Oil prices surged on Tuesday as concerns over potential supply disruptions amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine outweighed talk of a coordinated global release of crude stocks to calm markets. May Brent crude futures, which began trading as prompt on Tuesday, advanced 1.8% to $99.7 by 0734 GMT after briefly touching $100. The benchmark touched a seven-year high of $105.79 after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began last week. U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) April crude futures rose 1.6% to $97.28. That contract touched a high of $99.10 a barrel the previous day, and had settled up more than 4%. read more Concerns over tightening supplies drove prices higher as peace talks between Russia and Ukraine on Monday ended with officials heading back to capitals for further consultation, suggesting conflict resolution is not imminent. “The fragile situation in Ukraine and financial and energy sanctions against Russia will keep the energy crisis stoked and oil well above $100 per barrel in the near-term and even higher if the conflict escalates further,” wrote Louise Dickson, senior oil market analyst from Rystad Energy, in a note. Major oil and gas companies, including BP and Shell , have announced plans to exit Russian operations and joint ventures. read more Buyers of Russian oil are facing difficulty over payments and vessel availability as Western sanctions in response to the invasion of Ukraine take hold. read more Meanwhile, Asia’s factories sustained a brisk recovery in February amid signs the coronavirus pandemic was having less of an impact of business, implying an uptick in oil demand. read more Still, the market mood was helped by the United States and allies discussing a coordinated release of crude stocks to mitigate supply disruption. That release could tally up to between 60 million and 70 million barrels, media outlets reported. “That likely release is capping oil price rises for now,” analysts for Commonwealth Bank of Australia wrote in a note. The International Energy Agency (IEA) is set to hold an extraordinary ministerial meeting on Tuesday to discuss what role its members can play in stabilizing oil markets. Russia, which calls its actions in Ukraine a “special operation”, exports some 4 million to 5 million barrels per day of crude oil, and 2 million to 3 million barrels per day of refined products. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and other producers – including Russia – will also meet on Wednesday and are anticipated to maintain a gradual increase to supplies. NN: They will play the oil shortage fiction to the hilt. Reality is the world has plenty og gas and oil. It just leadership that has really fucked thing up. Liberal assholes have tripled the price of oil for Russia… WHAT FUCKING SANCTION…… The Oligarchs have to move their yachts back to the black sea…… They will have to go to Cuba, The middle East, and China Instead of vacations in Europe. That will show them .. How about they can suck up the shares of stocks of BP and the like at fire sale prices. Remember oil company investments in Russia are their to stay the technology transfer that made Russia a oil super power has been done. Their is no undoing it now. So really who is fucking who with this bogus sanctions drum beat…. Its all a charade so the lefty liberals do now have to do something real like providing air cover for Ukraine and send in troops to stop Putin.
U.S., Allies Vow to Go After Russian Elite’s Symbols of Wealth
Shoygu: Russian Nuclear forces on alert
(Reuters) – Russia’s defence ministry on Monday said its nuclear missile forces and Northern and Pacific fleets had been placed on enhanced combat duty, the Interfax news agency reported, in line with an order the previous day from President Vladimir Putin. Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu told Putin that “shifts on duty at the command posts of the Strategic Missile Forces, the Northern and Pacific Fleets, and the Long-Range Aviation Command began to carry out combat duty with reinforced personnel,” Interfax quoted the ministry as saying. Putin on Sunday ordered his military command to put Russia’s deterrence forces – which include nuclear arms – on high alert, citing what he called aggressive statements by NATO leaders and Western economic sanctions against Moscow. The move drew condemnation in the West, with the United States describing it as an escalation. A senior U.S. defense official said it was “putting in play forces that, if there’s a miscalculation, could make things much, much more dangerous.” It came as Russian forces ran into tough Ukrainian resistance after invading Ukraine last week in what Putin has described as a special military operation to demilitarise the country. Putin has justified the invasion by saying “neo-Nazis” rule Ukraine and threaten Russia’s security – a charge Kyiv and Western governments say is baseless propaganda.
