Saturday, November 09, 2024

Azerbaijan Accused of Exploiting COP29 for Political Gain

By Eurasianet - Nov 07, 2024


Armenian NGOs are boycotting COP29 in Baku, accusing Azerbaijan of "greenwashing" its human rights record and environmental damage in Nagorno-Karabakh.

The NGOs allege that Azerbaijan is engaged in deforestation, landmine planting, and destruction of cultural heritage in the occupied territories.

The UN's decision to host COP29 in Baku has been criticized, given the ongoing tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan.



Feeling excluded from directly participating in the upcoming COP29 climate conference starting November 11 inBaku, Armenian environmental organizations have issued a statement urging participants to speak up about Azerbaijan’s rights and environmental protection records.

The statement, issued by the Yerevan-based non-governmental organization Ecolur and signed by over 50 other Armenian entities, accuses the Azerbaijani government of using COP29 to craft a “greenwashing” narrative designed to obscure rights abuses and conceal alleged shortcomings in safeguarding regional ecosystems.

Armenian NGOs specifically accused Azerbaijan of engaging in “mass deforestation” in Armenian territory currently occupied by Azerbaijani armed forces in the wake of Baku’s reconquest of Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijani activities in the area, according to the NGO statement, are “devastating ecosystems” via the construction of a network of roads and the planting of land mines “restricting the movement of nearby [Armenian] residents and depriving them of access to water.”

The statement also urges participants to speak out about what it terms as “violations of humanitarian law, ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Armenian population [and] the destruction of Armenian historical and cultural heritage” in Karabakh.

Azerbaijani officials deny allegations of rights violations against Karabakh Armenians, while citing a variety of United Nations Security Council resolutions that endorse Baku’s sovereignty over the Karabakh enclave.

It seems unlikely that many participants will raise non-environmental topics publicly during COP29. A hosting agreement between the UN agency running the annual conference and the Azerbaijani government contains language that potentially enables the hosts to legally retaliate against anyone who voices public criticism of government policies.

The Armenian NGO statement criticized the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change for selecting Baku as a host city. Given the ongoing tension surrounding the Armenian-Azerbaijani peace process, Armenian environmentalists did not feel secure in attending the conference.

“The decision to hold COP29 in Baku was problematic in itself, considering not only the fact that such an event is being held in a country with a fossil fuel-based economy, but also the reality that this state uses profits from these resources to expand military aggression and blatantly violate international law,” the statement reads.

By Eurasianet.org

KAPITAL STRIKE

U.S. Apache to Exit UK North Sea Due To Windfall Tax

By Charles Kennedy - Nov 08, 2024, 


U.S. oil producer Apache plans to cease oil production at its assets in the UK North Sea by 2030, due to the windfall tax on operators.

Apache’s parent company APA Corporation said in an SEC filing that its assessment of the impact of the windfall tax, officially known as the Energy Profits Levy (EPL), resulted in findings that continued production in the UK North Sea would be uneconomical.

The Labour’s Autumn Statement confirmed last week that the windfall tax on UK North Sea operators is rising to 38% from 35%, effective November 1, 2024. The tax will now expire on 31 March 2030, a year later than the previous tax regime. The government is also removing the 29% investment allowance.

Since the tax was initially introduced by the Conservative government at the height of the energy crisis in 2022, oil and gas companies operating in the UK North Sea have been calling for certainty in the regulatory and tax framework. Recent changes in policies and the rising taxes have driven away operators, who say that a lack of North Sea investments would only make the UK more dependent on oil and gas imports.

Now Apache joins a growing list of companies reconsidering their presence in the UK.

“The Company determined the expected returns do not economically support making investments required under the combined impact of the regulations, and it will cease production at its facilities in the North Sea prior to 2030,” it said in the securities filing of the Q3 financial results.

The company’s investment program in the North Sea is now directed toward asset safety and integrity, APA said.

Apache entered the North Sea in 2003 after acquiring a 97% working interest in the Forties Field (Forties). Apache also has operated interests in the Beryl, Ness, Nevis, Nevis South, Skene, and Buckland fields and non-operated interest in the Maclure and Nelson fields.

The company had already suspended all new drilling activity in the North Sea in the second quarter of 2023, as part of its focus on capital allocation to optimize investment returns.

By Charles Kennedy for Oilprice.com
The End of ESG? Experts Predict a Shift in Corporate Strategy 

By ZeroHedge - Nov 08, 2024, 


ESG fund managers are being advised to seek legal counsel as the regulatory and political landscape becomes increasingly hostile.

The GOP's focus on fiduciary duty and antitrust concerns is putting pressure on ESG-focused firms.

Companies are expected to adopt a more cautious approach to ESG initiatives, potentially leading to "greenhushing" and a greater emphasis on legal compliance.




With President Trump once again taking the White House, one investment bank is advising ESG fund managers to "keep their lawyers very close", as the full scale death of ESG may very well be on the door step, according to Yahoo Finance.

Aniket Shah wrote in a note this week: “We’d encourage all ESG fund managers to have a lawyer on the team, or on speed-dial.”

