importer since the 1980s, though in 2023 it had a 5% surplus in coal. I suspect this surplus is largely down to Australian production.
Primary energy and “carbon”
Some stark statistics are on display here, and they do make one wonder yet again what is the point of all those COPs. No doubt COP enthusiasts will say that things would be so much worse without them, but in the absence of a counterfactual world, we will never know if they are right.
Not only was 2023 the second consecutive year to set a record for global primary energy consumption, its annual growth rate of 2% was 0.6% above its ten-year average. That might argue for an accelerating trend, but it might not be a trend that continues, as it may have been given a one-off fillip by the end of covid lockdowns, especially in China. In absolute terms, 2023 set a new record for the consumption of fossil fuels; their share of an increased total declined by a humble 0.4% from 81.9% to 81.5%. Demand for gas was flat, with demand for more “carbon intensive” oil and coal growing, with the result that energy-related greenhouse gas emissions also reached a record, high, exceeding 40 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent for the first time ever. CO2 emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels is by far the largest source of energy-related greenhouse gas emissions, contributing around 87% of the total.
I bang on a lot about China, I think with good reason. Another telling statistic is that even though China’s per capita CO2 emissions were already roughly 50% ahead of those of the UK at the start of 2023, over the course of the year per capita energy consumption in the UK declined by 0.1%, while in China it increased by 6.6% (and by 6.4% in India). Over the year, CO2 emissions from energy declined in total in the UK by 4.1% so that by the end of the year they represented only 0.9% of global emissions. Compare and contrast: in China they increased by 6.1% and in India by 8.4% (with China’s share of the global total increasing to 31.9% – or 32.1% if Hong Kong is included – and India’s share increasing to 8%).
Oil
Here we see another record set – the highest level of oil production the world has ever seen was achieved in 2023, reaching just over 96 million barrels a day. The US remains the world’s largest producer of oil, and its output increased by more than 8%. So much for those climate alarmist fossil fuel denigrators who demonised Trump and sanctified Biden. Consumption of oil also achieved the highest level ever seen, at over 100 million barrels per day (presumably thereby eroding reserves). Oil production in north America increased over the year by 6.7%, an acceleration over the ten-year trend of growth of 4.8% per annum. The figures for south and central America are even more dramatic – a declining trend of 0.1% per annum over the last ten years turned into a single year increase in production of 11.2%. Europe turned a decline of 0.6% per annum averaged over ten years, into a production increase of 0.3% (probably as a reaction to turning away from Russian oil: a 2.2% decline in output over the year was recorded for the Commonwealth of Independent States, broadly the co-operating parts of the former Soviet Union). The Middle East saw production decline by 1.6%, which contrasts with an average growth of 0.8% over the last ten years. Perhaps this was the result of reduced production by OPEC in an attempt to shore up the price of oil. African production of oil increased by 2.3%, reversing an average decline of 1.7% over the last ten years. Globally an average increase in production of 1.1% per annum over a ten year horizon accelerated into an increase of 2% over the year.
Consumption of oil increased all over the world, except in Europe, which saw a decline of 0.6%. China, by contrast (yet again) saw an increase in oil consumption of 10.7% (the separate figure for Hong Kong was an increase of 25.1%). China was the single biggest importer of oil globally, with 27% of the total. Europe had the second highest share at 21%, followed by the US at 15%. Collectively, China and India increased their imports of Russian crude oil by 53% whilst Europe reduced its imports by 72%.
Natural Gas
Demand for natural gas remained stable in 2023, though that disguises regional differences. For instance, demand in Europe fell by 7%, down to its lowest level since 1994. Gas production in Europe also declined by 7% over the year. By contrast, yet again, demand in the Asia Pacific region grew by 2%, driven by 7% growth increases in both China and India. The USA is now the world’s largest exporter of LNG, and China is its largest importer, with the Asia Pacific region responsible for 64% of all LNG imports.
Coal
Here too we see another record, with 2023 witnessing the highest ever level of global coal production, breaking the existing record, which was set in 2022. The increase of 1.6% over the year was seven times higher than the ten-year average growth rate. China alone was responsible for just over half of global coal production and, as we have already seen, it is also far and away the largest consumer of coal (at 56% of the world’s total). For the first time ever India consumed more coal than Europe and north America combined (levels of consumption in Europe and north America fell to their lowest levels since 1965). China is the largest importer of coal, and India is the second largest coal importer, and the Asia Pacific region as a whole being responsible for 82% of global imports of coal. Indonesia, Australia and Russia are together responsible for 70% of coal exports.
Nuclear Energy
Total installed capacity fell slightly, but electricity generation from nuclear plant increased by 2% over the course of 2023. However, that was still 2% below its peak output, which was achieved in 2006. The recovery of France’s nuclear fleet after prolonged outages in 2022 was offset by closure of German nuclear facilities. China, as with all sources of energy, leads the way in building new nuclear capacity – since 2000 it has built around 60% of all new nuclear capacity additions. Use of nuclear power has collapsed in Japan and Germany since Fukushima – down from 25% to 8% in Japan, and down from 23% to 2% in Germany.
