[[{“value”:”

Geopolitical Issues and Oil

You won’t want to miss this episode of the Energy Realities Podcast, featuring David Blackmon, Tammy Nemeth, Irina Slav, and Stu Turley, as they discuss geopolitical issues and their impact on oil. With President Trump authorizing the strike on Iran’s Nuclear programs, what will happen to oil? Will Iran retaliate, or will terror cells open up globally? Will the Strait of Hormuz be shut down? Will Russia step in to help Iran, or will it focus on Ukraine?

Highlights of the Podcast

00:01 – Introduction

02:00 – Iranian Tensions & Strait of Hormuz Threat

09:00 – Market Reaction to Geopolitical Risk

12:00 – Strategic Tanker Movements & Sanctions Workarounds

16:00 – Oil Economics & Regime Stability

20:00 – Potential Global Impacts & China’s Role

23:00 – OPEC+ & Global Oil Supply Questions

25:00 – North American Energy Security Gaps

28:00 – Price Prediction Roundtable

36:22 – BREAKING: Saskatchewan to rebuild its coal fleets, despite federal regulations calling for its demise

40:22 – ArcelorMittal drops their plans for green steel in Germany due to high energy costs

43:01 – The Senate Caves on IRA Wind and Solar Subsidies

45:05 – Supreme Court Wades Into Louisiana’s Coastal Erosion Lawsuit Issue

48:17 – Global Banks Increase Fossil-Fuel Funding as Climate Pledges Crumble

50:49 – UK issues tougher environmental rules for new North Sea oil and gas drilling

53:12 – Has Net Zero Caught Up to the UK’s Don Quixote Green Energy Dream? Reconsidering North Sea Oil Amid Energy Crisis

54:37 – Trump gave Iran every chance to resolve this peacefully – Doug Sheridan

Irina Slav

International Author writing about energy, mining, and geopolitical issues. Bulgaria

David Blackmon

Principal at DB Energy Advisors, energy author, and podcast host.Principal at DB Energy Advisors, energy author, and podcast host.

Tammy Nemeth

Energy Consulting Specialist

Stuart Turley

President, and CEO, Sandstone Group, Podcast Host

Geopolitical Issues and Oil

Video Transcription edited for grammar. We disavow any errors unless they make us look better or smarter.

Stuart Turley [00:00:15] Good morning, everybody. It is 8 o’clock Central Time U.S. And welcome to the Energy Realities Podcast. My name is Stu Turley, president and CEO of the Sandstone Group. We’ve got a special edition of the Energy Reality Podcast. Let me introduce our wonderful team today. First around the corner is Irina Slav. Irina is a fantastic energy writer out of How are you today?

Irina Slav [00:00:45] I’m great, thank you. It’s summer proper, it’s hot, but we’re fine. It’s still alive and not roasted, I mean.

Stuart Turley [00:00:54] Well, and we’re still cooking with gas then, right?

Irina Slav [00:00:59] Oh yeah, yeah, we’re definitely still cooking with them.

Stuart Turley [00:01:01] All right. And then we have David Blackmon. I mean, not just a David Blackmon, but the David Blackmon. How are you this morning, Mr. Blackmon?

David Blackmon [00:01:11] I’m just fabulous. Absolutely wonderful. It’s a beautiful day in Texas. It’s hot as hell and, and bright skies, no rain in the forecast. Uh, I’m running up my water bill.

Stuart Turley [00:01:23] That I like. When you sit back and I love all of your work that you’re doing over on the energy absurdities substack, your X account, as well as I saw your daily caller and your Forbes this past week. Well done. You’ve been.

David Blackmon [00:01:42] Not much talking about these days.

Stuart Turley [00:01:44] Do what now?

David Blackmon [00:01:45] Not much to write about these

Stuart Turley [00:01:48] Holy smoke, just when you thought energy absurdity left the White House is still, we got more than we can handle the talking. And then we have the Dr. I mean, she is absolutely having a great time in Canada, somewhere in an undisclosed location in Canada. How are you today, Tammy?

Tammy Nemeth [00:02:11] I’m doing great, Stu, thanks so much. I’m on holiday, but you know, energy realities is so important. Gotta come.

