In the next UN Climate Summit OPEC+ delegates must not back down

By Tom Harris 

 

In last month’s United Nations Climate Change Conference, it appeared at first that OPEC+ nations had injected a note of much-needed realism into the event (OPEC+ is a group of 13 members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and 11 other non-OPEC members (the top five producers of which are Russia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Mexico and Oman)). But in the final analysis, they all bowed to political correctness and, while avoiding direct language about phasing out fossil fuels, still ended up supporting "transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade, so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science."

Of course, if they were really paying attention to “the science,” they wouldn’t be transitioning away from fossil fuels at all. Delegates would be boosting exploration and development of fossil fuels so as to ensure our energy security in an increasingly unstable and unpredictable world. After all, if problematic climate change did happen, in contrast to the “renewable energy” they committed to triple, delegates would want us to have the most solid and dependable energy sources possible, and fossil fuels certainly fit the bill.

As ICSC-Canada concluded in last month’s report, “A CAUTIONARY TALE FOR GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE WORLD Part 2”:

“… a dispassionate examination of the available weather and climate observational data shows that nothing out of the ordinary is happening in the real world. Forecasts of impeding climate doom are based on hopelessly flawed computerized climate models that do not stand up to serious critique. Much of what climate alarmists claim is based on easily disproven myths.”

Just before COP28 started, it seemed that the conference leader would approach this issue sensibly. At the online She Changes Climate event on November 21, former UN special envoy for climate change Mary Robinson challenged Cop 28 president Sultan Al Jaber to lead in phasing out fossil fuels. Al Jaber was having none of it and answered:

“I accepted to come this meeting to have a sober and a mature conversation. I’m not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist… There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuels is what’s going to achieve 1.5C.”

Al Jaber was right. Phasing out fossil fuels would have little impact on climate.

In response to further pressure from Robinson, Al Jaber final challenged her back:

“show me the roadmap for a phase-out of fossil fuel that will allow for sustainable socioeconomic development, unless you want to take the world back into caves.”

He was right there too. As ICSC-Canada explained in Part 1 of the report released in 2022:

“Decarbonizing” an entire economy would mean virtually eliminating the use of all fossil fuels used to provide energy services like heat, light, motive power and all the thousands of uses of electricity. Consequently, achieving net-zero for the City of Ottawa would face insuperable technical and cost barriers, and demand unacceptable political changes for a democratic society, placing us back to standards of living of at least 150 years ago.”

This was not the only time recently that OPEC+ leaders have spoken sensibly about the issue.

In his December 6^th letter, OPEC Secretary General Haitham Al Ghais urged OPEC+ members to reject proposals at COP28 that targeted fossil fuels. Al Ghais wrote:

"It seems that the undue and disproportionate pressure against fossil fuels may reach a tipping point with irreversible consequences, as the draft decision still contains options on fossil fuels phase out."

He asked OPEC+ delegations at COP28 to "proactively reject any text or formula that targets energy i.e. fossil fuels rather than emissions."

Good. That is exactly what they should do.

There was another time during the conference when an OPEC representative spoke with courage and common sense about the issue. Hasan Alhamadi, the OPEC Secretariat’s head of public relations, also a support services manager with Kuwait Petroleum International, replied to an activist concerned about wildfires, “This has nothing to do with oil. How does it have to do with oil?”

Alhamadi was also right when he told another youth delegate who asked whether oil is the only energy solution, “Right now, yes…Give me an alternative…[solar] is too expensive for people, and no one would like to invest there.”

Without huge government subsidies, solar is far too expensive, not to mention unreliable and environmentally damaging.

Predictably, climate hawks went ballistic over the statements from Al Jaber, Al Ghais and Alhamadi. However, rather than scare them away from their responsible positions, it should have told these OPEC leaders they should double down on their pro-fossil fuel statements.

World War II Lancaster bomber pilot Sandy Mutch, who passed away at the age of 98 on April 15, 2018, said in 2013, “On bombing raids over Europe, we could tell we were closing in on the target when we started to get the most flak.”

That was because important German assets were often surrounded by anti-aircraft guns that filled the sky with AAA fire. Rather than being deterred by the resistance, it told Bomber Command exactly where the next wave of aircraft should concentrate their attack.

Mutch, who held a Master of Science degree from the University of Toronto (1951), concluded, “Anyone who wants to kill the dangerous and unfounded climate scare … should focus on exposing the shaky science behind climate alarm. That is the Achilles heel of the whole movement. Shoot it down and you win the war!”

But apparently even OPEC are not yet that serious about actually winning the climate war. Or perhaps they are hoping the whole mess collapses of its own weight as the public begins to rebel when the costs of draconian climate and energy policies finally hit home. Or maybe they plan to try to take advantage of the rather large loopholes in the UN statement. But they are taking a dangerous gamble as much damage can be done in the meantime to the world’s most important energy sources.

---

Tom Harris is Executive Director of the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC) at www.icsc-climate.com. If you liked this article, please share it and support ICSC through its GiveSendGo crowdfunding webpage at GiveSendGo - THERE IS NO CLIMATE EMERGENCY!: The Leader in Freedom Fundraising.