He continued: “Antitrust risk remains high for asset managers in ESG; there haven’t been any cases yet, thus there is no legal precedent. Further, legal risks regarding fiduciary duty will stay relevant as states enforce anti-ESG laws.”

Yahoo reports that Trump's victory has already hit green sector stocks, with wind-energy companies among the hardest hit. Beyond potential bans and obstructive policies, the ESG sector faces rising legal risks.

Key GOP figures argue ESG-focused firms neglect fiduciary duties, while Republican attorneys general accuse financial firms using ESG metrics of collusion against fossil fuels and fueling inflation.

In response, "greenhushing"—keeping ESG efforts quiet—is likely, Jefferies analysts note. Corporate CEOs are also expected to seek legal guidance to adapt to this shifting landscape.

Jeffries said: “General counsels are in the ear of CEOs, frightened about legal retaliation to ESG initiatives. The backlash could lead to more focused and pragmatic companies, engaging in strategic discussions closely tied to their business model.”

Analysts argue that a public backlash, similar to 2016, could pressure companies to address issues like abortion and diversity. Conflicting state policies on ESG could create a “nightmare” of fragmented requirements, they warn.

Shareholders may still push for ESG risk disclosures aligned with the International Sustainability Standards Board, even as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce maintains it isn’t against ESG or climate disclosures. Notably, these observations focus on the ESG label itself, not the broader clean energy transition.

By Zerohedge.com
UK

Trump in the White House: The media landscape grows darker


Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead Today
LEFT FOOT FORWARD


Trump's repeated attacks on 'fake news' and traditional media are one of the reasons why he's been labelled a fascist, given that one of the first things fascist governments do is close down independent media outlets.



“If Trump is gone before I wake, I pray to God the news ain’t fake,” read one viral meme on the night of the election. Sadly, the prayer went unanswered, but the notion of ‘fake news,’ which has become synonymous with Trump, feels more relevant than ever.

Since he announced his campaign for the US presidency first-time round in 2015, Donald Trump has repeatedly attacked ‘fake news’ and ‘traditional’ media. These attacks are one of the reasons why Trump has been labelled a fascist, given that one of the first things fascist governments do is close down independent media outlets.

Last Sunday, at a rally in Pennsylvania, he complained about the bulletproof glass surrounding him, stating: “To get me, somebody would have to shoot through the fake news – and I don’t mind that so much.”

He also called the media “bloodsuckers.”

“The media is so damn bad – it’s unbelievable,” he said, specifically criticising certain news outlets. “ABC, ABC, fake news, CBS, ABC, NBC,” he said. “These are, in my opinion, these are seriously corrupt people.”

As Trump intensifies his attacks on the mainstream media, the unregulated landscape of social media – where misinformation thrives – undoubtedly aided him in securing a second presidency, as it did the first-time round.

In 2015, Trump built a massive social media following, with supporters dubbing themselves “centipedes,” closely tracking his every move. During his presidency, the White House even considered some of his 8,000 tweets as official statements. Following his Twitter ban in January 2021, after he referred to the Capitol rioters as “patriots,” he had amassed over 88.9 million followers.

But when Elon Musk reinstated Trump’s account in 2022, Trump opted not to return, instead promoting his own platform, Truth Social, described by the LA Times as a “mix of swaggering gun talk, typo-filled Bible scripture, violent Biden bashing, nonsensical conspiracy theories and more misguided memes about Jan. 6 “hostages,” trans satanists and murderous migrants than anyone should be subjected to…”

A pro-Trump echo chamber

Even without Trump, under Musk, Twitter – now X – has witnessed a lurch to the right. X’s owner – the richest man in the world – has increasingly used the social media platform as a megaphone to amplify his political views. During the election campaign, he bombarded his millions of followers with pro-Trump content, some accurate, some misleading. Following Musk’s endorsement of the now president-elect, X algorithms intensified pro-Trump content.

“I don’t think this race would even be close if it wasn’t for what Elon Musk was doing with X and showing people what is going on,” said Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Junior.

This year, Trump’s digital outreach became the cornerstone of his campaign. Podcasters and influencers, with millions of followers tuning into their weekly, even daily shows, trumpeted Trump’s message with little scrutiny.

Makena Kelly of Wired’s Political Lab, notes how the industry has grown and changed dramatically since the last presidential contest, eclipsing the traditional media in viewership in some cases. “This size and power is a legitimising force, despite the racist and misogynistic rhetoric some share with the manosphere.”

Joe Rogan, whose chart-topping podcast has an estimated 81% male audience, announced he was giving the Republican his backing after being convinced in one of his interviews by Elon Musk. It was said that Rogan’s backing could carry significant weight with his young, male listenership – who Trump had been working hard to court ahead of the 2024 vote. Trump welcomed the endorsement as “great” news.

And this so-called ‘heterodoxy,’ ‘free-thinkers’ like Joe Rogan and Elon Musk, and their endorsement of the Republican’s hyper-masculine promise, seemed to win over their young male audience. Among younger voters aged 18-29, 49 percent of men voted for Donald Trump, shattering previous images of young people generally leaning left.