Stuart Turley [00:02:21] Well, this is a huge topic today. And as we go through this topic, everybody, uh, kind of woke up to some very loud banging in Iran as we had some, uh Dipsy do the diving going on around the, the political landscape and to kind of set this discussion up a little bit, if anybody was not, uh aware, but we did have a, an attack on the Um, Operation Midnight Hammer took effect. And this is from, uh, David Blackmon had, had put this out on, uh. This is from the department of defense. President Trump was warned by the Iranians to not attack the nuclear sites from the U S bases in Iran or use assets in Iran. So president Trump Iraq. Iraq and President Trump responded and said, no problem. So he sent B-2 bombers from the United States. They flew 36 hours and he also sent Tomahawks out of the seas from submarines and did not avoid that discussion. And so we’ve had quite a stir of events. The Iranian parliament has approved to shut down the Strait of Hormuz. However, they’re waiting for their security council to approve that. Now, they have said over 15 times in the past since 1980 to say that in the past that they would go ahead and shut it down, but they have not shut it done in the past. So we’ve had some very high increases in oil prices coming back around and we’re currently at 73.57 down a little bit on WTI and 76.78 on Brent. And as we take a look at the Strait of Hormuz, What does this mean if it was actually shut down well? The numbers are staggering, uh, about 20 to 30%, whatever the number is. I have to get an exact number, but it’s, um, uh a percentage of 20% of the oil in the United of the world of the global market and 20% of the LNG market also goes through that straight. That is a significant chunk. Of oil and LNG from the UAE and all of the other Gulf states going through there. So David, what are your thoughts?

David Blackmon [00:05:30] Yeah. It’s, it’s a big chunk. I think it’s close to 30% of global all production daily. All production flows through the straight of our moves. It, uh, here’s some percentages, 88% for the Saudis, a hundred percent of cutter Kuwait and Iraq, 60% UAE oil flows through there. Oh, and a hundred percent of Iran’s crude or 90% actually, not quite a Flows through the Strait of Hormuz to get onto the global market every day. It’s a big deal. So several points about this. I doubt Iran has the capability to shut down the Straight of Hromuz today with the, I mean, we have an armada of U.S. Naval assets now in that region right now, and they would blow any Iranian naval ships out of the water immediately. China also has a naval presence there, three or four destroyers. They’re not going to let the strait shut down because something like, what is it, 85% of the all China imports on a daily basis has to flow through the Strait of Hormuz. They have zero interest in allowing their Iranian clients to shut it down. So I think it’s an empty threat. Um, but if there is some big move. Or if they start lobbying missiles, what they could do is start lobbying missiles at oil tankers from other countries. And that would cause some upset in global markets. But right now, overnight, I was anticipating a fairly significant spike in oil prices, maybe $10 a barrel. When trading opened on the Asian markets yesterday, which is about five o’clock, I think, in our time in Texas. The opening price was only about $5 above where it had been at close of trading Friday. And it immediately went back down. And this morning we’re 50 cents below the levels at the end of the day Friday as the markets are just kind of waiting to see what Iran tries to do next. As we record this episode, Israel has launched more attacks. Into Iran at other strategic sites related to the Iranian military. But they’re not, they’re not attacking Iran’s oil infrastructure. So as long as the Straits remain open, this is my view. Long as the straits remain open, uh, as long as Israel in the United States or the United States do not go after Iran’s refining and shipping capabilities. Uh, the impact on all prices is going to be pretty muted and, uh, you know, traders, the different sale 25 years ago, we we’d have oil over a hundred dollars right now, no question about it today. There’s so much real time information, so much sophisticated, automated AI driven analysis of what’s happening that traders are not nearly as prone to panic. As they were in the past, even 15 years ago, when we saw it spiked $147 in 2008. And so I just think that has the impact of muting these market responses for these kinds of impacts in the Middle East, these kinds up sets going on. And then so unless there’s some major expansion, I’m not really expecting any big price impacts here. But that’s just my view.

Stuart Turley [00:09:19] Cool, Irina, what are you thinking?