Electricity and Renewables
Global electricity generation increased by 2.5% in 2023, to reach a new record level. Demand in the Middle East and the Asia Pacific regions increased by 5%, but fell in Europe by 2.4% and by 1% in north America. Renewables’ share of global power generation increased from 29% to 30%. As we have seen, renewables make the greatest proportionate contribution to power generation in central and south America. In 2023 global battery electricity storage system capacity stood at 56 GW. You won’t be surprised to learn that almost 50% of that was in China. With nuclear remaining flat at 9% of electricity generation, fossil fuels continued to do the heavy lifting, at 60%.
Key Minerals
Surprisingly perhaps, production of copper declined in 2023 by 1.6%, which contrasts with an average growth rate of 2% per annum over the previous ten years. Production of other critical minerals continued to grow at 4% per annum. The Asia Pacific region produced nearly 70% of the metals and materials critical to the manufacture of Li-ion batteries. Within this, China was both the world’s leading producer of refined cobalt and the world’s leading consumer of it, with nearly 87% of consumption used by the lithium-ion battery industry. As well as producing nearly 20% of the world’s lithium production, China also produced around 74% of its graphite supply. Europe’s largest reserves of lithium are in Portugal.
Conclusions
I think the conclusions can be expressed very simply. Energy demand continues to grow globally, fuelled by China (and to an increasing extent, India). The same can be said of demand for fossil fuels, which continues to set new records. Renewables, after all these years, all those subsidies, are still nowhere near doing the heavy lifting, and are doing little more than peck at the proportion of global energy they supply. Almost 30 years of COPs appear to have achieved very little, if anything. Finally, why do we in the UK bother?
Climate Scepticism 
A nice summary, thank you Mark. 👍
”A snippet regarding key minerals – Africa was responsible for nearly 75% of the world’s cobalt production. Within this, the Democratic Republic of Congo was responsible for around 96% (or 56% of the global total). Or so the report says – those numbers don’t seem to add up.”
The joys of proficiency in mental arithmetic! Or olafactory sensitivity in detecting stuff that doesn’t pass the sniff test.
LikeLiked by 1 person
”Wind and solar increased rapidly, but a word of caution is needed. Large percentage increases from a small base still represent fairly modest volumes, as is evident from the tiny dent renewables have made in 2023 regarding total proportions of energy supply. Solar is now growing faster than wind, and China is responsible for a quarter of the growth. Almost 2/3 of wind capacity growth was also in China …”
One inconvenient fact that renewables’ advocates consistently fail to mention when boasting about China’s added wind & solar capacity, is their relatively poor operational capacity factor. According to the English language ‘China Energy Portal’ (that sadly hasn’t been updated for a couple of years), China’s thermal plants generate at 2x the capacity factor of its wind farms and 3x the CF of its solar farms. Consequently, China’s *proportion* of FF-generated electricity is increasing at the expense of its renewables.
LikeLiked by 1 person
China Energy Portal link:
https://chinaenergyportal.org/2021-electricity-other-energy-statistics-preliminary/
LikeLike
We, in this tiny, geographically insignificant Sceptred Isle, started all this. The British, through our ingenuity, intelligence and pioneering spirit, invented the industrialised economy and the science of exploration geology:
https://www.ukogplc.com/page.php?pID=72
What has become of us, as the ball we set in motion, rolls on inexorably, modernising previously poverty-stricken nations worldwide? Our universities are no longer world class and are stuffed full of woke moronic students whose primary concern is not to get an education which will equip them to take part in the progress of humanity, but to protest loudly and imbecilically at the progress of humanity. We are poised to destroy our own oil and gas industry (and the last vestiges of a once vibrant coal industry) in order to virtue signal our intent to single-handedly ‘save the planet’ from a supposed fossil fuel induced carboniferous Thermageddon – because ‘Physics innit’. In the process, our ‘enlightened’ politicians and academic institutions imagine that we will initiate a shiny new Green Industrial Revolution which they hope will spread across the globe, rivalling the first British inspired Industrial Revolution. We think we’re going to write history again. But it ain’t gonna happen. Because, first and foremost, Britain will NOT enervate and reinvent its own economy by switching to ‘sustainable’ home grown energy and Green technology . It will destroy its own economy, its social, economic and industrial base, and it will demoralise and impoverish its own citizens who are the ultimate source of its former and potential future success as an erstwhile enterprising nation. Great Britain will wink out of existence as the world carries on regardless. All that will remain are the echoes of the screams of people like us who shouted ‘We told you so.’
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thanks Mark – a useful review. But there’s nothing remotely surprising about this. It’s yet more evidence of (as I said here: https://cliscep.com/2024/06/12/whats-going-to-happen-at-cop29/) the fact that that non-Western countries don’t regard emission reduction as a priority.
