Archive for Energy

Brent: Slumps on easing Middle East fears

By ForexTime 

  • Brent ↓ 6% this week
  • Fundamentals swing in favour of bears
  • Watch out for US/China data and EIA report
  • Technical levels: $77.90, $75 & $73

Oil benchmarks have been hammered this week, shedding over 6% thanks to potent fundamental forces.

  • The global commodity stumbled into Monday’s session after China’s highly anticipated Finance Ministry briefing failed to impress investors.
  • OPEC’s monthly oil market report rubbed salt into the wound as the cartel cut its demand forecast this year for the third time in a row.  
  • But the knockout blow for oil was delivered on Tuesday morning following reports that Israel may avoid striking Iran’s crude infrastructure.

With this development easing concerns over wider conflict and major supply disruptions, oil was left under the mercy of bears this week:

  • WTI: -6.6%
  • Brent: – 6.1%

Despite these heavy losses, oil prices are still up month-to-date and may see more volatility this week due to ongoing developments in China and US rate expectations.

This brings our attention to key US and China data scheduled near the end of the week.

  • Thursday, October 17th: US retail sales, initial jobless claims, EIA data
  • Friday, October 18th: China GDP, retail sales, industrial production, home prices

Over the past few weeks, confidence has improved in the US economic outlook thanks to better-than-expected data. If this translates to improving oil demand, the global commodity could receive a boost.

Still, US crude inventories have been rising over the past two weeks raising questions about demand. The latest EIA data on Thursday has the potential to move oil prices.

But it’s all about the data dump from China on Friday which could provide fresh insight into the health of the world’s largest energy consumers. Ultimately, a strong set of figures from China may boost optimism over the demand outlook – supporting oil prices as a result.

Looking at the technicals…

Prices are under intense pressure on the daily charts with Brent respecting a bearish channel.

There have been consistently lower lows and lower highs while the MACD trades to the downside. However, daily support can be seen around the $75.00 level.

  • Sustained weakness $75,00 could send prices back toward $73,00, $70.80 and $68.80.
  • Should $73.00 prove reliable support, this could trigger a rebound toward the 21-day SMA at $75.00 and $77.90.

Brent 3


Forex-Time-LogoArticle by ForexTime

ForexTime Ltd (FXTM) is an award winning international online forex broker regulated by CySEC 185/12 www.forextime.com

The Energy Bull Has Returned

Source: Michael Ballanger (10/7/24)

Michael Ballanger of GGM Advisory Inc. takes a look at the energy market, and shares his thoughts on junior miners. 

Last week, I decided to write about the fiscal bazooka engaged by Chinese President Xi Jinping that sent Chinese equities into a vertical moon rocket with relative strength for the major indices, hitting an all-time record at 91. From David Tepper to Louis Gave, the China bulls are now stampeding with the ferocity of the spooked herd while short sellers bleeding from the eye sockets and hair ablaze are covering with unfathomable urgency.

The move by the Chinese central bank to dive headlong into an easing cycle follows the past two years of pain as the real estate market has stagnated under the weight of oversupply and bubbly consumer attitudes. Overproduction in the EV sector has left inventories overflowing in both unsold units and the age of the fleet, as vast numbers of rotting vehicles are sitting in car lots around the country. Something had to be done, and it was as if Xi Jinping took aim and pulled the trigger.

Initially, the advance in Chinese equities was celebrated by only the bravado-laden diehard contrarians who had been buying large-cap Chinese companies at eight times cash flow with 75% of market cap in cash, similar to January 2023 when the Japanese equity markets suddenly caught a bid on the basis of their valuations relative to the over-owned, over-priced U.S. counterparts that have benefitted from a constant, never-ending combination of fiscal and monetary stimulus all designed to juice stock prices and maintain the asymmetrical wealth-effect so critical for sustained economic growth.

However, what few were talking about was the ancillary impact the Chinese stimulus move had on a number of other sectors. Copper, which I identified in early August as a “Buy” under $4.00/lb. (after exiting in May) was well on its way to test the 100-dma at around $4.40, but it received an enormous shot of adrenalin with the news that China had suddenly gone “full-Draghi,” deciding to do “whatever it takes” to get the economy back on track.

Copper is now ahead over 20% from those “carry trade crash” lows now cruising with a gale force Chinese tailwind behind it.

However, the sleeper in the China stimulus narrative is the one commodity that drives all economic growth — oil — and whether or nor it is politically correct, it is not going away anytime soon. Subscribers were sent an email alert last Tuesday before the opening suggesting that I was revisiting the “energy trade.”

In that email alert, I wrote:

The ETF that covers the big multinational oil & gas producers is the Energy Select Sector SPDR Fund (XLE:NYSEARC) that has traded as low as $78.98 last January and at USD $82.34 a couple of weeks ago. As can be seen from the chart, there have been three major “buy signals” since the lows of last month, with MACD, MFI, and now TRIX all kicking into gear. Accordingly, I want to take advantage of today’s pullback and take a starting position in the XLE. I have traded this ETF before, and when it moves, it moves fast with big gaps in price, and while it is not always easy to nail down the exact lows, sentiment numbers and trader positioning are about as dismal as one can get for any specific sector.

The chart shown below was from the Monday close at $87.80, and my instructions were that bids at $87.00 might be successful since oil was called lower for the Tuesday opening. The XLE opened at $87.03, traded down to $86.90 after which oil executed a massive reversal to the upside taking XLE to a closing price of $89.80.