Irina Slav [00:09:22] I think it’s really interesting that oil is not higher but what David said is true and there’s also the fact that we have algorithms thinking instead of oil traders and I think because they’ve outsourced they’re thinking that’s why they’re not panicking on the contrary I just saw the oil price chart and oil is down from this morning and that’s because the Iranians have not yet closed the Strait of Hormuz and I’ve been noticing for years now that unless the supposed supply disruption happens immediately right now traders start selling because oh it’s not gonna happen but you never know because well I agree with David it will be It’s really hard to actually block this rate of hormones. They have to try. This time, it has to be more than an idle threat because this time they are being bombed by Israel and by the US. They have save face, if nothing else, the Iranian government. You know, they have to show that they’re being serious. It won’t be good for their standing with Iranians if they don’t try to block it. How successful that would be is another matter, but just the attempt to block this trade would lead to a response from the US military, which will also cause a disruption in oil flows. It will be probably much shorter than if it’s blockade. I really don’t know what’s going to happen, but I’m pretty sure there will be some sort of disruption and maybe oil prices will scare oil traders by rising faster or maybe not. I don’t now, the oil market is insane. No, seriously, it’s not normal. No, it’s funny. It’s entertaining. The oil market, no.

Stuart Turley [00:11:44] One of the things that is most interesting about the strait in Iran’s Iran has two oil export one right at the the entrance of the Strait of Hormuz and then the other one is their Karg Island. I can’t I don’t know if I pronounced it correctly which is normal for an oaky taxi kind of guy like me but when you look at that island it’s not that’s 95 percent of their oil exports are off of that island and then you take a look at. Um, whether or not the, um, there are, is spoofing going on right now. GPS spoof in last week, we had three tankers on fire because of the sanctions on the tankers are causing problems with them turning off their sanctions or their GPS and everything else. And then there are a terrorist type activities on the shores. You don’t see any tankers. Uh, near the Iranian side. And as we take a look here, Tammy, what are your initial thoughts on this?

Tammy Nemeth [00:12:54] I agree with what everyone said so far, especially with respect to how trading happens. I know that there’s a lot of sort of emotion in trading, and sometimes it can be based a lot on the sort of waterfall effect, I guess, where one starts panicking and then there’s the knock-on effect and a lot people start panicking on the trading. But maybe there’s something else going on. Maybe it is the… The algorithms that are doing more of the trading now that that is tempering that sort of thing that like what David and Irene has said. I agree with Brian Zinchuk here was like he said, I’m shocked oil prices aren’t up $20 this morning. And Brett Baker had a great comment where he said sympathy for those of us trying to negotiate an oil and gas lease would be I appreciate it. But, you know, if you’re negotiating a lease now in North America or something, you know, it’d be like, yay, we can have energy security and back things up. But what I find interesting is, like, Irina had a great substack this morning where she talked about these tankers doing U-turns and. But I think.

David Blackmon [00:14:16] We’ve lost him.

Tammy Nemeth [00:14:17] I remember the Iranian tankers that were doing the U-turns.

Irina Slav [00:14:25] I didn’t see that mentioned, just that tankers were turning or stalling in the area. I think I’m frozen. Let me see. No, but we can hear you. My point was that even without an actual blockade, tankers and tanker owners are being careful, which is already a disruption because some of these tankers where empty. They were going that low And yeah, I wanted to make a point about Iranian exports. A few days ago, Reuters in Bloomberg, I think, Javier Blas, were reporting that Iran is sending more tankers out. You know, maybe in anticipation of something. And there were all these reports over the past few months that China is doing so badly on oil demand that it is putting oil in storage. Hmm, really? Maybe it was preparing for things or maybe it wasn’t, but now it has more oil in-storage. So I think that while it’s a very valid point that China would not like it, if the Strait of Hormuz is shut down for however long, China is not exactly unprepared.

Stuart Turley [00:15:58] And when the bombing started a little while ago, the, uh, I, there, there are roughly 1400 tankers in the dark fleet. Uh, of those 1400 tanker, there’s many of them used for, uh refined or, uh diesel and, and other kinds of products, uh Russia has about 670 of those tankers. But what I ran was, was doing was filling those tankers to offload. Am I here?

David Blackmon [00:16:33] Yeah, I can see you. I can hear you.

Stuart Turley [00:16:36] Oh, OK. And so.

David Blackmon [00:16:56] You there, Stu?