 

OPEC Can’t Stop Humiliating Joe Biden

Oil cartel cuts two million barrels of production and defies US pressure.

By: Andrew Moran October 06, 2022 @ Liberty Nation

As the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) decided to issue a major cut to oil production, the Biden administration is once again left floundering for a cohesive response that sidesteps the embarrassment of going cap in hand to Saudi Arabia earlier this year. Rather than admit that the president’s pleas have been ignored, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre deflected blame to the war in Ukraine, saying “It’s clear that OPEC+ is aligning with Russia with today’s announcement.” While his personal blunders have been on full display even before arriving at the White House, Joe Biden’s public policy boondoggles have had lasting consequences for the American people and their pocketbooks. And the soon-to-be-rocketing energy prices are no exception.

OPEC: 2020 Redux

  During OPEC’s first in-person meeting at its Vienna headquarters in more than two years, the 23-member cartel agreed to slash crude output by roughly two million barrels per day (bpd). When reports first surfaced, sources had stated the group was considering a cut of approximately one million bpd, with market analysts purporting that 500,000 bpd was a more realistic figure. This was the biggest reduction since the early days of the coronavirus pandemic and highlighted officials entering panic mode.

The drastic measure was approved “in light of the uncertainty that surrounds the global economic and oil market outlooks.” In other words, OPEC is worried about a recession eviscerating global demand, so the institution needed to keep prices elevated. Does this mean energy could flirt with $100-a-barrel prices again? The Biden administration is trying to mitigate the pain by – once again – raiding and draining the nation’s oil-denominated rainy-day fund and potentially turning to dictators to bail out progressive errors.

Biden Policy Gaffe

The White House announced soon after OPEC’s decision that the federal government would release ten million more barrels of oil from America’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) in November. “The President will continue to direct SPR releases as appropriate to protect American consumers and promote energy security, and he is directing the Secretary of Energy to explore any additional responsible actions to continue increasing domestic production in the immediate term,” said National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and National Economic Council (NEC) Director Brian Deese in a statement.

As Liberty Nation recently reported, Biden’s plan to inject one million barrels of oil a day from the emergency stocks was scheduled to expire on Oct. 31. However, the Department of Energy announced more releases for November deliveries, and now the administration is breaking open the piggy bank again ahead of the midterms. But a blindfolded Stevie Wonder stuck in a basement could see this is a political ploy, particularly with gasoline prices edging toward a national average of $4 per gallon.

While this is a short-term fix to improve Democrats’ chances at the ballot box, the long-term consequence is the SPR. When Biden took office, the roughly half-century-old SPR contained about 637 million barrels. For the week ending Sept. 30, there are a little more than 416 million, representing a 34% decline and the lowest level in four decades. Remember, then-President Gerald Ford helped establish the SPR in 1975 to prevent supply disruptions, not for Democrats or Republicans to bolster election odds.

Meanwhile, the administration all but confirmed that it still cannot comprehend what is going on with the energy file. According to the Oct. 5 press statement, officials are working with Congress to determine additional tools to reduce OPEC’s control over energy prices. The release also suggested that passing the Inflation Reduction Act was crucial to national security and energy independence.

First, OPEC’s immense impact on international energy prices was significantly diminished before the current inflationary crisis. Prior to the COVID-19 public health fiasco, the United States transformed into an energy-independent market, no longer depending on the Middle East, as the US was producing more than 13 million bpd. Moreover, former President Donald Trump wanted to add to the reserves when prices were cratering, but Democrats opposed this plan. Now, because of the Biden administration’s actions, the nation is begging OPEC, relying on repressive governments, and eating into Uncle Sam’s savings account.

Second, the Inflation Reduction Act might be a worthwhile long-term endeavor, but it does not resolve the plethora of current challenges. It is terrific that there will be more electric-vehicle chargers by 2035. But what about today? The American Petroleum Institute (API) has repeatedly stated that Washington could facilitate expanded output by slashing red tape, approving more leases, defending the sector in court against militant environmentalists, and lifting restrictions. The progressive utopia of a future zero-carbon economy does not need to be abandoned, but consider this: Despite the trillions of dollars in subsidies given to renewables, solar and wind only account for around 10% of the nation’s power generation. By comparison, natural gas and coal, which are more efficient and effective for electricity creation, represent about half.

Oil-vember

Will the pain at the pump and higher utility bills matter to voters come Nov. 8? Liberty Nation’s Leesa K. Donner reported that polls show 38% of Americans listed the economy as their top priority. What’s more, 48% trust the Republicans more than the Democrats (37%) on the issue. This is a notable gap, but the only poll that matters, as the old trope goes, is the one on Election Day. President Biden is utilizing a broad array of options to help lower energy costs by using a pen, a phone, and the trifecta of power in Washington. It is clearly not enough. Households may realize this, and, surprisingly, the GOP might succeed in this area because the solution to $4 gasoline, $5 diesel, $100 oil, and $7 natural gas is simple: drill, baby, drill.