LikeLike
Never mind all that, let’s get bothered by one proposed coal mine in Cumbria and some North Sea oil drilling licences 🙄
Whichever way you cut it, the ‘energy transition’ is in the realms of mythology as long as thermal sources account for 80% + of the global total, while overall consumption continues to expand.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Note that “renewables” includes hydroelectricity. Wind and solar together are less than 10% of primary energy.
Also, “enervate” means weaken, so that is just what we are going to do to ourselves. /pedantry
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jit: according to OWID, in 2022 wind and solar together were only 2% of direct primary energy consumption: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-primary-energy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks Robin. I was not accounting for biomass. I don’t think that counts as good energy, so I don’t think it should be lumped in with wind and solar as Energy Institute does in this figure:
Update: I can’t quite show the figure yet because WordPress has changed the way image links work. Once I understand what is going on, the image will surely appear!
Update 2: here it is.
Update 3: apparently not!
Update 4?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jit, thanks for the pedantry correction. I should have used energize, invigorate, stimulate. Enervate sounds like it’s the correct term but it means the exact opposite.
LikeLike
All of which completely pulls the rug from under the feet of the likes of the IEA when they tell us things like renewables have reached critical mass, fossil fuels demise is imminent, global net zero by 2050 is readily achievable, etc.
And that should feed into an intelligent debate about UK energy policy. Regrettably, it doesn’t.
Why let facts get in the way of a virtue-signalling fantasy about the UK single-handedly “saving the planet”?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jaime, it sounds like it should mean the opposite of what it does, so perhaps people should just get Humpty Dumpty about it. There is an “innervate” but that doesn’t quite fit either.
I remember as a postgrad correcting a foreign student’s paper about ladybird behaviour. It took me a while to realise that he thought “restive” meant at rest, rather than active. Once I had figured that out and apologised to him for the English language, it ended up reading a lot better.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have always felt that “virtue-signalling” in the Net Zero sense was the opposite of virtuous, given that such a luxury belief is usually paid for by others. However, “malign-signalling” does not trip off the tongue nearly so well … and it does not reflect quite so well on the signaller either! Regards, John C.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“US pledges to be a climate finance leader but defends gas expansion”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/25/us-climate-finance-gas-expansion-john-podesta-biden
…John Podesta, senior adviser to Joe Biden on international climate policy, also defended the large-scale US expansion of gas production, saying the world was fortunate America was strengthening its supply, given the demand for non-Russian sources after the invasion of Ukraine….
…He would not say whether the US would commit greater sums to climate finance, but said it was on track to meet Biden’s commitment to provide $11bn, a target that campaigners and developing countries have said is woefully inadequate given the size of the US economy and its responsibility for past emissions, but is many times greater than the $1.5bn on offer under Trump in his previous term.
Podesta defended the huge US expansion of oil and gas production, which has come in spite of its climate targets, and the recent US decision to slap tariffs on many green goods from China, including electric vehicles.
“The US is now the number one producer of oil and gas in the world, the number one exporter of natural gas, and that’s a good thing, because following the illegal invasion of Ukraine, and the need that Europe had to rely on different sources rather than Russia fossils, it was important that the US could step up and supply a good deal of that need,” he said. “But over time, the science is clear, we’ve got to transition away and begin to replace those resources with both zero carbon electricity and renewable resources.”
He did not specify a time frame, but said the US was committed to cutting carbon emissions by 50% by 2030 and reaching net zero by 2050...
The US had the most new oil and gas projects in 2022 and 2023, a recent report found, a surge in production that threatened internationally agreed climate goals.…
…Podesta accused China of deliberately overproducing green goods, steel and aluminium, and using coal-fired power to do so, increasing global emissions….
…There is also no agreement on who should provide the cash. Countries classed as developed under the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change are the only ones obliged to provide finance, but many of those want other big economies and petro states, including China, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, to contribute….
Good luck with that!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jit: note that OWID has just updated its direct primary energy consumption to take account of the latest Energy Institute report. It indicates that in 2023 wind and solar accounted for 2.4% of the global total, up from 2.0% last year – no doubt because of the Energy Transition!
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-primary-energy
LikeLike
A small absolute number it may be, but it’s a surprising large relative change, all things considering.
LikeLike
Possibly not so surprising in view of the vast amounts being spent on it. It’s interesting that the EI report has fossil fuel’s share of the global energy mix down from 81.9% in 2022 to 81.5% in 2023 – although substantially up in absolute terms. But however you look at it what’s happening is nowhere near the transition we keep being told about.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Oil Well That Ends Wells”
https://dailysceptic.org/2024/06/27/oil-well-that-ends-wells/
Well worth a read. Lots of interesting analysis, and this, among much else:
The decision in Finch will plainly have the effect of further gumming up the already Byzantine planning application process in the U.K. – this was no doubt the motivation for the litigation. EIAs are going to have to become longer; they are going to have to include yet more information to dispute and query; yet more expense is going to have to into their preparation. (Only a cynic would observe that yet more money will also be made as a consequence by the people who write EIAs, so I will refrain from doing so.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, Mark well worth a read: a well-written and thought-provoking article. And I thought this was an amusing and useful commentary:
Professor McGrogan’s conclusion is important:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Perhaps I should have posted that comment on the Court Again thread. I may copy the last two comments there later when I have more time.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“BP imposes hiring freeze and halts new offshore wind projects
New boss Murray Auchincloss reverses move away from fossil fuels, which had weighed on company’s share price”
https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/27/bp-imposes-hiring-freeze-and-halts-new-offshore-wind-projects
The head of BP has imposed a hiring freeze and halted new offshore wind projects, in an apparent attempt to placate investors who are unhappy with the oil company’s green targets.