Stuart Turley [00:16:57] Yeah. I’m just sitting here trying to think. Okay. So on your story. On your story, Irina, it is very good. And when we take a look at the, uh, China has got their storage, they’ve got their demand is down, but Iran has 90% of their federal budget is oil exports. And so I think that, uh President Trump and everyone is smart enough not to bomb the Iranian oil export. Because whoever does that is going to be responsible for trying to rebuild a complete disaster of a regime change. If there’s any hope for a regime, change in Iran, I hope they leave the oil exports alone and the capability for 90% of the federal budget is tied to oil. So I really don’t want that. Hit at all. I think that’s a last ditch thing. And I think the Iranian folks are absolutely wanting a regime change from everything that I can see.

Irina Slav [00:18:17] No, they don’t. No, I actually read a really wonderful comment on X. Yes, they do not like their government. They have not liked it for decades. It is repressive, it is cruel and all that. But this guy was saying, an Iranian, that they have seen what happens when the US bombs you to bring democracy. They’ve seen Libya, they’ve seen Afghanistan, and they’ve seen Iraq, they don’t want that. So they are stuck. Between their own repressive government. I’m not using the word regime because we either call everyone a regime or we call them governments. We can talk about the EU regime, the German regime, they’re being oppressive as well. Probably not as brutal as Iran’s for the time being. Anyway, language aside… So the Iranians are actually rallying behind their repressive government because it’s their government and this guy was saying it’s better to have a government, however repressive and cruel it is, than have no government and end up like Libya. Can you really blame them? Because I can’t.

David Blackmon [00:19:31] No, sure. Absolutely. Yeah. And what happens? I mean, so, so Brian, Brian’s in check has an interesting comment here.

Irina Slav [00:19:40] France very, very right.

David Blackmon [00:19:41] Yes, he’s a smart guy. Um, Iran’s only major play left is a close to straight. It’s art of war, strike your enemy where it is weakest. And that is, that’s the straight and that’s true. But the other side of that is we know now that Israel can decapitate the Iranian regime whenever it wants to. Right. I mean, we’ve seen that they’ve already decapitated all of this. Military leadership in Iran. And, uh, I mean, I think the ayatollahs understand that they are still breathing only by the grace of Benjamin Netanyahu and there’s not a lot of grace there. Um, so I think further escalation by Iran has to be tempered by that knowledge and, and I just think we’re going to see a lot of saber rattling from Iran about closing the strafe. I doubt they’re going to actually try to do it. Uh, they might lob a few missiles into the golf, but I just don’t think they’re gonna try to shut it down. That’s just, but that’s just me. That’s just my opinion here.

Tammy Nemeth [00:20:53] Well, I think you’re right when you say they need to save face and there has to be something there for them to be able to go back and say, well, we push back against the great Satan and all that kind of thing. But I think one of the elephant in the room is China because China has around the Straits of Hormuz as well. Are they going to side with Iran and say to America we’re protecting those tanker, the Iranian tankers going through because they’re destined for us? I don’t know. I think that there’s the potential there for escalation. Is China ready to take on the United States at this point? Could it escalate into something wider? Maybe. But this is one of the interesting things when. When this stuff is happening right now it’s lots of speculation and trying to figure out where where things could go. I think what’s fascinating is that the NATO meetings start tomorrow and you know this this isn’t North Atlantic but you know they they have to figure out you know do are they going to support what the United States is doing because there’s going to be some declaration against Israel and against what the what this action has represented. Are they going to be unified? I’m not sure. I know that whatever the UK says, Canada will probably mimic because, excuse me, the prime minister’s office in Canada tweeted the exact same statement that Britain did. And I’m like, why do they have the same guys on tweeting the same thing? Yeah, it was pretty funny. So it’s kind of like them, they’re just copying each other, which is always fascinating. What I’m worried about is that this will be used by the net zero people in the UK to double down even further on wind and solar, saying once again, we’ll be held hostage by these international crisis if we don’t invest in more wind and solr. So, Yeah, that’s definitely a possibility. So interesting time.

Stuart Turley [00:23:18] I like this. I believe this is from, uh, Travis Lynn. Do the 1400 tankers that are turning off their GPS transponders locators as a response to sanctions, outnumber the OPEC plus and bricks that can still be located in Eastern and Western, uh hemispheres.