Putin’s War In Ukraine Could Break The OPEC+ Alliance
The OPEC+ cooperation is facing a possible breakdown following Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine. Russia’s aggressive military moves towards Ukraine will have a negative impact on the oil market cooperation between OPEC and Russian-led non-OPEC members. The success formula of Riyadh-Moscow-Abu Dhabi is in serious trouble as Western powers will be putting Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, and others, under severe pressure to break up their strategic cooperation with Moscow. The growing economic, financial and strategic military cooperation that has been built up the last couple of years between mainstream Arab power players, especially Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, and non-OPEC member Egypt, with Moscow is now in jeopardy. Officially, Arab countries are not being asked to protest against Putin’s Ukraine invasion, but behind closed doors, the topic will be put on the table for sure. Washington, Brussels, London, and Paris will not be willing to have a major block of energy producers continue to work with Putin. The next couple of days could be crucial for OPEC+’s future, especially if Putin is continuing his war with Ukraine. At present, statements coming from the Arab world are very diplomatic, calling for a major de-escalation or diplomatic moves. Looking at the still struggling Western response to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, Arab countries still have some room to maneuver. However, if Washington, Brussels, and London are getting their act together, politically and militarily, choices will have to be made. Western governments will be willing to take a long-term strategy towards the MENA region, based on their vast links in energy, investments, and geopolitical assets, but there will be less room to allow Moscow to find support in key-Western allies in the MENA. For the two main OPEC leaders, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, it will be a very tight rope to walk. Part of their strategic control of oil and gas markets during the last few years was based on cooperation with Russia. Moscow’s influence in other FSU countries to stick to the production pact has been playing a pivotal role. While the Ukraine crisis is partly a major financial boon for Arab oil and gas producers due to rising crude prices, OPEC strategists now need to assess the ups and downs of continuing this partnership. Already, OPEC+ needs to tackle a number of problems. One major issue is the lack of spare production capacity in general, as some OPEC producers are already unable to keep up with their own quotas. While OPEC+ has stuck to their known monthly production hikes, real output levels are lagging behind, reflecting a 600,000 bpd quota shortfall. In the next few months, this number is expected to increase further. A lack of investment, declining field production, and lagging oil infrastructure are the main causes. Russia, as one of the main OPEC+ powers, is also facing some production issues. Some analysts already have indicated that Russia’s spare capacity is now below 300,000 bpd. Moscow is currently producing around 10.8 million bpd, but should be producing close to 12 million bpd according to the OPEC+ agreements. If it fails to reach these numbers, Moscow’s influence is under pressure in the alliance. Taking the production quota into account, while global crude prices are high, a potential breakup is not going to be very hard. Especially if Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi will be the only ones with extra spare production capacity. Geopolitically, the integrity of OPEC+ is very important. In contrast to the 20th Century or the first part of the 21st Century, there is more at stake lately. Riyadh, Abu Dhabi and also Egypt, have become weary of the lack of commitment of Washington as a military and economic partner. Moscow and Beijing have been filling up the gaps. Arab sovereign wealth funds are increasingly investing in Russia, China and Asia, while Russian investments in ports and industrial zones, such as along the Suez Canal, have a political impact too. At present, no Arab country is willing to make a clear choice between the West and the East. Choosing to back the West in the Ukraine crisis, or supporting economic and military sanctions on Russia and its cohorts, is however a bridge too far. Other Arab and non-Arab members of OPEC+ are also not yet willing to sanction Moscow. Putin’s strategic moves during the last decade have severely eroded Western influence in the region, and Moscow is now reaping the benefits. At the same time, Arab powers are also still keeping an eye on the Iran JCPOA discussions, and the position that China is taking towards Moscow. For most Arab oil producers, the Dragon-Bear developments are more important, at least on the surface. A breakup of OPEC+ is currently an option without a real risk for the Arabs. A potential energy sanctions regime on Russia isn’t completely out of the question. Riyadh and Abu Dhabi will for sure be coordinating any moves with Washington, London or Brussels, but will have a direct line to Beijing too. China’s stealth moves at present will not influence geopolitical decisions during the coming months, but could also have