Dear Eoin, Why do you think the Uranium Miners ETF you have been holding has been disappointing of late? Is it all about "risk-off" and withdrawal of liquidity from the market? What makes you continue to hold? What would make you sell? Thanks! Kind regards,
This article from Bloomberg may be of interest to subscribers. Here is a section:
China’s Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Ltd., known as CATL, unveiled its strongest battery to date Wednesday, saying that it could one day be used to power electric aircraft.
The battery, which loads more power into a smaller package, has an energy density of 500 watt-hours per kilogram, CATL’s Chief Scientist Wu Kai said during a presentation at the Shanghai auto show. CATL’s most recent battery, called Qilin, has an energy density of 255 Wh/kg and can power an electric vehicle for 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) on one charge.The technology, which CATL calls a condensed state battery, is potentially a breakthrough that will help electrify sectors wed to fossil fuels because existing batteries are either too heavy or unsafe. Still, questions remain about the materials it will use, its cost and ultimate market impact.
Thanks to a subscriber for this article from Foreign Affairs. Here is a section:
Even with redoubled efforts to produce more clean energy at home, the United States and others will still depend on China for critical minerals and other clean energy components and technologies for years to come, creating vulnerabilities to Chinese-induced shocks. For instance, in recent months, China has suggested that it may restrict the export of solar energy technologies, materials, and know-how as a response to restrictions that Washington imposed last year on the export of high-end semiconductors and machinery to China. If Beijing were to follow through on this threat or curtail the export of critical minerals or advanced batteries to major economies (just as it cut off rare earth supplies to Japan in the early 2010s), large segments of the clean energy economy could suffer setbacks.
Traditional energy heavyweights are also recalibrating their positions in response to the changing geopolitical landscape in ways that increase energy security risks. Saudi Arabia, for instance, now sees its global stance differently than it did in the decades that followed the famous “oil for security” bargain struck by U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt and Saudi King Abdulaziz ibn Saud on Valentine’s Day in 1945. Riyadh is now far less concerned with accommodating Washington’s requests, overt or implied, to supply oil markets in ways consistent with U.S. interests. In the face of a perceived or real decrease in U.S. strategic commitment to the Middle East, Riyadh has concluded it must tend to other relationships—especially its links to China, the single largest customer for its oil. The kingdom’s acceptance of China as a guarantor of the recent Iranian-Saudi rapprochement bolsters Beijing’s role in the region and its global status. Relations with Moscow have also become particularly important to Saudi Arabia. Regardless of the invasion of Ukraine, the Saudi government believes that Russia remains an essential economic partner and collaborator in managing oil-market volatility. It will therefore be extremely reluctant to take positions that pit the Saudi leadership against Putin.
This article from Bloomberg may be of interest. Here is a section:
European Union (EU) lawmakers have agreed on the world’s first binding quotas for using renewable hydrogen (H2) and derived fuels. The March 30, 2023 rules will create significant demand for renewable H2, mandating existing industrial hydrogen users replace at least 42% of their demand with renewable H2. They also mandate at least 1% of transport energy to be H2-based.
Member states should ensure 42% of existing industrial H2 demand is renewable by 2030, rising to 60% by 2035. The industry quota targets companies such as fertilizer and methanol producers, but excludes refineries, which are covered under the transport mandate. Member states will be legally required to adopt this agreement as national law and the European Court of Justice will determine penalties for states that fail to comply.
In transport, fuel suppliers need to replace 5.5% of final energy demand with H2 or advanced biofuels, with a minimum target of 1% for H2-based fuels by 2030. BNEF expects the hydrogen share to be closer to the minimum goal as meeting the combined target using H2 alone would require extensive use of the molecule in road transport. Advanced biofuels had already reached a 2.1% share in transport by 2021.
This article from Bloomberg may be of interest to subscribers. Here is a section:
The measures are part of the 27-nation region’s plan to cut emissions by at least 55% from 1990 levels by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050.