While online influencers and digital media is eclipsing traditional media in US, the trend appears to be progressing more slowly in the UK. Both Labour and the Conservatives have invested heavily in online strategies to reach voters. In the 2015 election, Labour enlisted Blue State Digital, known for its work on Barack Obama’s campaigns, while the Conservatives allocated substantial resources to Facebook advertising.

But as a study by Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at Oxford University found, despite advancements in digital media, traditional broadcast media remained more influential in shaping public opinion during the 2015 election, with much social media discussion responding to broadcast content.

Nonetheless, the trend suggested that the influence of digital media was set to grow in future elections.

Now, eight years later, digital, unregulated platforms have become a formidable force in the political landscape, and, it seems, it’s the right-wingers who are on the winning foot.

The TikTok generation

Take TikTok, which, during his first presidency, Trump was the biggest threat to the platform after he tried to ban it on national security grounds. Trump joined the video sharing app in June, and just a day later, had attracted three million followers. As Reuters reported, the move was strategically aimed at connecting with younger voters in his third bid for the White House.

His inaugural TikTok video featured him greeting fans at an Ultimate Fighting Championship event in New Jersey and quickly racked up millions of views. In a statement, he asserted that he would “use every tool available to speak directly with the American people.”

Though it’s uncomfortable to find any merit in Trump’s statements, with about half of TikTok’s users under age 30 saying they rely on the platform to keep up with politics, his observations reflect the reality of today’s media landscape, where social media has emerged as a dominant force.

Traditional media is declining and increasingly appeals to an aging audience, yet even this demographic does not always align with its content.

A recent survey found that 78% of Americans aged 65 or older get most political and election news from journalists and news organisations. But that figure drops to 55 percent for people aged 30-49 and to 45 percent for 18-29-year-olds.

But in the UK, despite the pervasive Conservative messaging in the media, research shows that those who primarily read right-wing news outlets are increasingly inclined to support alternatives to the Conservatives.

Polling by Best for Britain in April suggested that despite the domination of Conservative-leaning newspapers in the industry, 37 percent of people who get their news mostly from print outlets had planned to vote Labour at the election compared to 22 percent who plan to vote for the Conservative Party.

Readers of the Sun were found to be the most likely of readership to back Labour with almost four in ten (38 percent) having planned to cast their vote for Starmer compared to one in four (25 percent) prepared to back Sunak. The only right-wing newspaper to buck the trend was the Daily Mail whose readers continue to lean Conservative 33 percent to 26 percent for Labour.

A separate poll showed a similar trend among GB News watchers, where Labour led by 39 percent to 28 percent, excluding undecided voters.

The ‘Trump effect’

There is little doubt that the “Trump effect” in America has spread widespread distrust and hostility towards mainstream media, creating a disconnect between millions of American voters and the principles of balance, respect, and quality journalism that once defined traditional media (at least quality traditional media).Of course, the big difference between our media and that of the US is the BBC, which, for all its faults, is widely loved and respected, in spite of being continually sniped at by Conservatives and the right-wing media.

Unlike the likes of Fox News and other US news outlets, the ‘Beeb’ doesn’t rely on polarisation as a business model, as it’s legally obligated to neutrality.

Foreign Policy notes that one might assume American viewers are just different. Perhaps they like drama, hyperbole, and confirmation more? But a 2020 report by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, shows that isn’t necessarily true. Rather, 60 percent of Americans want neutral news. What’s more, 56 percent of Americans find the BBC trustworthy.

But, with or without a BBC, when it comes to winning elections, clearly, political strategists are increasingly recognising that traditional media is not as essential, as it once was. And it’s the right that seem to be winning the digital media wars.

For Mark Jacob, author of Stop the Presses, a weekly newsletter about how right-wing extremism has exploited the weaknesses in American journalism, the decline of traditional media is not solely its fault, as the rise of smartphones and social media has altered consumer habits. He argues that right-wing disinformation has bewildered mainstream journalists, who have often failed to adapt their strategies in the face of this challenge.

Instead of merely broadcasting political rhetoric, journalism should focus on meaningful investigations, contextualising news events, and holding public figures accountable.

“… with Trump’s successful campaign of lies eight years ago should have come an aggressive reassessment by the media. Only in limited cases has that happened. Networks are still letting a deranged criminal traitor tell outrageous falsehoods on live television with no pushback. They’re amplifying disinformation and pretending that amounts to “fairness.”

Abetted by our own right-wing press

In addition to the insufficient accountability in mainstream media coverage that Jacob highlights, and the right’s more visceral connection with audiences on social media, Trump was, regrettably, even supported by our own right-wing press.

During the final weeks of the campaign, content with negative sentiment about Kamala Harris was published on the Daily Mail’s TikTok account, which has 20 million followers. It achieved 13.4 million views, outperforming even Trump’s official campaign account.

The Daily Mail capitalised on controversial content, including a widely criticised performance by stand-up comedian Tony Hinchcliffe at a Trump rally, which drew a backlash for its offensive remarks about Puerto Ricans. Despite this, the Mail focused on sensationalised clips that resonated with a pro-Trump audience.