an impact on the future of OPEC+. Some could argue a weaker OPEC+ is to the advantage of Beijing, as Moscow will be more willing to increase flows to China. Analysts should be not looking the next couple of days at crude oil prices or official statements made by OPEC+ officials. The main focus should be on the body language shown on March 2, when OPEC will be meeting again. The same scenario as at the Third Summit of OPEC Heads of State and Government in Riyadh 2007 could play out. A breakup of the OPEC+ bromance is an underestimated possibility. NN: The world cannot live without Russian oil and gas. The issue is how and where it comes to market. Oil does not have a passport. So if it show up in Asia who is the wiser. Problem is how does the EU and the US sanction Putin and still buy his oil… Answer is they don’t….. Hold that thought
UK minister Kwarteng welcomes BP’s exit from Rosneft, speaks of “wake up call”
Ukraine agrees to talks with Russia
LVIV, Ukraine (Reuters) – Ukrainian and Russian officials will meet for talks at a venue on the Belarusian border with Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s office said on Sunday. The talks, the first since Russia unleashed a full scale invasion of Ukraine last week, would be held without preconditions and are the result of a phone call between Zelenskiy and the Belarusian president, Zelenskiy said. “We agreed that the Ukrainian delegation would meet with the Russian delegation without preconditions on the Ukrainian-Belarusian border, near the Pripyat River,” he said in a statement. NN: I do not see how one can have a negotiation with a gun pointed at your head. The wold needs to enforce a no fly zone over the Ukraine and supply vast weaponry. And let the brave freedom fighters of Ukraine get on with it. The Russians were efeated in Afganaistan. And the US was defeated in Vietnam. If the people rise up not fearing death they can defeat a invading army every time.
EU energy ministers to discuss plans for supply shocks from Ukraine crisis
BRUSSELS (Reuters) – Energy ministers from European Union countries will on Monday discuss preparations for potential energy supply shocks and measures to shore up gas stocks following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The invasion of Ukraine by Russia, Europe’s top gas supplier, has sharpened concerns of disruption to energy supplies and increased scrutiny of European Union countries’ reliance on imported fossil fuels. EU ministers will “take stock of possible additional actions in terms of safeguarding supply, the use of strategic oil stocks, the management of gas stocks” at the emergency meeting, according to a preparatory note by France, which currently chairs EU ministers’ meetings. They will also discuss possible assistance to Ukraine’s energy sector, according to the document, seen by Reuters.
Russia supplies around 40% of Europe’s gas. EU rules require all member countries to have a plan to respond to gas supply shocks.
The European Commission has said Europe could cope with a short-term disruption to Russian gas flows. Analysts say a complete or prolonged halt would have severe economic repercussions, requiring emergency measures like factory closures. Dutch front-month gas prices spiked by around 40% on Thursday, softening on Friday as pipeline flows from Russia stayed steady. Gazprom said it was supplying gas via Ukraine in line with demand from European consumers. The EU ministers will also consider extra measures to tackle high energy prices. Soaring gas prices in recent months have hiked bills for households and industries, prompting governments in most of the EU’s 27 countries to use subsidies and tax breaks to curb bills. The European Commission will this week unveil plans to require countries to fill gas storage to minimum levels ahead of winter, as a buffer against supply shocks. A draft of the plan, seen by Reuters, also includes measures to expand renewable energy faster, as Brussels stresses the need to shift away from imported fossil fuels and rely on locally-produced low-carbon sources – not only to fight climate change, but as a matter of security.
“Let’s now dash into renewables at lightening speed… The faster we move, the sooner we reduce dependency on others,” EU climate policy chief Frans Timmermans said in a tweet on Friday.
To meet its 2030 climate target, the EU expects to reduce gas consumption more than 25% from 2015 levels, although gas is expected to retain a significant share of Europe’s energy mix for at least the next decade. NN: They are till living in LALA land as they “dash into renewables” It ain’t gonna happen. Open up their Nuclear reactor, move into natural gas power generation, open up fracking and arrange non Russian sources of gas and pipelines. If they do a Manhattan type project building at both ends breaking the project to 4 parts on cots plus contract they can have a pipeline to Greece by next winter….
The new omicron BA2 mutation is more contageous and will be more infectious
- Danish scientists confirmed this week that the new subvariant can reinfect people who’ve previously had omicron, although it doesn’t appear to be all that common.
- They also agree that it’s more contagious than the original version of omicron, BA.1, which is still widely circulating around the world.