The EU wants to be a global leader in the green shift, an increasingly challenging objective after US President Joe Biden’s landmark climate package and competition from China in low-carbon technologies and critical materials. At the same time, the bloc is grappling with an unprecedented energy crisis triggered by a cut in gas supply from Russia following the war in Ukraine.
“It is now more important than ever for the EU to get and stay on track to climate neutrality and resilience, providing a positive example to galvanize global action and to work with our partners worldwide to develop the solutions needed for all to transition to climate neutrality,” the commission said.
The EU indicated an emissions cut of 75% to 80% would follow the average trajectory between 2030 and climate neutrality in 2050. Lowering pollution by more than 90% would signify “a very high ambition, close to reaching climate neutrality already in 2040,” the commission said.
The commission signaled it is considering various options on the evolution of the EU Emissions Trading System, the bloc’s flagship carbon cap-and-trade program. They included an extension to cover new sectors, potential inclusion of all fossil-fuel uses and accounting for carbon capture technologies.
It also said removing carbon dioxide from the environment is indispensable and sought views on how to tackle emissions from agriculture, including putting a carbon price on greenhouse gases from the sector.
This article from Bloomberg may be of interest to subscribers. Here is a section:
E-fuels, made using renewable energy and carbon dioxide captured from the air, aren’t seen as a viable solution for the vast majority of cars, given their high cost and current lack of availability. Instead, the bulk of carmakers in the region are expected to remain focused on battery-powered vehicles.
“We see e-fuels as a useful addition to the existing fleet of combustion engines and for special applications such as emergency vehicles or limited series, the Porsche 911 for example,” Volkswagen said in a statement. Europe’s biggest carmaker said that it remained committed to the electrification
of its fleet.
The deal, announced on Saturday, was enough for Germany to drop its opposition to the proposal. A push by the country’s pro-business FDP party, the junior member of Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s governing alliance, for the commission to come forward with more assurances on e-fuel cars had delayed a vote earlier this month.
any comments from US officials as-to when they start to replenish the US strategic oil reserve…….?
This note for Bloomberg may be of interest. Here is a section:
Exposure to plummeting oil prices via the options market has forced some financial firms to dump crude futures, accelerating a selloff that has sent prices plunging to the lowest in over a year.
Banks and other financial institutions typically take on futures positions to offset some of the price hedging they do for oil producers and other customers. But as oil prices collapse rapidly, the firms’ exposure rises, forcing them to exit their futures positions in a strategy known as delta hedging.
That’s driving some of the day’s selloff, UBS Group AG analyst Giovanni Staunovo said in a note. A massive number of WTI options contracts that were sold at $70 and $75 a barrel needed to be covered once oil futures crashed below those levels, market participants said. For Brent, more than 24,000 put options were open at $80 and $75 a barrel for May, both levels that were breached this week.
“Financial institutions now need to avoid having a price risk on their balance sheets,” Staunovo said in his note. “So, they are selling crude futures to offset the risks, amplifying the rout.”
This article from Bloomberg may be of interest to subscribers. Here is a section:
Crude has had a bumpy year so far as traders juggle concerns over a global economic slowdown and optimism around China’s long-awaited demand rebound. Inflation accelerated last month, raising the question as to whether the Federal Reserve would feel pressure to raise rates at its meeting next week despite ongoing financial turmoil. Meanwhile, crude supplies are expected to remain in surplus until demand takes off. The International Energy Agency releases its snapshot on the outlook for supply and demand on Wednesday.
Traders will be watching price action to see if the flat price is supported at recent lows.
“If buyers don’t show up soon and support oil at $70, we can see an air pocket lower to $62,” said Jc O’Hara, the chief technical strategist at Roth Mkm.
you are showing charts and talking a lot about carbon emission certificates in the EU. (MO2 generic future on Bloomberg). is there any tradeable or investable instrument out there? tkx a lot!