Murray Auchincloss – BP’s former finance chief who was appointed CEO in January after the shock departure of his predecessor, Bernard Looney, for failing to fully detail relationships with colleagues last year – is slowing down investments in big low-carbon projects such as offshore wind, in news first reported by Reuters.
Cue lots of comments from disgruntled campaigners over the following paragraphs.
LikeLike
While in the UK we wring our hands over new gas and oil licences in the North Sea…
“Falkland Islands eyes economic boom in talks to exploit huge oil field
British territory consults islanders over plans to drill for 500m barrels of oil”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/30/falkland-islands-oil-field-exploit-navitas-uk/
Unfortunately it’s behind a paywall. Does anyone know if the ability to proceed depends on the whim of the UK government?
LikeLike
Mark,
The reserves are much larger than Rosebank and British firms are likely to benefit:
Greenies are not happy:
Tough. The UK government has no say in the matter. But I expect the lawfare brigade will try and cook up something. It must be especially galling for Green activists in that an Israeli company owns most of the rights to the field.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Excellent article on the Daily Sceptic by Jusper Machogu (think he’s the African farmer/engineer who was recently smeared by the Beeb and others) which concludes:
“Fossil fuels will bring development in Africa. Fossil fuels will protect us from the climate. Fossil fuels will feed us and end toil in Africa. Anybody who says otherwise should be put on trial because they are partly responsible for the suffering and deaths of millions of Africans.
Fossil fuels for Africa!”
The full article:
https://dailysceptic.org/todays-update/
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Guyana banks on future as a ‘Latin Qatar’ in high-stakes gamble over oil production
With newfound oil wealth reshaping the economy, can the country balance growth with sustainable development?”
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/article/2024/jul/08/guyana-banks-on-future-as-a-latin-qatar-in-high-stakes-gamble-over-oil-production
…Since 2015, when US multinational ExxonMobil found oil in Guyana – then one of the poorest countries in the Americas – its 800,000 citizens have been swiftly climbing the ranks of nations with the highest GDP per capita, thanks to one of the world fastest-growing economies.…
…In 2023, the GDP of this “Latin Qatar” rose by 33%, and is expected to grow by another 34% in 2024. Oil royalties and exports contributed approximately $1.62bn (£1.27bn) to the government’s annual revenue last year, with projections to increase to $2.42bn by 2024 and $7.5bn by 2040 – enough to dramatically boost the national budget, estimated at $5.49bn in 2024.
In the decade since ExxonMobil discovered the Liza oilfield, 190km (118 miles) off the coast of Guyana, the country has risen as a new world oil magnate. This former British colony has about 90% of the area of the UK but only 1.2% of its population. Its oil reserves are estimated at 11bn oil-equivalent barrels, which is 75% of the oil reserves of its giant neighbour Brazil.
The International Energy Agency estimates the offshore discoveries could mean Guyana’s 2022 production of 250,000 barrels daily will grow fivefold by 2030.
That makes Guyana a protagonist in the Latin America and the Caribbean oil rush. Amid the global debate on transitioning away from fossil fuels, half the countries in the region – 16 out of the 33 – are involved in new, major oil and gas extraction projects.
Guyana is betting on oil, as the global production and consumption steadily increases. Faced with a bullish world oil market, many in the global south ask why Guyana, Ecuador, Brazil, Argentina or Mexico should be expected not to exploit such highly valued commodities….
Which is fair enough, so far as I am concerned. Good luck, Mr Miliband, with the example you seek to set to the developing world.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Pristine forests and grinding poverty: why shouldn’t Brazil’s Amapá state embrace oil wealth?Illustration: Israel Vargas
The state’s dilemma sums up a core problem faced by president Lula: how to reconcile environmental commitments with the need for development”
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/article/2024/jul/09/pristine-forests-and-grinding-poverty-why-shouldnt-brazils-amapa-state-embrace-oil-wealth
…Brazil is poised to become the world’s fifth-largest oil producer by 2030, buoyed by increased output from deepwater deposits in its southeastern coast….
LikeLiked by 1 person
As so often, the Guardian bigs up China’s massive renewables growth, which is undeniable, while down-playing it’s ongoing reliance on fossil fuels:
“China building twice as much wind and solar power as rest of world – report
Country on track reach 1,200GW of installed wind and solar capacity by end of 2024 – six years ahead of Beijing’s target”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jul/11/china-building-twice-as-much-wind-and-solar-power-as-rest-of-world-report
Deep down , though, the reality is undeniable:
…Between 2020 and 2023, only 30% of the growth in energy consumption was met by renewable sources, compared with the target of 50%.“It is obviously important for China to keep on adding more renewable energy to meet its targets,” said Li Shuo, the director of the China Climate Hub at the Asia Policy Institute in Washington DC. “But it’s not as simple as you just keep building and it will be solved … [because] there is no sign that the country is trying to steer away from its coal consumption.”