There are a great many oil bears out there that want to see fossil fuels outlawed and ICE’s outright banned. I consider those attitudes as archaic and ill-sighted as the electrification transition will take decades to complete. Thinking that the world can survive and grow without the use of oil is delusional.

I am not a moralist; I am a financial opportunist. I pore over charts and essays and financial statements day after day to try to find what I believe are legitimate chances to profit, with not even the slightest consideration of what the company may or may not be doing to “save the planet.” I recall one afternoon driving home from hockey practice in 1962, listening to the CBC newscaster discussing relations between JFK and Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev regarding nuclear disarmament.

Frightened by what I was hearing, I asked my dad if “mankind” was going to bring about the end of the world. My dad responded with an answer I can never forget. He said, “Son, “mankind” will never bring about the end of the world. It might bring about the end of “mankind but it will never cause the end of the world.”

The egotism of these moralists who preach about carbon credits, global pollution, and every imaginable ecological sin committed by Big Oil or Big Nuclear, or the military-industrial complex is beyond maddening. Watching the student body of a university lying in front of cars, trucks, and buses as a protest to the petroleum industry takes me to a place that I won’t even mention.

I was one of those poor slobs during the Arab oil embargo of 1973-1974, sitting behind the wheel of a 1965 Ford Custom while in a 30-car line-up waiting for a chance to fill the tank up, which was running on fumes. It was not a fun time.

Another name I now own is a fascinating little junior from the Alberta oil patch called HHemisphere Energy Corp. (HME:TSX.V), which I bought last Tuesday. Paying a 5% dividend, the company uses a Polymer-flooding technique to enhance oil recovery from pools in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

They have been growing production systematically since 2017 and had a record year in 2023 and expect even better for 2024.

It is a perfect addition to a mining-centric portfolio and delivers diversification with an enviable income stream.

Gold and Silver

Gold put in a decent week, and up until around 11:00 am this morning, after the traders had a couple of hours to mull over the jobs report, silver made a very brief sojourn into the new 52-week high ground before coming under the merciless wrath of the bullion bank behemoths that decided to crush the breakout with undeniable conviction and send it down from an $.80 advance to a $0.07 loss on the day.

The silver bugs were collectively disheartened and summarily vanquished as they always are whenever they start to trot out the champagne flutes, cymbals, and pompoms. I am positive about the inevitability of a silver breakout, but it will be led by gold and copper, the two primary drivers of the bull market in the metals. While gold is being driven higher by that constant and persistent central bank bid, copper is being driven by a rapidly approaching structural deficit that is going to disrupt the global flow of everything because copper is found in everything.

Housing, electronics, medicine, and a myriad of other products and industries that rely on copper for its universal application. Silver, while also used in a broad spectrum of industrial applications, is primarily driven by the retail crowd ever seeking a “poor man’s gold” and, as such, rarely winds up being owned but rather rented with an ownership horizon far shorter than either gold or copper.

That explains the volatility in the silver market and why it is that the bullion bank traders find it so much easier to bat silver around whenever they choose while rarely daring to try the same with gold and never trying it with a market as wide and expansive as copper. That said, there will be a point in time and soon when silver will overtake both gold and copper and assume a leadership role, which will make the silver bugs giddy with “I-told-you-so” excitement as it grabs the reins and vaults into the lead, grabbing headlines in every financial publication and two-bit tout sheet across the globe.

The silver bugs will all rejoice in their final and ultimate vindication of owning one of the worst-acting metals of the past four years, and while I will be an owner of silver when that occurs, I shall not be mired in self-adulation because, at the point in the metals cycle where silver grabs all of the headlines, it is also the terminus of the move in the metals.

Every metals bull market ends with the silver bugs shaking their fists at the world, and when that occurs, as happened in 1980 and 2011, I want to be in full liquidation mode of the more speculative pieces in my metals portfolio and moving to hedge the “never-sell” portions that are intractable items for the financial future.

This is why I have always wanted gold to lead the pack slowly, quietly, and methodically, as it has since 2020, correcting and advancing with higher highs and higher lows. I never want to see CNBC “Guest Commentators” voicing their opinions on a gold market that has been “LIMIT UP” for three straight days because once the prey comes out of the brush and into the broad daylight, it becomes an enviable target.

Near-term, gold prices are due for a correction. The bearish indicators all line up after RSI moved into overbought extremes in late September. Unlike last April when I tried to trade the correction, I will simply stand aside and let the market work off the overbought condition and try to time the pullback so I can be leveraged properly into new highs by year-end.

For now, no new buys in the bigger names, but the juniors are still ridiculously “cheap.”

Stocks

Friday’s NFP report showed a blow-out increase in the number of new jobs, sending the CNBC cheerleaders into a full-on feeding frenzy as the stocks took aim at all-time highs. The cheering centered around “good news” on the economy being “good news” for stocks, and despite the bond market taking it on the chin, when one lifted the hood and looked into the engine room, all one saw was a bunch of new government jobs and a “wages paid” number that set off the inflationary alarm bells with vigor.

However, the bulls are carrying the day but with the Middle East on fire and the REPO and SOFR markets starting to sweat bullets (i.e. liquidity drying up), I will remain fully-hedge until at least the end of the month.

Rising wages, rising oil, rising gold and rising 10-year yields are never earmarks of a risk-free equities environment. Caution is warranted.