- But it’s surprisingly not driving a second wave of omicron infections. Globally, Covid cases have plunged 21% over the past week.
A more contagious subvariant of omicron, known as BA.2, is spreading across the globe and could soon become the dominant version of Covid-19. It’s now the top variant in at least 18 countries and rapidly spreading, representing 35% of all new cases that have been genetically sequenced worldwide, up from 10 countries and 21% of cases the week before, according to new data from the World Health Organization. In the U.S, BA.2 currently makes up 3.8% of genetically sequenced Covid cases, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A pandemic-weary public wants to know two main things: Will BA.2 cause a second surge of omicron cases, and will it put even more people in the hospital with severe infections? So far, scientists say the answer to both questions is probably no. However, Danish scientists confirmed this week that the new subvariant can reinfect people who’ve previously had omicron, although it doesn’t appear to be all that common. They also agree that it’s more contagious than the original version of omicron, BA.1, which is still widely circulating around the world. But it’s surprisingly not driving a second wave of omicron infections. Globally, Covid cases have plunged 21% over the past week — subsiding in every region except the Western Pacific — while deaths have fallen 8% over the past week, according to data from the WHO. Maria Van Kerkhove, the WHO’s Covid-19 technical lead, said the global health agency is closely monitoring countries that have detected BA.2, but so far the subvariant hasn’t caused a fresh surge in cases. “As we’re seeing that decline in cases in countries, we’re not seeing an increase again with BA.2,” Van Kerkhove said during a question-and-answer session livestreamed on the WHO’s social media platforms Tuesday. Here’s what’s known about the subvariant so far. Danish researchers have found that BA.2 is about 30% more transmissible than BA.1. Denmark was one of the first countries where BA.2 became dominant, and public health authorities around the world have paid close attention to the situation there to gather insight on what the subvariant might mean for the future course of the pandemic.
“We conclude that Omicron BA.2 is inherently substantially more transmissible than BA.1,” a team of scientists affiliated with Danish public health authorities and the University of Copenhagen wrote in a study last month, which has not yet been peer-reviewed.
The U.K. Health Security Agency found in late January that BA.2 had a substantial advantage over BA.1 in England. “We now know that BA.2 has an increased growth rate which can be seen in all regions in England,” said Dr. Susan Hopkins, the agency’s chief medical advisor. “If what is being reported is true that BA.2 is slightly more transmissible, then my strong inclination is to say that BA.2 will likely take over wherever BA.1 was,” said Mehul Suthar, a virologist at Emory University. However, Suthar said this doesn’t necessarily mean that BA.2 will cause a surge of infection. BA.2′s ability to cause another wave depends, in part, on whether it can reinfect people who have already caught and recovered from omicron, he said. Danish scientists confirmed Tuesday that the BA.2 subvariant can reinfect people who previously had its omicron predecessor, BA.1, though the risk of catching the virus again appears low. The Statens Serum Institute in Copenhagen analyzed a randomly selected sample of 263 reinfection cases. Forty-seven people caught BA.2 less than two months after infection with BA.1, according to the study. The majority of the people reinfected with BA.2 after BA.1 were younger than 20 years old and unvaccinated. “The reinfection rate appears to be low given the high number of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests during the study period but still highlights the need for continuous assessment of length of vaccine-induced and/or natural immunity,” the study’s authors wrote. The people reinfected had mild symptoms and none of them were hospitalized or died. The study also found that people reinfected with a BA.2 infection had a reduced viral load, indicating some crossover immunity from the first infection. The U.K. Health Security Agency, in a separate study, found 69 cases of people reinfected with BA.2 no more than 90 days after their first infection with Covid. However, no instances of people reinfected by BA.2 after first catching BA.1 were found among the 51 cases where enough information was available. The timing of the first infections and sequencing indicated their original Covid cases were the delta variant. Neither study has been peer-reviewed, which is the gold standard in academic publishing. Scientists have been publishing their research as quickly as possible due to the urgency of the pandemic. NN: By fall the 5th wave will be upon us. And by that time will mutate into the deadest form yet. And it will evade our present vaccine and acquired immunity. It is crazy they are opening the door wide open to this fast spreading highly courageous mutation. Have we not learned anything these past two years?