Stuart Turley [00:23:38] I’m not sure what you’re thinking there, but on the OPEC, as Irena put out and I was going to point out in her Oil What’s Up article this morning on her Substack is that the OPECs plus increase in production did not happen. And so you sit back and kind of go. Uh, she had some great points in there, Irina on, uh, on that is their spare capacity when, when I don’t think that they can.

Irina Slav [00:24:19] Yeah, and the spare capacity is in the person’s goal. Which is really inconvenient to fight and break cells in the goal.

David Blackmon [00:24:29] You know, the United States could put a lot more oil on the market, but it would take about a year.

Tammy Nemeth [00:24:36] Canada could have, but we don’t have a pipeline.

David Blackmon [00:24:42] What’d you say, Tammy? I’m sorry.

Tammy Nemeth [00:24:43] I said Canada would be able to help, but we don’t have a pipeline.

Stuart Turley [00:24:51] You know, one of the biggest travesties to the Canadian oil fields is the death of the Keystone pipeline and the United States needs to quit taking advantage of forcing and keeping Canada’s oil on a different level because it’s basically we’re robbing Canada’s Oil by putting it on rail. Did I just say that out loud? I’m sorry. It needs to be in a pipeline and have equal pricing applied to it.

Tammy Nemeth [00:25:25] Yeah, I mean, there’s the discount pricing into the Midwest, which is, you know, terrible for for Canadian oil producers, but it’s, you know, pretty much the only place it can go. I mean it can’t go west now with the Trans Mountain twinning of the pipeline there. And some of it is is going out. But you know I think there were two big travesties. One was the cancelation of the Energy East pipeline, which would have sent oil to the East Coast. Would have been able to export to Europe, would have completed by now. And then there was, of course, the Keystone XL which Obama killed and then Biden killed and everything. Really the environmentalists killed that one and their lobbyists in Washington. So, yeah, I mean, it’s a pity that there were different mechanisms there in order to reduce the pressure from these kinds of geopolitical developments. And allows for more energy security. But now with the SPR drained, I don’t know how long it will take to repair that. So the United States doesn’t have quite the same amount of storage that China has. And China’s been building up their storage for a very long time. So I think that China could weather this better than, say, Europe or other jurisdictions. But China’s got they’re buying oil from all different kinds of places. Perhaps one of the reasons why they were supporting Iran so much was they were probably getting it at a significant discount because Iran couldn’t sell it to anybody else.

Stuart Turley [00:27:04] You bring up a very great point, Tammy, and the energy security for the United States has been compromised by Governor Gavin Newsom out of California. He has decimated what California used to be an energy independent thing. David had a great podcast last week on that, and when you sit back and take a look, they import 70% of their oil. And part of that, believe it or not, the molecules are coming from Russia. And I find it odd that they’re running their refineries out of business. And you look at the refinerys that are being increased in China. You have to wonder if contracts aren’t in place for the California to buy finished products from China. Makes a lot of energy security questions for me, but that’s a, that’s a different topic, but it is around the energy security because California, if the straight of hormones is shut down, 70% of the oil going to California comes from Sorry, I get tickled.

David Blackmon [00:28:25] Which is roughly the same percentage, uh, that’s going to China, right? 75%. I think of, of China’s imports come, come through the straight. So here’s a round table question. Let’s go around the table. Just, I’m sorry, Stu, I don’t want to please do take over your moderation. But I think it’s an interesting question. As we sit here today, where do we all think, uh, let’s say WTI, which is right at 74 today, right now, where did we think it’ll be a week from today when we reconvene?

Irina Slav [00:29:07] Oh I really don’t like doing this. I have no idea. It will be either higher or lower than it is today because if nothing happens in a week prices will tank and I think OPEC might be thinking about this. If nothing happens oil prices will fall and they will fall hard. You know, when somebody hypes up an oil price rally because of some supply disruption or other and you see a jump in prices and then when the disruption doesn’t happen, they tank harder than they have gone up, which is once again because of this algorithmic trading and it’s not humans doing the decisions. But humans listening to machines doing their decisions, which I think is perfectly safe and reasonable and nothing to worry about until an actual disruption occurs. So I don’t know where prices will be, but. I don’t know

David Blackmon [00:30:18] Take a guess, a wild guess, just a number.

Irina Slav [00:30:23] WTI!