 

Important Disclosures:

  1. Michael Ballanger: I, or members of my immediate household or family, own securities of: All. I determined which companies would be included in this article based on my research and understanding of the sector.
  2. Statements and opinions expressed are the opinions of the author and not of Streetwise Reports, Street Smart, or their officers. The author is wholly responsible for the accuracy of the statements. Streetwise Reports was not paid by the author to publish or syndicate this article. Streetwise Reports requires contributing authors to disclose any shareholdings in, or economic relationships with, companies that they write about. Any disclosures from the author can be found  below. Streetwise Reports relies upon the authors to accurately provide this information and Streetwise Reports has no means of verifying its accuracy.
  3.  This article does not constitute investment advice and is not a solicitation for any investment. Streetwise Reports does not render general or specific investment advice and the information on Streetwise Reports should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her personal financial adviser and perform their own comprehensive investment research. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports’ terms of use and full legal disclaimer. Streetwise Reports does not endorse or recommend the business, products, services or securities of any company.

For additional disclosures, please click here.

Michael Ballanger Disclosures

This letter makes no guarantee or warranty on the accuracy or completeness of the data provided. Nothing contained herein is intended or shall be deemed to be investment advice, implied or otherwise. This letter represents my views and replicates trades that I am making but nothing more than that. Always consult your registered advisor to assist you with your investments. I accept no liability for any loss arising from the use of the data contained on this letter. Options and junior mining stocks contain a high level of risk that may result in the loss of part or all invested capital and therefore are suitable for experienced and professional investors and traders only. One should be familiar with the risks involved in junior mining and options trading and we recommend consulting a financial adviser if you feel you do not understand the risks involved.

Brent Crude Oil Prices Rise Amid Geopolitical Tensions

By RoboForex Analytical Department 

Brent crude oil prices climbed to 74.55 USD per barrel by Wednesday, marking a significant increase driven by escalating geopolitical tensions in the Middle East. The previous session saw prices surge by over 2% as fears grew over potential crude oil shortages due to the intensifying conflict in the region, particularly with Iran’s heightened involvement.

Iran, a key member of OPEC, holds substantial influence over global oil supplies. Its assertive stance in the Middle East conflict raises concerns about disruptions in energy exports, which could tighten the global oil market and push prices higher.

Mixed market sentiments

Despite the upward pressure from geopolitical factors, the overall sentiment in the oil market remains mixed. One of the dampening factors is the weak demand from China, the world’s largest oil importer. China’s sluggish economic indicators have limited the potential for a sustained recovery in oil prices, as reduced industrial activity translates to lower energy consumption.

Adding to the complex market dynamics, the American Petroleum Institute (API) reported that US crude oil inventories decreased by 1.5 million barrels during the week. This decline was less than the anticipated drop of 2.1 million barrels, marking the second consecutive weekly decrease but suggesting that demand may not be as robust as expected.

Furthermore, the appreciating US dollar has not yet significantly impacted crude oil prices but could do so in the future. Typically, a stronger dollar makes oil more expensive for holders of other currencies, potentially reducing global demand and applying downward pressure on prices.

Technical analysis of Brent crude oil

On the H4 chart, Brent crude found support at 69.90 USD, forming an upward wave targeting the 75.50 USD level. After reaching this point, a correction back to 72.66 USD is possible. Subsequently, there is potential for a new bullish wave extending to 78.20 USD, which serves as a local target. The MACD indicator technically supports this scenario; its signal line is below zero but trending sharply upwards, indicating increasing bullish momentum.

On the H1 chart, Brent broke above the 72.66 USD level and reached a local target at 75.30 USD. A consolidation range is expected to form below this level. A corrective move back to 72.66 USD (retesting from above) is possible, potentially leading to a downward exit from the consolidation. Once this correction is completed, the price may resume upward towards 75.50 USD, the initial target. The Stochastic oscillator technically confirms this Brent outlook, with its signal line below the 80 level and preparing to decline, suggesting a short-term correction before further gains.

Conclusion

The interplay of escalating geopolitical tensions and mixed economic signals continues to influence Brent crude oil prices. While concerns over supply disruptions due to Middle Eastern conflicts push prices upward, weak demand from China and inventory data from the US temper this rise. Additionally, the strengthening of the US dollar could impact global oil demand in the near future. Traders and investors should closely monitor these factors, as they will likely contribute to continued volatility in the oil market.

 

Disclaimer

Any forecasts contained herein are based on the author’s particular opinion. This analysis may not be treated as trading advice. RoboForex bears no responsibility for trading results based on trading recommendations and reviews contained herein.

Brent: Slips into Q4 on supply fears

By ForexTime 

  • Brent ↓17% in Q3
  • OPEC+ JMMC, EIA & NFP in focus
  • Over past year US NFP triggered ↑ 0.4% & ↓ 1.9%
  • Key level of interest – $70.80

The past few months have been rough and rocky for oil benchmarks.

Crude and Brent shed over 16% in Q3 due to expectations around OPEC+ bringing back production while a slowdown in China rubbed salt into the wound.

Brent monthly

Oil has already entered October on the back foot, falling 1% thanks to the bearish market sentiment.

Many forces are set to influence prices, ranging from China’s stimulus plans, a return of Libya’s oil production, ongoing geopolitical tensions, and bets around lower US interest rates.

This potent cocktail may translate to significant price swings in Q4.

Regarding Libya, the producer is preparing to restore output after a month-long shutdown. This is likely to fuel concerns over supply at a time when OPEC+ may move ahead with planned production increases in December.