In another pro-Trump viral clip, the Mail’s TikTok showed a tourist who had flown from Japan to attend a Trump rally. “Trump supporter goes above and BEYOND #trump#kamala#japan#election#newyorkcity#nyc,” read the accompanying text.

And judging by some of the comments in the feed below the clip, the content succeeded in resonating with its audience.

“The whole world wants Trump as president that should say something,” was an especially painful comment.

And it wasn’t just the Daily Mail’s TikTok account spouting a pro-Trump narrative. In the final few days of the campaign, the newspaper’s columnist Richard Littlejohn – who has advocated hiring the host of You Are What You Eat, Dr Gillian McKeith, to sift through human excrement to identify country of origin – wrote an article headlined, “I haven’t got a dog in this fight, but watching Trump I can’t help wishing we had a politician who would give us hope again, make Britain great again – and make us laugh again.”

Which brings me onto Nigel Farage, a vocal Trump supporter, and shrewd social media promoter, whose videos on TikTok outperformed all other parties and candidates during the general election campaign.

During a rally in Pennsylvania on the eve of the vote, Farage met Trump backstage, posting the encounter to his millions of followers on social media.

The Reform UK leader claimed “a Trump win will make the world a safer place” despite concerns on both sides of the Atlantic over past threats by the Republican to pull the US away from Nato.

Reciprocating the endorsements, Trump gave a special mention to the Reform leader during the rally. In a shout-out to his “friend,” he said: “He’s shaking it up out there. He was the big winner of the last election in the UK.”

As the mainstream media seems sadly on a path to its own irrelevance, modern media is being ever more tightly embraced by populist, right-wing politicians.

Of course, many UK politicians are behind the curve and are still intimidated by nasty headlines in the Mail, with ministers finding themselves asking, “What would the Mail say?” when contemplating any ‘liberal’ policy that might provoke backlash from the paper.

In a media landscape transformed by social platforms and the relentless march of misinformation, the prayer that “the news ain’t fake” resonates louder than ever.

With each rally, each viral TikTok, and each strategic post, Trump’s influence underlines a crucial lesson for journalism. To survive, the mainstream must adapt, prioritising truth and accountability over the more comfortable narratives of the past. The call for a fearless and honest press is urgent, otherwise, the media risks becoming a relic, sidelined by a populist tide that thrives on chaos and distortion. Just as the meme prayed for truth, the future of journalism must embody it – before it’s too late.

Right-wing media watch – Once again, the anti-woke brigade fail to grasp the National Trust’s appeal

Undeterred by yet another failed invasion attempt, the right-wing anti-woke crusaders at Restore Trust faced their fourth defeat in trying to plant their candidates on the National Trust council during this year’s Annual General Meeting (AGM).

Their candidates managed a mere 18,000 votes while the winning candidates scooped a hefty 42,000.

But fear not, GB News remained determined to throw around ‘woke’ insults at Europe’s largest conservation charity.

“National Trust pushes through woke vegan overhaul of cafes despite backlash from members,” blared their headline on November 3.

Despite a resounding 57,490 votes in favour of a resolution to make half the offerings at its 300 cafes plant-based, the broadcaster insists the Trust is facing a backlash over the decision, with 20,111 votes opposing it.

“….critics accuse the [National Trust’s] leadership of pushing an anti-meat agenda,” the article continues, citing on such critic stating: “This motion forces us to eat food that is not of our choice. Instead, we should be supporting the National Trust’s livestock tenant farmers.”

In addition to the vegan produce resolution, members also backed a proposal to strengthen the trust’s response to the climate emergency and support the proposed Climate and Nature Bill.

But rather than commending such climate efforts, GB News was intent on stirring up trouble reporting that some AGM attendees expressed concern about staff and volunteers’ attitudes toward British history.

“Some questioned the attitudes and patriotism of staff and volunteers towards British history, following comments by director general Hilary McGrady about the progressive nature of trust employees,” the article continues.

The broadcaster was also quick to inform of other “recent controversies,” including the “trust’s use of explainer panels highlighting slave-owning histories at its properties, the introduction of vegan scones, and decisions regarding property restoration.

“Additionally, there was criticism of the trust’s ‘quick vote’ system, which some argue stifles debate.”

In fact, GB News even dedicated a whole separate article to this right-wing complaint, with a headline screaming: “National Trust members furious after being BLOCKED from holding vote aimed at stopping charity imposing woke policies without scrutiny.”

“A group of National Trust members has been prevented from attempting to debate the charity’s “debate-stifling” voting system at its annual meeting last weekend.

You’d think after four consecutive failures, the anti-woke media might take a hint and recognise that folk actually appreciate the National Trust’s woke, progressive, vegan, left-wing appeal – whatever label they want to slap on it.

Smear of the week – Ed Miliband and the kettle conspiracy!

Ed Miliband has long been a favourite target of the right-wing press. During the 2015 general election, the Tory tabloids launched a full-scale smear campaign, with the Sun devoting nearly half its front page to a photo of Miliband looking like he was about to have a heart attack while eating a bacon sandwich. “Don’t swallow his porkies and keep him OUT!” was the message.