Previous analysis by GEM and the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, a thinktank, found that approvals of new coal power plants increased fourfold in 2022-2023, compared with the previous five-year period of 2016-2020, despite a pledge in 2021 to “strictly control” new coal power. Growth in total coal consumption increased from an average of 0.5% a year to 3.8% a year between the two time periods.
Geopolitical tensions such as the war in Ukraine, which focused many countries’ attention on energy supplies, and major power cuts in parts of China in recent years, have increased Chinese officials’ concerns about energy security.
China’s power grid remains reliant on coal, which officials see as necessary to mitigate the intermittency of renewable energy. And officials often see the coal industry as being a safe way to boost local GDP figures, although clean energy sectors are now the biggest driver of China’s economic growth, accounting for 40% of GDP expansion in 2023….
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Country on track reach 1,200GW of installed wind and solar capacity by end of 2024”
…..with an average capacity factor of, maybe, 20% depending on the mix. An honest, objective report would mention this – but it’s the Guardian.
LikeLike
Miliband has just announced an immediate ban on drilling any new wells in the N. Sea, including the bids submitted in the previous licensing round, well before the election.
Sheer lunacy: it will increase imports, reduce future tax revenue, destroy jobs in the sector, send a hostile signal to oil companies, make us more reliant on foreign suppliers………nightmare.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Another setback for “Peak Oil”.
UK “leading the world” by ending North Sea oil production and JSO not having much of an effect!
New drilling technology to put billions of barrels of oil in reach, analysts say
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/article-new-drilling-technology-to-put-billions-of-barrels-of-oil-in-reach/
“An oil production breakthrough that producers say can safely tap ultra-high pressure fields could put up to 5 billion barrels of previously inaccessible crude into production, analysts said.
Chevron CVX-M on Monday disclosed it had pumped first oil from a field at 20,000 pounds per square inch pressures, a third greater than any prior well. Its $5.7-billion Anchor project employs specially designed equipment from NOV, Dril-Quip and drillships from Transocean.
Similar high-pressure, high-temperature oil fields that would benefit from the 20k technology are found off the coasts of Brazil, Angola and Nigeria, said Aditya Ravi, a Rystad Energy analyst. The Gulf of Mexico will be the proving ground for the new gear.
Brazil has major offshore developments that “are prime candidates for future 20k technology application due to their complex high pressure, high temperature environments,” he said.
Including non-U.S. fields, more than 5 billion barrels of known oil and gas of known resources globally could benefit from the technology, Ravi said. Those volumes equate to about 50 days of current global production.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
“China responsible for 95% of new coal power construction in 2023, report says”
https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-responsible-for-95-of-new-coal-power-construction-in-2023-report-says/
China accounted for 95% of the world’s new coal power construction activity in 2023, according to the latest annual report from Global Energy Monitor (GEM).
Construction began on 70 gigawatts (GW) of new capacity in China, up four-fold since 2019, says GEM’s annual report on the global coal power industry….
...The level of new construction starting in China is nearly quadruple what it was in 2019, when the country hit a nine-year annual low of entirely new coal power stations starting.
This is the fourth year in a row that the amount of new coal construction starting has increased in China. This is out of line with President Xi Jinping’s 2021 pledge to “strictly control” new coal power capacity, GEM states.
In early 2022, China’s National Energy Administration’s 14th five‐year plan for a “modern energy system” stated that 30GW of coal power would be retired by 2025.
However, when counting larger coal units with capacity of at least 30 megawatts, less than 9GW of power plants have been shut down in the last three years, and few others have plans to retire, GEM notes.
If China is to meet this 30GW retirement target, it “needs to take immediate action”, GEM adds….
LikeLiked by 1 person
From the Gem webpage –
“Our Story Origins – In 2007, responding to a call to action by climate scientist James Hansen, an informal group of journalists and environmental advocates began documenting 151 proposed coal plants in the United States. This group would eventually go on to become Global Energy Monitor.”
Think someone asked on another comment thread “how did this NZ madness start”.
I Would point to James Hansen 1988 Congressional testimony on climate change that helped raise broad awareness of global warming as the likely start.
LikeLike
From Energy Voice:
“
Windfall tax could lead to Forties pipeline closing 10 years early, Ineos says
Ineos, the operator of the crucial Forties Pipeline System, has warned it could close 10 years early due to the UK government’s North Sea tax policies.”
Article itself is paywalled. DESNZ really is the Dept for Energy Security OR Net Zero.