The OPEC+ Joint Ministerial Monitoring Committee meeting on Wednesday 2nd October is expected to conclude with no policy changes. However, any hints of further delays to the planned production increase beyond December may support oil.

 

Also, watch out for the EIA data on Wednesday and US jobs report on Friday which could inject oil benchmarks with more volatility.

As covered in our week ahead report, the US jobs report has the potential to impact Fed cut cuts.

Note: Lower interest rates could stimulate economic growth, which fuels oil demand. Lower interest rates may also lead to a weaker dollar, which boosts oil which is priced in dollars.

Golden nugget: Over the past year, the US jobs report has triggered upside moves on Brent of as much as 0.4% or declines of 1.9% in a 6-hour window post-release.

 

Looking at the technicals…

Prices are under pressure on the daily charts with Brent respecting a bearish channel.

There have been consistently lower lows and lower highs while the MACD trades to the downside. However, daily support can be seen around the $70.80 level.

  • A solid breakdown and daily close below $70.80 could send prices back toward $68.80 and the levels not seen since December 2021at $67.00
  • Should $70.80 prove reliable support, this could trigger a rebound toward the 21-day SMA at $72.30 and $75.00.

brenttt98


Forex-Time-LogoArticle by ForexTime

ForexTime Ltd (FXTM) is an award winning international online forex broker regulated by CySEC 185/12 www.forextime.com

Uranium Co. Acquires Rio Tinto’s Wyoming Assets

Source: Joe Reagor (9/27/24)

Roth MKM raised its target price on Uranium Energy Corp. (UEC:NYSE AMERICAN) after its agreement to acquire Rio Tinto Plc.’s (RIO:NYSE; RIO:ASX; RIO:LSE; RTPPF:OTCPK) Wyoming uranium assets for US$175 million in cash.

Roth MKM analyst Joe Reagor, in a research report published on September 25, 2024, reiterated a Buy rating on Uranium Energy Corp. (UEC:NYSE AMERICAN) while raising the price target from US$9.00 to US$9.50. The report follows UEC’s announcement of its agreement to acquire Rio Tinto Plc.’s (RIO:NYSE; RIO:ASX; RIO:LSE; RTPPF:OTCPK) Wyoming uranium assets for US$175 million in cash.

Reagor highlighted the significance of the acquisition, stating, “We view this acquisition as an ideal bolt-on for UEC and as such, we are increasing our price target from US$9.00 to US$9.50.” The analyst noted that the acquired assets include the Red Desert project, the Green Mountain project, and the Sweetwater uranium plant, with historical resources of 175 million pounds of uranium.

The analyst emphasized the potential value creation from these assets, explaining, “Given the current resource base is historical, there is potential for UEC to generate shareholder value by converting these resources to a SK-1300 compliant resource, in our view.” Reagor also pointed out the potential for new discoveries and the significance of the Sweetwater plant, stating, “Ultimately, we believe the licensed capacity could be converted to ISR resin stripping and thereby provide UEC with significant production growth potential.”

Regarding UEC’s strategic plans, Reagor noted that the company intends to fund the transaction from its existing liquidity. He added, “We believe UEC’s purchase price for Rio’s Wyoming uranium assets reflects the historical nature of the resources and a lack of recent work on the projects. However, if UEC is able to update the resources to be SK-1300 compliant, they would be worth significantly more, in our opinion.”

Roth MKM’s valuation methodology for UEC is based on a sum-of-the-parts analysis. Reagor explained, “We assign a value of US$974.5 million to UEC’s ISR projects (US$8.5 per pound of resource including the historical resources from Uranium One), US$156 million for the potential to add 52 million additional pounds of ISR resources in Wyoming (US$3.00 per pound), US$246.4 million for its hard rock assets (US$6.00 per pound of resource), and US$69.3 million for the company’s exploration project Oviedo (US$3.00 per pound of the low end of the exploration target).”

The analyst added values for various facilities, assets, and investments, including “US$250 million to the company’s Hobson Facility, US$250 million for the Irigaray facility, US$1.2 billion for the former UEX assets, US$255 million for Roughrider, US$325 million for the Rio Wyoming assets (less US$175 million acquisition cost), and US$38.3 million for its titanium asset.”

In conclusion, Reagor’s sum-of-the-parts analysis led to a total valuation of US$3.9 billion, or US$9.45 per fully diluted share, rounded up to a price target of US$9.50. This represents a potential return of approximately 47% from the current price of US$6.45.

The report also outlined several risk factors, including political risk, commodity price risk, operational and technical risk, pre-revenue risk, and market risk, which could impact UEC’s ability to reach the price target.

 

Important Disclosures:

  1. As of the date of this article, officers and/or employees of Streetwise Reports LLC (including members of their household) own securities of Uranium Energy Corp.
  2.  This article does not constitute investment advice and is not a solicitation for any investment. Streetwise Reports does not render general or specific investment advice and the information on Streetwise Reports should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her personal financial adviser and perform their own comprehensive investment research. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports’ terms of use and full legal disclaimer. Streetwise Reports does not endorse or recommend the business, products, services or securities of any company.

For additional disclosures, please click here.

Disclosures for Roth MKM, Uranium Energy Corp., September 25, 2024

Regulation Analyst Certification (“Reg AC”): The research analyst primarily responsible for the content of this report certifies the following under Reg AC: I hereby certify that all views expressed in this report accurately reflect my personal views about the subject company or companies and its or their securities. I also certify that no part of my compensation was, is or will be, directly or indirectly, related to the specific recommendations or views expressed in this report.