The media’s vitriol towards Miliband and Labour was consistent and intense, and many believe that the combined efforts of the Sun, Daily Mail, Daily Express, and Daily Telegraph, not only contributed to, but actually orchestrated Miliband’s downfall.

“… I haven’t a shadow of doubt that Ed Miliband lost because of newspaper coverage,” said Roy Greenslade, a former professor of journalism at City University.

And, as the saying goes, a leopard never changes its spots, especially when it comes to right-wing media outlets.

Now, as the minister for energy security and Net Zero, Miliband is facing renewed attacks, not only because they view him as an easy target, but also because if there’s one thing the right-wing press seems to loathe, it’s the concept of Net Zero.

“Miliband’s war on teatime: People ‘will have to restrict when they boil the kettle to help Ed Miliband hit 2030 clean power targets,” headlined the Sun this week.



The article continues with dire warnings about the need for swift planning and regulatory reform to meet ambitious infrastructure goals.

The experts the piece refers to is the National Energy System Operator (NESO), which the Sun was quick to point out is now taxpayer-owned after a £630m deal. Their ‘Our Clean Power 2030 advice to government report, which was commissioned by Miliband and published this week, concludes that while the challenge of achieving clean power by 2030 is substantial, it’s feasible.

But as Stop Funding Heat – a group dedicated to calling out media outlets for spreading “climate lies” for clicks, sales and vested interests – astutely noted, the very report the Sun twisted for its headline doesn’t even mention the words “kettle” or “boil.” In fact, it highlights the benefits of transitioning to clean energy.

“Who’d have predicted that the Sun would run yet another misleading headline about climate policy?” the group mockingly asked.

Indeed, the report is decidedly pro-climate action. Fintan Slye, the chief executive of NESO, said: “There’s no doubt that the challenges ahead on the journey to delivering clean power are great. However, if the scale of those challenges is matched with the bold, sustained actions that are outlined in this report, the benefits delivered could be even greater.”

Slye painted a rosy picture of a clean power system for Great Britain, one that would free us from the volatility of international gas prices, secure our homes with affordable energy, decarbonise our commutes, and drive innovation.

But of course, the part of the report that the Sun jumped on was its assertion that meeting the 2030 targets would require a six-fold increase in “demand flexibility.”

In other words, we might have to forgo our cherished cuppa during Coronation Street breaks or at the half-time whistle during the football. And somehow, it’s all Ed Miliband’s fault.

Poor old Ed, he always manages to brew up a media storm! Mind you, it could be said that he must be doing something right to attract so much vitriol from the likes of the Sun.

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead is author of Right-Wing Watch
Solar, Clean Energy Stocks Hammered After Trump’s White House Victory

By Alex Kimani - Nov 07, 2024

Solar stocks got pounded on Wednesday, only to see a partial discovery on Thursday.

Trump’s victory has renewed worries among traders that the incoming administration will weaken support for the solar industry.

Trump has pledged to rescind any “unspent” funds under the IRA.




Solar and clean energy stocks sold off heavily on Wednesday after Donald Trump defeated Kamala Harris to clinch leadership of the White House. Trump’s victory has renewed worries among traders that the incoming administration will weaken support for the solar industry, as well as other forms of low-carbon energy.

Sunnova Energy (NASDAQ:NOVA) -22%, JinkoSolar (NYSE:JKS) -16% and SolarEdge Technologies (NASDAQ:SEDG) -15% led the bloodbath as traders digested Trump’s historic win and re-election as the 47th President of the U.S. Other major losers were First Solar (NASDAQ:FSLR) -14%, Enphase Energy (NASDAQ:ENPH) -13%, Array Technologies (NASDAQ:ARRY) -12.6%, Maxeon Solar Technologies (NASDAQ:MAXN) -12.4%, Fluence Energy (NASDAQ:FLNC) -12% and Daqo New Energy (NYSE:DQ) -11%. Meanwhile, the iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (NASDAQ:ICLN), the world’s largest green energy ETF and a catch-all bet on clean energy, tanked nearly 10% on the day.

Trump has never hidden his disdain for clean energy (especially ‘windmills’). He has repeatedly lambasted the historic Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), describing it as the “biggest tax hike in history”. Trump has pledged to rescind any “unspent” funds under the IRA should he ascend to the Oval Office, again, “To further defeat inflation, my plan will terminate the Green New Deal, which I call the Green New Scam,” the former president said before the Economic Club of New York in September.

Two years ago, the Biden administration signed the IRA, allowing hundreds of renewable energy companies to benefit from $369 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for clean energy. In the previous year, the Biden administration passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), with the act authorizing $1.2 trillion in spending for transportation and infrastructure; $43 billion (not including loans and tax incentives) in flexible spending could be used for battery manufacturing, retooling auto industry facilities, retraining and rehiring existing auto workers and grid updates while more than $7.5 billion will support the buildout of EV infrastructure.