LikeLiked by 2 people
More sub-headlines from Energy Voice:
“Shrinking oil and gas profits tax take ‘casts doubt’ on UK Government plans. The decline in the North Sea tax base raises further questions over the £1.2bn per annum uplift in windfall tax revenues which the government has ear marked to fund GB Energy.” Article:https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/560116/shrinking-oil-and-gas-profits-tax-take-casts-doubt-on-uk-government-plans/
“UK’s critical gas infrastructure at risk if Investment Allowance scrapped. NSMP CEO calls for industry and policymakers to collaborate to deliver a just transition as UK gas faces risk from fiscal instability”. Article paywalled
But I doubt if any of the Millibanders are paying attention.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Energy Voice headline:
“Who is the UK North Sea’s top tax payer? Just 35 North Sea companies paid £7.5billion in 2023 as sector warns UK tax policies will kill jobs, investment and receipts”
That figure is probably just corporate taxes. The revenue from income tax, NI, VAT, etc must be substantial. And the nutters want to shut it all down.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“BP ‘abandoning plan to cut oil output’ angers green groups
Reports of strategy reset leave campaigners saying company is prioritising profits over planet”
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/07/bp-abandoning-plan-to-cut-oil-output-angers-green-groups
Green groups have reacted with fury to reports that BP has dropped a target to cut its oil output in the next five years, saying the company was prioritising profits over the health of the planet.
Campaign groups including Greenpeace and Reclaim Finance slammed the move that would potentially result in the oil company scrapping its plan to reduce oil and gas output by 25% by 2030 under a strategy reset by the company.
The move, reported by Reuters, would be further evidence of the chief executive Murray Auchincloss’s plan to scale back some of the company’s green aims in an attempt to gain investor confidence and grow returns, through its more profitable oil and gas operations.
The company is also targeting several new investments in the Middle East and the Gulf of Mexico to boost output, the news agency said.
BP and rival Shell were among the top risers on the FTSE 100 on Monday, as the price of oil rose above the $80-a-barrel mark for the first time since August. Brent crude was up about 3.5% at $80.85 a barrel....
LikeLiked by 1 person
Offshore Energy UK has analysed the impacts of the govt’s planned tax increases and cuts to investment allowances for the N. Sea:
https://www.energyvoice.com/promoted/560555/oeuk-releases-report-on-impact-of-fiscal-policy-on-economic-growth/
Key quotes:
“The modelling, previously shown to the Treasury, demonstrates how the Government’s proposed fiscal policy would generate a loss in economic value of around £13 billion compared to the economic contribution generated under the current windfall tax regime.
The loss comes from an expected reduction in investment by oil and gas producers into UK projects, with capital investments over the period expected to fall to £2 billion compared to around £14 billion under the current regime.
OEUK has said the analysis shows the policy will undermine the UK offshore energy sector’s ability to support the Government’s overarching goal of driving economic growth.”
“Around two thirds of additional production that could be approved under the current tax regime would be uneconomic. The UK would be more reliant on other countries to meet the domestic energy demand at a cost to the UK economy and net-zero.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
“‘Very concerning’: BP dilutes net zero targets as global retreat from green standards gathers pace”
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/13/very-concerning-bp-dilutes-net-zero-targets-as-global-retreat-from-green-standards-gathers-pace
…It emerged last week that BP plans to abandon its curbs on fossil fuel production in favour of targeting several new investments in the Middle East and the Gulf of Mexico….
…BP’s oil industry rival Shell signalled earlier this year that it may slow the pace of its emissions reductions for this decade by setting a new plan to reduce the carbon intensity of the energy it sells by 15-20% by the end of the decade, compared with its previous target of 20%….
…Oil companies are not alone in scaling down their green promises. Volkswagen has quietly dropped a voluntary target to cut CO2₂ emissions from passenger cars and light commercial vehicles by 30% between 2015 and 2025 in favour of making the same cuts between 2018 and 2030….
…However, BP and Shell still looked “pretty good” compared with oil companies in the US, where there was an even bigger backlash against ESG, Woodward said. US banks JP Morgan and State Street pulled out of the Climate Action 100+ investor group, which pushes for change from big greenhouse gas emitters, this year….
LikeLike
Hilarious:
“Fossil fuels could become cheaper and more abundant, says IEA
International Energy Agency says transition to clean energy means there will be a surplus of oil, gas and coal”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/16/fossil-fuels-could-become-cheaper-and-more-abundant-says-iea
Fossil fuels could soon become significantly cheaper and more abundant as governments accelerate the transition to clean energy towards the end of the decade, according to the International Energy Agency.
The world’s energy watchdog has signalled a new energy era in which countries have access to more oil, gas and coal than needed to fuel their economic growth, leading to lower prices for households and businesses.
The Paris-based agency’s influential annual outlook report found that energy consumers could expect some “breathing space” from recent spikes in global oil and gas prices triggered by geopolitical upheavals because investment in new fossil fuel projects has outpaced the world’s demand.