Disclosures: Within the last twelve months, ROTH Capital Partners, or an affiliate to ROTH Capital Partners, has received compensation for investment banking services from Uranium Energy Corp.. ROTH makes a market in shares of Uranium Energy Corp. and as such, buys and sells from customers on a principal basis. Shares of Uranium Energy Corp. may be subject to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Penny Stock Rules, which may set forth sales practice requirements for certain low-priced securities.

ROTH Capital Partners, LLC expects to receive or intends to seek compensation for investment banking or other business relationships with the covered companies mentioned in this report in the next three months. The material, information and facts discussed in this report other than the information regarding ROTH Capital Partners, LLC and its affiliates, are from sources believed to be reliable, but are in no way guaranteed to be complete or accurate. This report should not be used as a complete analysis of the company, industry or security discussed in the report. Additional information is available upon request. This is not, however, an offer or solicitation of the securities discussed. Any opinions or estimates in this report are subject to change without notice. An investment in the stock may involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. Additionally, an investment in the stock may involve a high degree of risk and may not be suitable for all investors. No part of this report may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of ROTH. Copyright 2024. Member: FINRA/SIPC.

Rising electricity demand could bring Three Mile Island and other prematurely shuttered nuclear plants back to life

By Todd Allen, University of Michigan 

Constellation, an energy company that provides electricity and natural gas to customers in 16 states and Washington, announced on Sept. 20, 2024, that it plans to restore and restart Unit 1 at Three Mile Island, a nuclear plant near Middletown, Pennsylvania, that was shut down in 2019. Microsoft has signed a 20-year agreement to purchase electricity generated by the plant to offset power demand from its data centers in the mid-Atlantic region.

Three Mile Island was the site in 1979 of a partial meltdown at the plant’s Unit 2 reactor. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission calls this event “the most serious accident in U.S. commercial nuclear power plant operating history,” although only small amounts of radiation were released, and no health effects on plant workers or the public were detected. Unit 1 was not affected by the accident. University of Michigan nuclear engineering professor Todd Allen explains what restarting Unit 1 will involve, and why some other shuttered nuclear plants may also get new leases on life.

What is the history of TMI-1?

Three Mile Island Unit 1 is a large nuclear power station with the capacity to generate 837 megawatts of electricity – enough to power about 800,000 homes. It started commercial operations in 1974 and ran until September 2019.

After the accident at Unit 2 in 1979, Unit 1 was shut down for six years, until the operator at the time, Metropolitan Edison, demonstrated to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that it could operate the reactor safely.

Constellation closed Unit 1 down in 2019, even though the plant’s operating license had been extended through 2034 and it had no operational or safety problems. TMI-1 could not compete economically at that point with natural gas-fueled power plants because gas had become extremely cheap.

Pennsylvania also had a policy preference for increasing electricity generation from solar and wind power. The state legislature chose not to reclassify the plant as a carbon-free electricity source, which would have qualified it for state support.

The 1979 accident at Three Mile Island had broad, lasting effects on nuclear power regulation.

What is the reactor’s current condition?

Since the shutdown in 2019, the plant has sat idle. The NRC calls this status safe storage, or SAFSTOR. The plant is shut down, uranium fuel is removed from the reactor, and the facility is maintained in a safe, stable condition. Irradiated fuel is stored in large steel and concrete casks on a physically secured portion of the site, known as an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation.

In addition to the fuel, other materials in the plant are radioactive, such as structural channels that direct the cooling water during operation and the large vessel in which the reactor is housed. Radioactive decay occurs during the SAFSTOR period, reducing the plant’s radioactivity and making it easier to dismantle the plant later.

A half-dozen large cylindrical casks on a concrete pad.
The United States does not have a licensed long-term disposal site for spent nuclear fuel, so it is stored in large dry casks on-site at operating and closed reactors.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, CC BY

What will Constellation need to do to prepare the reactor to restart?

Constellation will need to ensure that it has enough fuel and sufficiently trained personnel. It also will have to ensure that the reactor’s components are still in a condition that allows for safe operation.

This will require detailed inspections and mandatory maintenance actions to ensure that all components are running correctly. In some cases, the company may need to install new equipment.

The exact work will depend on the results of inspections but could include upgrading or replacing the reactor’s major components, such as the turbine and associated electricity generator; large transformers that move the electricity from the reactor out to the grid; equipment used to cool the reactor during operation; and systems for controlling the plant during startup, shutdown and power generation.

As an analogy, imagine that you move to a city and stop driving your car for five years. When you decide to resume driving, you’d need to ensure you have gas, that your driver’s license is still valid and that all of the car’s components still operate correctly. It would probably need new oil, air in the tires, new filters and other replacement parts to run well.

A nuclear plant is much more complicated than a car, so the number of checks and verifications will take longer and cost more. Constellation expects to bring the restored plant online in 2028 at a projected cost of US$1.6 billion.

What will the NRC consider as it decides whether to relicense the reactor?

The agency needs to independently confirm Constellation has enough fuel and trained personnel, and that the plant can run safely. These checks must be approved by the commission before the plant can operate.

In my view, Constellation will need to show that the plant is in a condition to operate at the same levels of safety that existed there in September 2019 when the company terminated operations.

Do you expect other utilities to try this type of restoration at closed reactors?

Constellation is not the only utility considering restarting a nuclear plant. Holtec International, an energy technology company, bought the closed Palisades nuclear plant in southwest Michigan in 2022 with the intent to decommission it, but then the company decided to restore and reopen the plant.