Recently, Politico provided estimates that companies have announced plans to build or expand an estimated 555 manufacturing facilities thanks to generous IRA benefits of the IRA. But here’s the kicker: less than half of the 230 facilities that were slated to commence by the end of 2024 will beat the deadline, meaning that over 60% of IRA investments will be at the mercy of the Trump administration. With the GOP set to take both the Senate and the House, a unified Congress could spell doom for Biden’s signature bill.

The IRA has so far survived Republican-led attempts to repeal major parts, but could be under serious threat under a new Trump administration. Trump may lack the power to unilaterally roll back the climate law, but certainly could make its "implementation more difficult", as Shannon Rinehart, portfolio manager at Threadneedle, has pointed out. His administration could hobble the climate law through executive action by revising treasury department rules yet to be finalized, holding back some of its loans and grants and/or tightening limits on tax credits.

“Some parts of the IRA will receive more pushback from Republicans than others. We’re trying to steer clear of those parts,” Chris Berkouwer, portfolio manager at Robeco, reported. According to Berkouwer, investments aimed at improving the grid infrastructure are likely to receive bipartisan support; however, whereas Democrats might want the grid strengthened to cater for the rollout of more renewables, Republicans are likely to favor the renewed infrastructure serving coal and gas power generation utilities.

Up until recently, investments dedicated to the booming electric vehicle sector appeared to be in Trump’s crosshairs. Last year at a Detroit rally, Trump attacked the sector, claiming that EVs are “too expensive” and “don’t go far enough”. He, however, appears to have softened his anti-EV stance after cozying up to Tesla Inc. (NASDAQ:TSLA) CEO, Elon Musk. The auto industry has already announced more than $100 billion in EV investments, creating more than 100,000 American jobs. TSLA has jumped nearly 20% since Wednesday, with Bank of America saying Trump's plan to relax environmental rules will likely provide an incentive to other automakers to slow down their EV ramps even further.

That said, it’s likely that Trump might face some pushback from his own party if he attempts to do away with the IRA: in September, 18 Republicans in the House of Representatives signed a letter to Speaker Mike Johnson, asking him not to work towards “prematurely repealing energy tax credits” supporting new IRA investments--the majority of which have gone to Republican states.’Red States have actually benefited more from the IRA than blue states: A 2022 report by Climate Central revealed that Iowa and Oklahoma, some of the ‘reddest’ states with Republican governors and majority Republican state legislatures, lead the nation in wind power production; California and Florida are the largest producers of solar power while Texas is a leader in both solar and wind power. The report says that state and federal incentives are a big reason for the rapid growth of renewable energy generation.


By Alex Kimani for Oilprice.com

 Calgary

Tariffs and 'drill, baby, drill' — What Trump 2.0 could mean for Alberta's energy sector

Trump tariffs are the 'weaponization of uncertainty,' says trade analyst

A man in a blue suit with a large red tie stands in front of an American flag. a separate image shows Pumpjacks in front of a sunset.
Former U.S. president Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, holds a campaign rally at Macomb Community College in Warren, Mich., last Friday. The image on the right shows pumpjacks at well heads near Calgary on May 12, 2024. (Brian Snyder/Reuters, Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press)

With Donald Trump set to become the next president of the United States, some market watchers are feeling uneasy about what the Republican leader's "America First," protectionist trade policies will do to Alberta's economy.

Among the most concerning policies is Trump's proposed worldwide minimum 10 per cent tariff on imported goods and the potential implications for Alberta's energy sector.

In Trump's victory speech, the former president vowed to "govern by a simple motto: Promises made, promises kept." 

It's something Al Salazar, head of macro oil and gas research at Enverus Intelligence Research, says will keep oil market forecasters on their toes for the next four years. 

"The one thing that's the big cloud that's hanging over in terms of uncertainty is Trump's proposed tax on all imports, anything between 10 to 20 per cent," said Salazar, who is also the Calgary Eyeopener energy columnist.

"It kind of doesn't make sense to tax crude imports into the U.S. because that's going to push up gasoline prices and be inflationary for U.S. citizens. But on the other hand … in terms of supply chain, that is really concerning."


LISTEN | Al Salazar on two terms of Trump: 
Our business columnist, Al Salazar, on the energy sector's view of this morning's election news.

Salazar believes anything that could tilt a trade advantage toward the U.S. is something that warrants concern in the Canadian energy sector. 

"In a way, this election is all about change, and certainly we've got change coming."

Virtually all of Canada's crude oil was exported to the United States last year, with 87 per cent — or 3.3 million barrels per day — of that oil coming from Alberta, according to data from the Canadian Energy Regulator. 

This year's completion of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion from Alberta to the West Coast has improved Canada's access to Asian markets, but much of the oil unloaded from the pipeline is being shipped by tanker to California.

With Alberta being the largest crude producer in the country, some say this new era of Trump could mean the province's economy is particularly exposed to what's going on in the States. Trump also promised during his campaign that it would be "drill, baby, drill" on Day 1 of his presidency. 

"At this point, we're quite concerned about what the potential impacts to Canada and to Alberta, specifically, could be, knowing that we're very trade exposed," said Ruhee Ismail-Teja, vice-president of policy and external affairs for the Calgary Chamber of Commerce.