Read More From Andrew Moran

 

OPEC Members Continue Non-compliance

Written by  Bob Adelmann Friday, 11 August 2017

The Paris-based International Energy Agency (IEA) noted in its latest report released on Friday that non-compliance among OPEC’s members, and those non-members who also agreed to cut oil production, increased again in July. Non-compliance is the death knell for any cartel, and OPEC is no exception.  Specifically, non-compliance among the cartel’s members rose to 25 percent in July, the highest since the agreement was inked in January. Among non-OPEC members who signed on to that agreement, non-compliance was at 33 percent in July...........OPEC has only two tools at its disposal: control of production, and words. As the cartel control of production thanks to increasing noncompliance by its members, it must rely on words. In anticipation of the report from the IEA, OPEC held a meeting with some of the non-complying members earlier in the week, calling them to task for their waywardness (“laggards” was the term used) and then ending the meeting with a press release designed to soothe the skeptics: “All [laggards] expressed their full support of the existing monitoring mechanism and their willingness to cooperate.”

This changes nothing. The reality is that the cartel’s increased fraying at the edges could threaten its very existence.......To Read More....

My Take - OPEC is doomed - good ridence - couldn't happen to a more deserving group, and fracking is the reason.  Fracking is going to change the way the world works, far more than many realize or wish. 


 

Farewell to OPEC

The energy revolution unleashed by President Trump is sure to make the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries an energy relic.

Daniel John Sobieski

Maybe the fly on the wall knows, because nothing was leaked to the New York Times or Washington Post, but one of the topics that may have come up in meetings between American and Saudi officials during President Trump’s historic visit is the energy revolution unleashed by President Trump that is sure to make the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries an energy relic.

Through regulation repeal and executive orders and the changing of the guard at the Environmental Protection Energy, Trump has made fossil fuels great again with expanded shale oil and natural gas production for both domestic consumption and export leading the way. And thanks to the completion of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines, North American energy independence is soon to become reality.............  More

Shale Boom 2.0: OPEC Underestimated U.S. Frackers

Shale Revolution Drives American

Household’s Energy Cost To Record Low

Brought to you by Benny Peiser's
Global Warming Policy Forum 

 

The current boom in U.S. oil production is even stronger now than the run from July 2011 to April 2015. And this is with oil prices at half their previous level and before President Donald Trump has done anything to meet his pledge to “lift the restrictions on American energy and allow this wealth to pour into our communities.” Output growth could accelerate if prices rise, or costs fall further. What should really trouble OPEC, though, is that this rate of growth is even faster than the first shale boom.  --Julian Lee, Bloomberg, 26 February 2017

A voracious thirst for petroleum makes the US one of the largest importers of oil. But for the past two weeks it has also scaled the ranks of exporters. Outbound shipments of crude have surpassed 1.2m barrels a day, more than last month’s daily production of Algeria, Ecuador or Qatar — each a member of OPEC. The foreign sales underscore how the US has become more integrated into the world oil market since Washington lifted 40-year-old constraints on crude exports at the end of 2015. The US continues to import much more than it exports but its oil companies now have the freedom to market barrels abroad when it makes economic sense. The situation presents a further challenge to Saudi Arabia and other Opec members, which historically held the power to turn supplies on and off when needed. Or as Timothy Dove, chief executive of Pioneer Natural Resources, told analysts this month: “We’ll be significant swing producers in terms of worldwide supply.”  --Gregory Meyer, Financial Times, 28 February 2017

Germany has ambitious plans for both electric cars and renewable energy. But it can’t deliver both. As things stand, Germany’s well-meaning but contradictory ambitions would actually boost CO2 emissions by an amount comparable with the present-day emissions of the entire country of Uruguay or the state of Montana. The basic problem is that an electric car running on power generated by dirty coal or gas actually creates more emissions than a car that burns petrol. For such a switch to actually reduce net emissions, the electricity that powers those cars must be renewable. And, unless things change, Germany is unlikely to have enough green energy in time. After all, news of the potential petrol car ban came just after the chancellor, Angela Merkel, had announced she would slow the expansion in new wind farms as too much intermittent renewable power was making the grid unstable. --Dénes Csala, The Conversation,  26 February 2017

The climate may change but one thing that never does is the use of climate change as a political wedge against Republicans. Also never changing is the call from some Republicans to neutralize the issue by handing more economic power to the federal government through a tax on carbon. The risk is that Donald Trump takes up the idea, which would hurt the economy with little benefit to the environment. --Editorial, The Wall Street Journal, 25 February 2017

We’re reported before on the environmental mess left behind by the Dakota Access Pipeline protest neat the Standing Rock Indian reservatio, but there’s still one more installment to the story that deserves to be entered in the ledger: “Crews continue to clean up the Oceti Sakowin protest camp. As officers moved in and protesters moved out, garbage wasn’t the only thing left behind. Two dogs and six puppies were found and rescued at the main Dakota Access Pipeline Camp by Furry Friends Rockin’ Rescue.” So let’s add it all up: protesters claiming to be concerned about nature and wildlife leave huge amounts of trash and abandoned vehicles that threaten the waterway they say is “sacred,” and abandon their own pets. --Steven Hayward, Power Line, 26 February 2017