That work is underway now. Recently, in its first major inspection at the plant, the NRC found a number of components that it said required more testing and repair work.

Wolverine Power Cooperative, a not-for-profit energy provider to rural communities across Michigan, plans to purchase electricity from the restored Palisades plant, with support from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Empowering Rural America program. Holtec is receiving support for restoring Palisades from the U.S. Department of Energy and the state of Michigan.

A third company, NextEra Energy, is considering restarting its Duane Arnold nuclear plant in Palo, Iowa. And others could follow. In the past decade, a dozen nuclear plants closed before the end of their licensed operating lives because they were having trouble competing economically. But with electricity demand rising, especially to power data centers and electric vehicles, some of those plants could also become candidates for reopening.The Conversation

About the Author:

Todd Allen, Professor of Nuclear Engineering & Radiological Sciences, University of Michigan

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

 

Brent Crude Oil Rebounds Amid Monetary Easing and Market Dynamics

By RoboForex Analytical Department

Brent crude oil has regained its upward momentum, climbing towards 73.63 USD, following a recent decline triggered by comments from US Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. In his statement, Powell indicated that the Fed would be cautious about further easing monetary conditions, emphasizing that the rate cut schedule should not be seen as a definitive plan for all future actions by the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC).

Despite these cautious remarks, the Fed’s recent decision to lower rates by 50 basis points is fundamentally seen as positive for the commodity market. Lower borrowing costs might stimulate economic demand and enhance interest in energy resources.

Concurrently, the latest data from the US Department of Energy showing a decrease in crude oil inventories by 1.63 million barrels—exceeding expectations of a 0.50 million barrel reduction—also supports bullish sentiments in the oil market. This stock reduction is especially significant as it indicates a robust demand backdrop.

Additionally, the market is closely monitoring potential increases in oil production by OPEC+ countries and the economic data coming from China, the world’s largest oil consumer. Recent weaker-than-expected economic indicators from China have cast some doubts on the sustained strength of oil demand.

The geopolitical situation in the Middle East remains a critical factor, with any escalation potentially impacting energy supply routes and market stability.

Technical analysis of Brent Crude Oil

The market has established a consolidation range around 72.00 USD for the further Brent forecast, with current fluctuations extending to a high of 73.73 USD and a low of 71.78 USD. Having found support at 71.78 USD, there is potential for the market to breach the upper boundary of 73.73 USD today. A successful break above this level could indicate a continuation of the growth trend towards 75.15 USD, possibly reaching up to 75.77 USD. The MACD indicator supports this bullish outlook, with the signal line below zero but pointing upwards, suggesting an imminent upward movement.

Today, Brent surpassed the 73.00 USD mark, continuing its ascent towards the target of 75.15 USD. Upon reaching this target, a retest of the 73.00 USD level from above may occur, potentially setting the stage for another upward wave towards 75.77 USD. The Stochastic oscillator, currently above 80, is poised for a temporary decline, indicating that a corrective phase could follow before further gains.

 

Disclaimer

Any forecasts contained herein are based on the author’s particular opinion. This analysis may not be treated as trading advice. RoboForex bears no responsibility for trading results based on trading recommendations and reviews contained herein.

Oil and gas communities are a blind spot in America’s climate and economic policies

By Noah Kaufman, Columbia University 

On a recent visit to Rangely, a small town in northwest Colorado, my colleagues and I met with the administrators of a highly regarded community college to discuss the town’s economy. Leaving the scenic campus, we saw families driving into the mountains in off-road vehicles, a favorite activity for this outdoors-loving community. With a median household income above US$70,000 and a low cost of living, Rangely does not have the signs of a town in economic distress.

But an existential risk looms over Rangely. The town is here because of an oil boom during World War II. Today, the oil and gas industry contributes over half of the county’s economic output.

Rangely is not unique in the United States, which is the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas. There are towns across the country that depend on the oil and gas industry for well-paying jobs and public revenues that fund their schools and other critical services.

A heavy dependence on any single industry is risky, and the oil industry is prone to booms and busts. But the economies of oil- and gas-dependent towns face a unique threat from global efforts to address the risks of climate change, which is fueled by the burning of oil and natural gas. Any serious strategy to halt global warming involves policies that will, over time, sharply reduce demand for all fossil fuels.

Early signs of this transformation can be seen in last year’s international agreement to “transition away from fossil fuels” and in the spread of electric vehicles that are starting to displace gasoline- and diesel-powered cars, trucks and buses.

As an economist who worked at the White House during the Obama administration and early Biden administration, I contributed to detailed strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to support communities in economic distress. But we did not have a plan to prepare oil and gas towns like Rangely for future economic challenges.

Why oil and gas towns are overlooked

Congress has prioritized support for small towns in recent legislation. However, oil- and gas-dependent towns were largely absent from these strategies for three primary reasons.

First is a perceived lack of urgency. The attention to a “just transition” as the nation moves away from fossil fuels has been disproportionately directed to coal-dependent communities. U.S. coal production has declined for 15 years, and a continued transition away from coal appears imminent and inevitable.

In contrast, U.S. production of oil and natural gas continues to grow. To be sure, some oil and gas communities are already struggling. But the widespread economic risks of a shift away from oil and gas may feel more like a problem for future decades.

Second, politicians downplay risks to oil and gas communities.

Most Republicans are not planning for a future decline in oil and gas production at all, and that includes many local politicians in oil and gas-dependent communities. For their part, most Democratic politicians prefer to focus on how climate action can be an engine of future economic growth. President Joe Biden likes to say, “When I think about climate change, I think jobs.”