"In fact, $3.6 billion every day crosses between the Canada-U.S. border, so any change in government will have massive implications for the Canadian economy."

With the presidential election still resonating across the globe, Ismail-Teja says it's challenging to predict how a second Trump term could be felt in Alberta, as how these proposals would look in practice isn't exactly clear yet.

"There's conversations about whether Canada's oil and gas sector might receive a carve-out from tariffs because the impact to the U.S. would be so significant in a negative way if they did follow through with that promise," she said. 

  • How will the U.S. election affect politics in Canada in the next federal election? That's the topic of CBC Radio's Ask Me Anything segment this week on Cross Country Checkup. Leave a question here and they may read it on the Nov. 10 show!

However, one trade expert says there's no reason to believe Canadian energy wouldn't be impacted.

Carlo Dade, the director of trade and trade infrastructure with the Canada West Foundation, says he believes Trump's proposal for a global baseline tariff doesn't seem to make any exceptions for oil and gas.

"This is not a 10 per cent tariff … it is the weaponization of uncertainty," he told CBC Radio host Kathleen Petty on Wednesday, adding the uncertainty is to force jobs back to the U.S. across the economy. 

"This is a threat unlike anything we've ever faced before."

Because of how the former president will now be surrounded by a different team and the implications of the MAGA think-tank that is Project 2025, Dade foresees a very different environment for a second Trump term. Although it's still early days, Dade says it's important to consider the "substance" behind what Trump says. 

Trump could bump oil prices

But not everyone agrees four more years of Trump would have negative impacts on Alberta's energy sector. 

"I think a Trump presidency is bullish for the price of oil," said Eric Nuttall, partner and senior portfolio manager at Ninepoint Partners in Toronto.

"The reason I believe that is that, domestically, the 'drill, baby, drill' narrative is toothless, meaning no president can influence the rate of production growth."

Nuttall doesn't believe Trump will place tariffs on Canadian oil, as the U.S. energy industry is heavily reliant on Canadian heavy oil imports. 

"They would be shooting themselves in the foot were they to make their very own feedstock more expensive," he said. 

He anticipates Trump to be hawkish on enforcing existing U.S. sanctions on oil-producing Iran, which could ultimately trim global supplies.

After winning several battleground states, Donald Trump, flanked by family and supporters, gave a celebratory speech in which he vowed to 'bring every ounce of' energy and fight to the job of president.

Calgary-based wealth portfolio manager Martin Pelletier also thinks Trump's presidency could drive up oil prices. 

However, he says it's still too early to determine whether Trump's win is a net positive or a net negative for Alberta, specifically.

"I do worry that if we don't take a professional stance on dealing with an uncertainty around the Trump administration, and if we use it for political means for that government to stay in power, then it will have economic consequences," Pelletier said. 

Overall, Ismail-Teja, with the Calgary Chamber of Commerce, says because the U.S. will prioritize restoring "anything that can be brought back to the U.S.," manufacturing is naturally at the top of that list, which would likely affect the energy industry in particular. 

"As much as we're collaborators, we're also competitors."

She anticipates there will need to be plenty of work ahead for different levels of government in the two countries to establish solid relationships. 

"We know that while President Trump has been in before, there's a significant turnover of officials around him," she said. 

"At the state level, there will be a huge importance for provincial and federal governments to have state-to-province relationships and really communicate the importance of the Canadian economy to America."


LISTEN | How the upcoming Trump administration might impact trade: 
What might another Trump Administration mean for trade relations between the US and Alberta?

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith acknowledged the relationship between Alberta and the U.S. in a post to X, formerly known as Twitter, where she also congratulated Trump and his running mate JD Vance on their victory.

"Alberta and the United States have a long standing trading partnership that has strengthened both economies and improved quality of life in both jurisdictions," reads the post. 

Smith also said Alberta is the single largest supplier of crude oil and natural gas to the United States, making it a critical part of North American energy security.

The premier said she looks forward to reinforcing those ties with the new administration.

Alberta has to 'change the language'

Dade, with the Canada West Foundation, isn't so sure shining a spotlight on the province's energy exports to the U.S. is the kind of thing that helps Alberta.

"If you were to tell JD Vance that you're exporting oil and gas to Ohio, his first reaction is, 'Don't we have oil and gas here? Why do we need Canadians? You're taking jobs from Americans.' You have to change the language," said Dade. 

"What we've been using for decades will now do us harm."


LISTEN | How Alberta will fare in a second Trump term: 
Canada has been told to 'buckle up', but what about Alberta? We discuss the potential impact of a second Trump Presidency on Alberta, including on our oil and gas sector.

In order for Alberta to survive this next round of the Trump administration and to understand the "economic populist wing of the MAGA movement," he says the province needs to distinguish itself from the rest of Canada and China, as well as emphasize that Alberta's oil and gas industry exports jobs to the United States. 

Agriculture, too

Alberta's largest export market is the U.S., according to government data from 2023. That year, exports increased by just over 20 per cent from 2022 to reach $8.9 billion, and oil and gas isn't the province's only industry that's impacted by what happens south of the border. 