David Blackmon [00:30:24] WTI 74 right now.

Irina Slav [00:30:26] Yeah, sorry You said 74 today

David Blackmon [00:30:31] 74, it’s up 20 cents.

Irina Slav [00:30:34] Yeah, okay. Well, I’ll say 77.

David Blackmon [00:30:38] 77. Okay. Tammy?

Tammy Nemeth [00:30:42] Hmm. I hate making these predictions, I’m like Irina, I have no idea. I know, I did this.

David Blackmon [00:30:52] Brian’s inject says

Tammy Nemeth [00:30:53] He says 95.

Irina Slav [00:30:56] Like,

Tammy Nemeth [00:31:00] Yeah, so if nothing happens, I think it’ll hover around the same that it is now. Maybe drop a little. If tankers start being hit, if they actually try to close it, then I think it’ll spike fairly quickly. I would probably put it at about like the 85.

David Blackmon [00:31:23] 85. Okay. We’ve got 77, 85, and 95, Stu.

Irina Slav [00:31:27] Is someone writing this down?

David Blackmon [00:31:31] Well, I’ll… I’ll take notes later.

Stuart Turley [00:31:34] We will have the transcript provided out on our Substacks. So, uh, just be a little, and here is, uh. Uh, each one, uh each one has around 78 and I almost agree with him right on the money for, um, I think there’s going to be less swinging in the WTI and let me throw this squirrel into this, uh can And that is, um, I think that it is going to be Robert’s also got a good one as well. I think that we are going to see less impact on WTI because of the, uh, disruption is not going to impact WTI nearly as much. I think it’s going to be a higher swing if there is anything going on. And I think that that swing, that $5 difference may. Widen a bunch because there’s less, uh, where do you sell your, um, uh light suite and where do you w who are the buyers for it? You have to look at all of those, uh different matrices around there. And so I see that there’s about 75, 78 for WTI is where it’s going to kind of hover.

David Blackmon [00:32:58] Pick a number.

Stuart Turley [00:33:00] 77. And I think that Brent is going to be a lot higher.

David Blackmon [00:33:11] Okay. I’ve got 68. And I think that’s optimistic. I think it’s probably going to be lower than that, but I’ll go with 68. Okay. For the factors, our arena stated a few minutes ago, because when the drop comes, it’s going to drop heart. OK, well, that was my contribution to the discussion.

Stuart Turley [00:33:34] We’ve had a lot of fun this morning.

Tammy Nemeth [00:33:37] That’s a great map, by the way, with those three major choke points there. That first one that you had that we’ve been looking at. Yeah. So the Middle East has so many of the world’s global choke points, which is significant.

David Blackmon [00:33:57] It does. There are three, the Strait of Hormuz is the most important one, because if they all can’t get through there, it doesn’t enter the Suez Canal, you know, I mean, it didn’t enter the Red Sea if it can’t get through the strait, right? So really I think the market’s going to respond more to the of Horemuz than, than the other two.

Tammy Nemeth [00:34:18] Yeah, especially with the fact that it cuts off Qatar and Emirates for the LNG. So it’s not just the oil that’s affected with this. It’s also the LNG. And there’s some indication that if they decided to hit an LNG tanker, they’re more vulnerable than an oil tanker.

David Blackmon [00:34:40] Yep, well, they’re more yeah, they are more likely to catch fire.

Stuart Turley [00:34:47] There are regimes change over energy. And when you take a look at why did Syria fall or have a regime change, it’s because they did not allow pipelines. Look at this map. You have Iran, Iraq, and Syria and Turkey and Turkey over the last two decades has been trying to become the natural gas conduit through that land bridge to the Europe. And it has absolutely been regime changing because of the trading in rubles versus the U S dollar. And I’ve been spending hours on talking about all of this. And this is absolutely critical that this is only one piece of the energy puzzle when you’re looking at regimes, uh, and the U.S. Dollar and whether or not it’s trade in rubbles or in the on or anything else, it is, uh, we are seeing. Somebody has a question on the bricks and everything else. I think you’re gonna see more and more importance on what countries trade in what dollars or in their own currencies very soon. We are gonna see a lot of that change. Okay?