Fatih Birol, the executive director of the IEA, said the report confirms its prediction that the world’s fossil fuel consumption will peak before 2030 and fall into permanent decline as climate policies take effect. But continuing investment in fossil fuel projects will spell falling market prices for oil and gas, the IEA added.…
I’m not an expert, unlike Mr Birol, but my money says he’s wrong, both with regard to the date when fossil fuel use peaks and with regard to his prediction of falling prices. With a world population that keeps growing, and with developing countries determined to raise their people out of poverty, demand for fossil fuels will continue to grown well beyond 2030 by my reckoning. Only time will tell which of is is correct.
LikeLiked by 1 person
An additional point from that article:
…The “new world” for energy consumers will be more comfortable economically, Birol said, but he warned that the shift will require green alternatives, such as electric vehicles and heat pumps, to become cheaper too if they hope to compete against more affordable fossil fuels….
I’ll stick with my gas boiler and diesel car, thanks.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Mark – read your linked article from “The world’s energy watchdog”
Seems a strange conclusion to me, but then again,
“The world’s rising production of crude oil from new oil projects in the US, Canada and South America could mean that future supplies will outstrip global oil demand growth because China, the world’s biggest oil importer, is “wrong-footing” major oil producers by shifting rapidly towards electric vehicles, the IEA said.”
If so, wonder how China plan to charge all those EV’s ?
Sounds to me like IEA are another quango that spout gibberish & get paid to do it.
LikeLike
dfhuter,
Watch this space – work in progress on my part.
LikeLiked by 1 person
From the DT, another oil company is reducing its North Sea activity:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/21/labour-election-agents-oil-company-sell-off-north-sea-asset/
The article is not paywalled. Key quotes from the company:
“Deltic Energy, which is chaired by Labour election agent Mark Lappin (the irony!!), said it would switch to pursuing opportunities abroad due to “well-publicised political and fiscal headwinds” at home.
“The statement by Deltic on Monday said: “For the last decade, Deltic has invested in its UK portfolio and achieved material exploration success despite the well-publicised political and fiscal headwinds that have hampered the UK’s oil and gas industry in recent years.
“It is clear that, while this situation persists, the UK is not the ideal place in which to invest in new oil and gas exploration or appraisal opportunities. “Therefore, the board has carefully considered the best way to leverage the company’s international experience and expertise to create value for shareholders going forward.”
Andrew Nunn, Deltic’s chief executive, said the company was “actively assessing a number of attractive opportunities in geographies where more supportive policies towards oil and gas development exist”.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
A very strongly-worded opinion piece on Energy Voice which nails the foolhardy zealotry driving govt policy:
https://www.energyvoice.com/insights/energy-opinion/562022/windfall-taxes-and-government-policy-destroying-aberdeen-and-the-north-east/
It will not be long before this website and others will be saying “told you so” as the disaster unfolds. By then it will be too late and the damage will be irreversible.
LikeLiked by 2 people
MikeH – Thanks for the link, well worth the read. As you say it “nails the foolhardy zealotry driving govt policy”.
Liked the last bit –
“Meanwhile, the Scottish Labour Party net zero spokesperson, Sarah Boyack, presumably doesn’t see the irony in her words:
“Scotland’s energy industry is one of our key economic assets but years of neglect by the SNP and Tories has left it in a precarious state. For too long, oil and gas workers have been let down by two governments with no plan for the future, but Labour will secure Scotland’s place as a clean energy superpower.”
With all due respect, and whilst there is no doubt both the SNP and Tories did cause damage to the energy industry, the reality is that the Labour government risks decimating it – and once again it will be the people of Aberdeen and the north-east who will suffer the most. What thanks is that for having driven economic prosperity in the UK over the last 50-odd years?”
Makes you weep.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Another one bites the dust:
“Apache to cease North Sea production by 2030 due to windfall tax. North Sea operator Apache (NYSE:APA) has said it will cease operations in the UK by the end of 2029.”
Headline from Energy Voice (article paywalled).
OK, they are not a huge producer – about 5% of N. Sea output, aiui – but it’s one more straw in the wind. There’s also the infrastructure aspect. If this shutdown takes out pipeline links to other fields, there may be a snowball effect. For example, the Forties pipeline ties in about 80 oil fields and Ineos are talking of bringing its closure forward to 2030-35….
LikeLiked by 1 person
Meanwhile the view from Canada, a country with an arguably “progressive” government which talks up Net Zero:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-what-will-donald-trump-mean-for-canadas-oil-sands/
“First of all, gasoline prices will weigh on Mr. Trump, as they have on Democrat Joe Biden. As a Rystad Energy report says, “U.S. consumers prefer an oil and energy-intensive lifestyle, and for this energy to come at a low cost.”
This sentiment is true no matter who is in the White House. To try to dampen down unease on gasoline prices two years ago, Mr. Biden unleashed his country’s emergency supply of oil, urged domestic producers to drill, and pled with Saudi Arabia to produce more crude, amongst other actions.
Mr. Trump, who has promised to slash energy bills by “more than half,” will also do what he must to keep gasoline prices steady, including making sure that his country has enough diluted bitumen from Canada.