In 2023, Alberta exports of agricultural and food products set a fourth consecutive record at $17.9 billion, up 10.5 per cent from the year prior.

James Rajotte, the Alberta senior representative to the U.S., told CBC Radio's Alberta at Noon that Albertans have to be concerned about any potential tariffs on any Canadian products. 

"We have to realize we're in a different era now. Both parties are more protectionist, both parties are more focused on the United States returning manufacturing, especially jobs, to the U.S.," said Rajotte on Wednesday.

"We are not in the Ronald Reagan free-trade era anymore, and we really have to adjust to that."

Citi Sees Oil Prices Dropping to $60 Under Trump

By Irina Slav - Nov 07, 2024

Citi analysts forecast lower oil prices next year due to potential import tariffs and increased oil production encouraged by the incoming US administration.

The new administration's influence on OPEC+ and domestic energy policies could further impact oil prices.

While pro-growth energy policies might lead to higher production, they could also depress prices due to increased supply.



Citi analysts have forecast that Brent crude would average $60 per barrel next year driven lower by the energy policies of the incoming U.S. administration.

The bank noted import tariffs and higher oil production as the driving factors behind this forecast for oil prices.

Analysts also suggested Trump may use his “influence on OPEC+” to convince the group to bring supply back, including production and oil from floating storage. They also said Trump’s presidency could lead to a decline in geopolitical tensions, further contributing to lower prices.

At the same time, energy policies at home could see stronger government support for oil and gas investments, potentially boosting production, Citi analysts also wrote, as quoted by Reuters. “Still, despite the more supportive oil and gas agenda, its immediate impact on physical oil markets is likely to be limited,” they said

“Conceptually, the impact of a potential second Trump term on oil prices is ambiguous, with some short-term downside risk to Iran oil supply ... and thus upside price risk,” Goldman Sachs analysts wrote in a note earlier in the week, before the elections. They did add, however, that there was downside risk to demand and prices stemming from Trump’s stated trade policies.


There is also the question of prices and production growth motivation because pro-growth energy policies may well lead to more production but they would also depress prices and that, in turn, would lead to lower production as has happened since the oil and gas industry came into being.

“If the Trump administration opens up federal leases for oil and gas, Federal lands would get 25% per barrel of revenues. You will have a lot of trouble finding an oil company that can make money at $52.50 per barrel with what they have left from a $70 barrel,” Smead Capital president Cole Smead told CNBC.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com



Barrick sees deal with Mali over new mining code before year-end


By Divya Rajagopal and Felix NjiniNovember 7, 2024

Souvenir luggage tags are displayed at a Barrick Gold Corp at the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada (PDAC) annual conference in Toronto, Ontario, Canada March 1, 2020. 
REUTERS/Chris Helgren/File Photo 

Summary

Companies
Barrick has offered 55% economic interest in Loulo-Gounkoto

CEO says talks with Mali's government continue

Government has demanded alleged unpaid taxes, sources say

TORONTO, Nov 7 (Reuters) - Barrick Gold (ABX.TO), opens new tab, the world's No. 2 gold miner, is confident of concluding talks for a new mining code with Mali's junta-led government before the end of the year, CEO Mark Bristow told Reuters on Thursday.
Talks between Toronto-based Barrick and the authorities in Mali on how to implement new mining rules governing its Loulo-Gounkoto mining complex, one the biggest gold mines in Mali, have dragged on for months.

an country is demanding about $500 million in unpaid taxes from Barrick, Reuters has reported, citing sources, as the government tries to wring more income from the sector, which is dominated by gold miners, to shore up state revenues as prices of the precious metal rally.

Mali has been negotiating with miners in the country on how to apply new mining rules in which the state and local private investors must own a 35% interest in mining projects, up from 20% currently.

Bristow said Barrick had offered Mali 55% of the economic benefits from the Loulo-Gounkoto operation, in a deal that he said bore similarities to an agreement the miner reached with Tanzania about five years ago. The CEO declined to comment on Mali's cash demands and allegations of unpaid back taxes and fines.

"We are prepared to give them more of the economic benefits," Bristow said in an interview. "The key is you don't want to damage the long lasting value of the asset. The biggest sufferer will be the country, and any increase in basic cost has an impact on how long the projects will run."

While Barrick and Canadian miner B2Gold (BTO.TO), opens new tab are among Mali's biggest gold producers, they have recently faced pressure from the junta over unpaid back taxes following an audit of the sector.

B2Gold said in statement on Thursday it made a one-time tax payment of $30 million after an audit and the company would also advance an output expansion at its flagship Fekola mine.

B2Gold said in September the company would keep its 80% stake in Fekola, while the government holds the remainder.

While Barrick has offered a larger share of "economic benefits" to Mali, the company would continue to "carry the capital risk which we have always done", Bristow said, adding that talks were ongoing.

The CEO reiterated that Barrick would target to grow 30% organically, without the need for M&A, which would give it space to look at "external opportunities for the few (deals) that the company may need to have value creation criteria".