He is not wrong to highlight the economic opportunities of climate solutions. But clean energy jobs rarely offer one-for-one replacements for the high-paying jobs in the oil and gas industries and the public revenues those industries bring local communities.

Third, economists’ policy toolbox is poorly suited to the challenges facing oil and gas communities.

Proposals to support local economic development commonly suggest targeting persistently distressed local economies with measures such as wage subsidies that have the potential to rapidly put more people to work.

A different prescription is needed for oil and gas communities, which are not generally struggling today. Over the 15-year period prior to the pandemic, the U.S. counties with oil and gas production experienced average annual GDP growth of 2.4% per year, compared with 1.9% nationwide.

Most oil and gas communities do not need economic stimulus policies that provide immediate relief. What they need are holistic economic development strategies that can cultivate new industries – building on their existing strengths – that will enable them to prosper into the future.

Solutions to help oil and gas towns prepare

Harvard economist Ricardo Hausmann compares the challenge of developing new economic capabilities to the game of Scrabble, where each additional letter enables the creation of more words. He cites the Finish economy as an example: It evolved from harvesting lumber to making tools that cut wood to producing automated cutting machines. From there, it evolved to sophisticated automated machines, including those used by global corporations such as telecommunications giant Nokia.

Such economic evolutions must be tailored to the characteristics of individual places. But the initial step is to recognize the problem and invest in solutions.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe is doing this in southwest Colorado. It devotes oil and gas revenues to a Permanent Fund, which promotes fiscal sustainability by ensuring the tribe’s assets are aligned with its long-term financial goals, and a Growth Fund that diversifies the tribe’s revenue sources by investing in a range of businesses.

At the national level, a recent National Academies panel proposed the creation of a federally chartered corporation to help communities facing acute economic threats, including a future decline in oil and gas. This corporation could provide funding for displaced workers, critical public infrastructure and programs that ensure access to economic opportunities.

Colorado’s state Office of Just Transition has started to serve this role. Currently, it focuses only on the transition away from coal, with the goals of helping communities develop new economic opportunities and helping workers transition to new jobs. But its mission could be expanded in the future. In fact, Rangely is already receiving some support due to coal closures nearby.

No one-size-fits-all solution

Small, rural towns like Rangely illustrate how oil- and gas-reliant regions will need unique strategies tailored to the strengths and limitations of individual places. No off-the-shelf playbook exists.

Our group of researchers who visited Rangely are part of the Resilient Energy Economies initiative, which was created by universities, research institutes and philanthropic organizations to ensure that policymakers have the information they need to help fossil fuel-dependent communities successfully navigate the energy transition.

The best time to build a more resilient economy is before a crisis arrives. Anyone familiar with the Bible – or Broadway – knows the story of Joseph, whose dreams foresaw seven years of abundance for Egypt followed by seven years of famine. The pharaoh acted on Joseph’s vision, using the boom to prepare for the bust.

The United States is experiencing abundant oil and gas production today. Policymakers know risks are coming. But so far, the country is failing to prepare communities for harder days to come.The Conversation

About the Author:

Noah Kaufman, Senior Research Scholar in Climate Economics, Columbia University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Brent remains under pressure: China and rapid growth in OPEC+ production to blame

By RoboForex Analytical Department

The oil market remains under pressure. A barrel of Brent oil declined to 71.80 USD by Tuesday. The commodity erased all early-week gains as fears of slowing demand in China outweighed the risk of energy shortages due to the storm in the Persian Gulf.

In recent weeks, market participants have been paying close attention and analysing the whole range of news related to China. The sluggish economic growth rate combined with the global strategy of transition to low-carbon raw materials is reducing China’s need for oil. This negatively impacts Chinese oil imports and naturally affects market prices as China is considered the world’s largest raw material consumer.

Investors are also confident that oil consumption in Europe and the US will reduce following the active driving season. Additionally, some oil refineries are going into maintenance mode, meaning they will not need as many raw materials as before. OPEC+ had previously postponed the planned increase in oil output for a couple of months. Yes, the market now has a respite but the likelihood of an imminent commodity oversupply is still looming over prices

Storm Francine is expected to intensify near Texas, US and could become a Category 2 storm, which means a hurricane threat. Some production facilities in Texas may be shut down until weather conditions improve.

Brent technical analysis

The BRENT H4 chart shows that the market has broken below the 74.96 level and completed a downward wave, reaching 70.50. A consolidation range could form at the current lows today. An upward breakout will open the potential for growth to 75.00 (testing from below). With a downward breakout, the range could expand to the local target of 69.69. This scenario is technically supported by the MACD indicator, with its signal line below the zero level at the lows and poised for growth.

The BRENT H1 chart shows that the market has reached the downward wave’s local target of 70.50. Today, the market is forming a consolidation range above this level. The range expanded up to 71.90 and down to 70.46. A breakout above the 71.90 level will open the potential for a corrective wave towards 75.00. With a breakout below 70.46, the range could expand downwards, with the wave continuing to 69.69. This scenario is technically supported by the Stochastic oscillator, whose signal line is below 20 and poised for growth.

 

Disclaimer

Any forecasts contained herein are based on the author’s particular opinion. This analysis may not be treated as trading advice. RoboForex bears no responsibility for trading results based on trading recommendations and reviews contained herein.