That comes to another point, that even as the U.S. has become the world’s biggest oil producer in recent years, its consumption of Canadian oil has never been higher, reaching a record 4.3 million barrels per day in July.”
I didn’t know Biden had paused approvals of LNG export terminals. More virtue signalling by the Democrats……..
For instance, on the natural gas front, product from Canada makes its way to the U.S. for domestic use there, or for international export from U.S. LNG export facilities. An American pause on approvals for new LNG export terminals, implemented by the Biden administration this year for a study on climate risks, is likely be one of the first items a Trump Administration dumps. That will be a net positive for Canadian natural gas producers, who won’t have their own export facility until next year.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Maybe it’s not all bad news: will Trump resurect Keystone?
Also hasn’t the oil pipeline to Canada’s west coast been upgraded recently, with government funding?
LikeLike
Another straw (haystack?) in the wind:
https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/580021/ineos-uk-investment/
This doesn’t appear to be paywalled.
Key quote: “Ineos Energy has announced it will cut UK funding in favour of the US, with its “proper energy security and a proper fiscal regime,” executive chairman Brian Gilvary said. The company boss took aim at the UK’s tax policy, labelling it “one of the most unstable fiscal regimes in the world”.
Gilvary told the Telegraph that the company would divert £3 billion of investment to the US in the wake of heightened taxes on oil and gas companies.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Apologies if this duplicates but WordPress disappeared my first attempt…
Headline from Energy Voice:
“Reeves’ North Sea windfall levy to cost Treasury £10bn by 2030” (The article is paywalled)
Clearly Reeves is pushing the N. Sea taxes down the far side of the Laffer curve. Do socialists never learn (rhetorical!).
LikeLiked by 2 people
More dire warnings, this time from the Chief Exec of EnQuest a $bn oil company (my bold):
“We remain very clear that we are committed to continued investment in our UK business, targeting material, value-enhancing growth. Our near-term pivot to investment outside of the UK underlines, however, how successive UK governments have made the UK North Sea globally uncompetitive through fiscal policy. The UK remains the only country worldwide levying a windfall tax on energy profits, in an environment where even the Office of Budget Responsibility acknowledges that prices are at, or below, historic norms and therefore no windfall exists. Following a well-run consultation on the future of the UK’s oil and gas fiscal system, we believe that the UK Government now has a tool with which to revitalise this sector; materially increasing investment and tax revenues to Treasury, improving the UK’s energy security in a volatile macro environment, and protecting jobs across the country, which are currently being lost at a rate of 1,000 per month. We implore the government to act now to avoid the accelerated decline of this industry and the resulting death of the UK’s energy transition ambitions.”
Couldn’t be clearer but no-one is listening.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Snippets from an article on the Energy Voice website:
“The Offshore Energies UK (OEUK) survey of 97 member companies and businesses found that 55% of respondents had cut headcount in the past 12 months. A further 45% of respondents expect to make further reductions over the next year if the current fiscal regime continue, OEUK said.”
“OEUK’s director of supply chain and people, Katy Heidenreich, said “The government’s Office for Budget Responsibility has revised down its forecast revenue from £41.6bn in November 2022 to £17.4bn for the period 2022-23 to 2027-28,”. “If this tax is reformed as OEUK proposes, the sector can add £137bn to the economy by 2050, secure £41bn of extra investment and support 23,000 additional jobs by 2030.”
From anecdotal feedback, the horse has bolted. Even if the govt reverses course now, it will have little impact, not least because there is no trust that any relaxation won’t be cancelled in a few years.
LikeLiked by 2 people
MikeH – thanks for the info. As you quote –
“and protecting jobs across the country, which are currently being lost at a rate of 1,000 per month. We implore the government to act now to avoid the accelerated decline of this industry and the resulting death of the UK’s energy transition ambitions.”
If jobs lost is really 1,000 per month (and I have no reason to doubt the figure) someone (Unite?) needs to organise some sort of strike/supply blockade to counter, as you say “Couldn’t be clearer but no-one is listening.”.
I would not want that to happen, as I have no real idea what effect it would have on UK households & businesses, but what else can be done?
LikeLike
dfhunter: those job loss figures are “across the country” which I would understand to mean lots of incremental staff reductions, closures of small companies and so forth, probably affecting a large range of companies throughout the supply chains. As such some form of strike action would not be practical.
The unions do seem to react when there’s a large operation at risk such as Grangemouth and, more recently, the Lindsey refinery.
LikeLike
The former head of Oil & Gas UK does not mince his words on the budget and govt policy:
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/business/local/6903445/oil-gas-boss-budget-north-sea/
Excerpts:
““It is truly dreadful stuff delivered with bad intent,” he said. He called on the industry and its trade bodies to speak out. “They need to be open, severe, and unrelenting in their criticism of this awful industrial mess, energy incoherence and human misery which this government is now clearly delivering.””
“For now, and the coming few years, we will continue to suffer from the industrial and employment vandalism of this Labour government, led on energy issues by a team of badly informed and ill-advised zealots.”
LikeLiked by 3 people