Putin is reshaping post cold war order
The post-Cold War order, which began in 1989, ended in 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine and said it had no right to exist as an independent nation. Faced with the largest military conflict in Europe since World War II, the biggest questions are
- How much will this new world order resemble the Cold War?
- How effective will the Russian war effort be in Ukraine?
- Can Russia decapitate the Zelensky government and establish a puppet regime? Can they hold hostile territory in the long term against armed guerrillas, fighting for their homeland? Will a lingering conflict, and the endless funerals it brings, undermine Putin’s rule?
- Can we avoid a direct, deadly, and unpredictable engagement between nuclear powers?
- Will the costs the West imposes on Russia be high enough to deter China from taking Taiwan?
Russia’s invasion is not just an effort to retake Ukraine, which was once part of the Soviet Union. It is an effort to use military force to overturn the post-Cold War settlement, reached in the early 1990s. In fact, the invasion cannot be understood without first understanding what that settlement looked like and why Russia wants to overturn it, despite the high costs. In the 1980s, when Vladimir Putin was a KGB agent in East Germany, the Soviet Union had become an arteriosclerotic state. It was unable to keep up with the US in high-technology arms, unable to legitimate its rule with Marxist-Leninist ideology, which its people no longer believed, and unable to afford the cost of maintaining its empire in Eastern Europe. When its subordinate partners in Eastern Europe, known as the Warsaw Pact, faced popular uprisings, Moscow had always sent in troops to restore their puppet regimes. Under Mikhail Gorbachev, the Kremlin decided it could no longer afford to send in the Red Army. That decision meant the revolts in Eastern Europe would succeed, the communist regimes would topple, and the Soviet Union would no longer dominate its neighbors. Two years later, the Soviet Union itself collapsed. Region after region within the USSR peeled away and declared independent statehood. Crucially for today’s politics, that meant independence for territory that had once been fully incorporated in the USSR: Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Georgia, Belarus, Moldova, and the “stans” in central Asia. Some of these new states maintained close relations with Moscow. Others veered toward the West, culturally, economically, and militarily. East Germany was merged into West Germany and the combined state remained within NATO. The Western alliance also extended its reach further east. That included Poland, once a member of the Warsaw Pact, and the Baltic States, which the Soviet Union seized after Stalin’s secret pact with Hitler. For these states, NATO membership was both a symbol of westernization and a security guarantee, with the vital provision that an attack on one NATO member was an attack on all. NATO’s expansion under the Clinton administration was less a well-thought-out strategic plan than an expected low-cost effort to bring democratizing states into the trans-Atlantic world order. It was considered nearly costless because no one believed Russia was still a security threat or would consider NATO’s expansion threatening. The European Union was simultaneously extending membership to the same countries. In short, the West and the US-led world order was expanding geographically, not by force but by invitation. Russia was never included in that expansion, though it might have been had it democratized, transformed its economy, and demonstrated peaceful intentions toward its neighbors. Instead, Russia was offered a cooperative arrangement with NATO but never considered for full membership. Moscow later claimed that the George H.W. Bush administration had privately agreed that NATO would never expand eastward. Not one inch. The Bush administration denies it. In any case, the issue was never discussed between President Bush and his Russian counterparts or embodied in any written agreement, formal or informal, as you would expect of such a major undertaking. Later, Russia would claim that NATO’s expansion was both a betrayal and threat. Nor was Russia offered membership in the EU, which would have required successful democratization, as well as a thorough-going transformation of its economy. NATO and the EU posed a threat to Russia, but not a military one. The principal threat was that thriving, prosperous democracies on Russia’s doorstep were a standing rebuke to its own failures. That rebuke undermined the Russian’s regime’s legitimacy and, potentially, its stability. The dual failure of Russia’s efforts to democratize and modernize its economy left the Kremlin with major problems. To legitimate its rule, the post-Soviet regime has relied on traditional Russian nationalism.
OPEC+ trims forecast for 2022 oil market surplus in latest data
LONDON, Feb 27 (Reuters) – OPEC+ revised down its forecast for the 2022 oil market surplus by about 200,000 barrels per day (bpd) to 1.1 million bpd, according to a base scenario in a technical committee report seen by Reuters on Sunday.