Oil and gas communities are a blind spot in America’s climate and economic policies

By Noah Kaufman, Columbia University 

On a recent visit to Rangely, a small town in northwest Colorado, my colleagues and I met with the administrators of a highly regarded community college to discuss the town’s economy. Leaving the scenic campus, we saw families driving into the mountains in off-road vehicles, a favorite activity for this outdoors-loving community. With a median household income above US$70,000 and a low cost of living, Rangely does not have the signs of a town in economic distress.

But an existential risk looms over Rangely. The town is here because of an oil boom during World War II. Today, the oil and gas industry contributes over half of the county’s economic output.

Rangely is not unique in the United States, which is the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas. There are towns across the country that depend on the oil and gas industry for well-paying jobs and public revenues that fund their schools and other critical services.

A heavy dependence on any single industry is risky, and the oil industry is prone to booms and busts. But the economies of oil- and gas-dependent towns face a unique threat from global efforts to address the risks of climate change, which is fueled by the burning of oil and natural gas. Any serious strategy to halt global warming involves policies that will, over time, sharply reduce demand for all fossil fuels.

Early signs of this transformation can be seen in last year’s international agreement to “transition away from fossil fuels” and in the spread of electric vehicles that are starting to displace gasoline- and diesel-powered cars, trucks and buses.

As an economist who worked at the White House during the Obama administration and early Biden administration, I contributed to detailed strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to support communities in economic distress. But we did not have a plan to prepare oil and gas towns like Rangely for future economic challenges.

Why oil and gas towns are overlooked

Congress has prioritized support for small towns in recent legislation. However, oil- and gas-dependent towns were largely absent from these strategies for three primary reasons.

First is a perceived lack of urgency. The attention to a “just transition” as the nation moves away from fossil fuels has been disproportionately directed to coal-dependent communities. U.S. coal production has declined for 15 years, and a continued transition away from coal appears imminent and inevitable.

In contrast, U.S. production of oil and natural gas continues to grow. To be sure, some oil and gas communities are already struggling. But the widespread economic risks of a shift away from oil and gas may feel more like a problem for future decades.

Second, politicians downplay risks to oil and gas communities.

Most Republicans are not planning for a future decline in oil and gas production at all, and that includes many local politicians in oil and gas-dependent communities. For their part, most Democratic politicians prefer to focus on how climate action can be an engine of future economic growth. President Joe Biden likes to say, “When I think about climate change, I think jobs.”

He is not wrong to highlight the economic opportunities of climate solutions. But clean energy jobs rarely offer one-for-one replacements for the high-paying jobs in the oil and gas industries and the public revenues those industries bring local communities.

Third, economists’ policy toolbox is poorly suited to the challenges facing oil and gas communities.

Proposals to support local economic development commonly suggest targeting persistently distressed local economies with measures such as wage subsidies that have the potential to rapidly put more people to work.

A different prescription is needed for oil and gas communities, which are not generally struggling today. Over the 15-year period prior to the pandemic, the U.S. counties with oil and gas production experienced average annual GDP growth of 2.4% per year, compared with 1.9% nationwide.

Most oil and gas communities do not need economic stimulus policies that provide immediate relief. What they need are holistic economic development strategies that can cultivate new industries – building on their existing strengths – that will enable them to prosper into the future.

Solutions to help oil and gas towns prepare

Harvard economist Ricardo Hausmann compares the challenge of developing new economic capabilities to the game of Scrabble, where each additional letter enables the creation of more words. He cites the Finish economy as an example: It evolved from harvesting lumber to making tools that cut wood to producing automated cutting machines. From there, it evolved to sophisticated automated machines, including those used by global corporations such as telecommunications giant Nokia.

Such economic evolutions must be tailored to the characteristics of individual places. But the initial step is to recognize the problem and invest in solutions.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe is doing this in southwest Colorado. It devotes oil and gas revenues to a Permanent Fund, which promotes fiscal sustainability by ensuring the tribe’s assets are aligned with its long-term financial goals, and a Growth Fund that diversifies the tribe’s revenue sources by investing in a range of businesses.

At the national level, a recent National Academies panel proposed the creation of a federally chartered corporation to help communities facing acute economic threats, including a future decline in oil and gas. This corporation could provide funding for displaced workers, critical public infrastructure and programs that ensure access to economic opportunities.

Colorado’s state Office of Just Transition has started to serve this role. Currently, it focuses only on the transition away from coal, with the goals of helping communities develop new economic opportunities and helping workers transition to new jobs. But its mission could be expanded in the future. In fact, Rangely is already receiving some support due to coal closures nearby.

No one-size-fits-all solution

Small, rural towns like Rangely illustrate how oil- and gas-reliant regions will need unique strategies tailored to the strengths and limitations of individual places. No off-the-shelf playbook exists.

Our group of researchers who visited Rangely are part of the Resilient Energy Economies initiative, which was created by universities, research institutes and philanthropic organizations to ensure that policymakers have the information they need to help fossil fuel-dependent communities successfully navigate the energy transition.

The best time to build a more resilient economy is before a crisis arrives. Anyone familiar with the Bible – or Broadway – knows the story of Joseph, whose dreams foresaw seven years of abundance for Egypt followed by seven years of famine. The pharaoh acted on Joseph’s vision, using the boom to prepare for the bust.

The United States is experiencing abundant oil and gas production today. Policymakers know risks are coming. But so far, the country is failing to prepare communities for harder days to come.The Conversation

About the Author:

Noah Kaufman, Senior Research Scholar in Climate Economics, Columbia University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.