Tammy Nemeth [00:36:15] OK, so Brian mentioned this in the comments. The first story there, he wrote this great piece on Saskatchewan is going to rebuild its coal fleets, the coal power fleet, despite the federal regulations that say they have to be shut down by 2030, 2035, or whatever. Yeah, 2030. So the Saskatchewan made this huge announcement. Brian had the minister responsible for it on his podcast on Friday, I think it was Brian. It was great. And basically, they’re saying they’re gonna refurbish their existing coal fleet, reopen some of the ones that they’ve shut down. They’re gonna install carbon capture that they’re going to use for enhanced oil recovery, even though it reduces the amount of power sent to the grid, because they have to use the power to capture it and so on. But one of the big things is to use the enhanced oil recovery to increase the oil protection in Saskatchewan. The premier has come out and said that he wants to double Saskatchewans oil production by 2035 or whatever it is. Now, what’s interesting about coal in Saskatchewan, people are like, why would you want to do that? It’s because the province is the, it’s a state utility. So the province actually controls. The production of the power through SAS Power. And the province owns the coal. So they don’t have to pay world prices for anything. It’s basically they’re paying themselves to use the coal for their own power generation. So it actually keeps the prices lower. But I mean, some people could argue that the reasonably priced coal and coal power in Saskatchewan is subsidizing the wind and solar they’ve and forced to. Install because of these stupid net zero regulations. And so consumers are basically subsidizing this wind and solar. So the goal is to transition to nuclear by 2050. So the coal is going to be this bridge to nuclear, by 2050, and I mean, Saskatchewan does have the uranium, maybe the SMRs will be helpful. But the the minister responsible said that they’re looking at an all-of-the-above strategy rather than Just shutting everything that works down. Here’s like in Saskatchewan when it’s really cold and in the winter The wind turbines don’t work and there’s no Sun and it’s minus 40 who can keep their heat their house warm, you know So they’re gonna do so

Irina Slav [00:38:56] sounds amazingly sensible. It’s refreshing and a little bit shocking that somebody somewhere is thinking rationally for a change.

Tammy Nemeth [00:39:06] Especially in Canada.

Irina Slav [00:39:12] You know because it gets really cold and you know how dangerous this kind of cold can be and that you need reliable really reliable Energy to survive this cold

Tammy Nemeth [00:39:26] Exactly, exactly. It’s not like Vancouver, you know, where it goes down to minus five, and everybody’s panicking and freaking out. It it’s minus 40. You step outside for any kind of extended period of time without proper stuff, you die. So you want your citizens to be dying in order to meet the net zero proclamations from the federal government, I mean, they have a responsibility to their citizens, you know, so.

David Blackmon [00:39:56] No, don’t ask him that question directly. You may get an answer you don’t like

Tammy Nemeth [00:40:02] Sure. I mean, they’re expanding the assisted suicide in Canada. So I think it’s like the number four cause of death in the country is through assisted suicide. It’s really quite tragic. Anyway, then the second story is ArcelorMittal drops their plans for green steel in Germany due to high energy costs. This is a Reuters article. And this is the most hilarious quote from the German government. They said the most important takeaway from them saying we’re not going to do green steel, we’re taking the subsidy, they were offered a 1.3 billion euro subsidy to convert the factories into using hydrogen to produce steel. And Arcelor said, you know, even with that subsidy, it’s too expensive. The energy costs are too expensive And the spokesperson for the government said, the most important thing is that no money has yet been paid. What a relief, they haven’t taken the subsidy yet

David Blackmon [00:41:15] Yeah, good grief.

Tammy Nemeth [00:41:18] I thought that was so funny. And then they were saying that even if you think about it, even with the subsidy, with the high energy prices, the costs are still too high to be profitable. But there’s three other steel makers in Germany who’ve taken the subsidy and are still pushing through. But they’re calling on the German government to improve market conditions for their product, which I basically mean… How do you improve your market condition? You stop anybody from buying other steel because the big complaint is that they’re importing steel instead. And what they found, like some of the steel they’re getting is from Russia. I guess there’s no sanctions on steel. Some of it’s from Turkey, and some of it from China. If it’s Chinese steel, they better be careful because Vancouver used a bunch of Chinese steel to build a really big bridge that they’ve had nothing but trouble because the steel’s of poor quality and the welds are inferior and it’s buckling.

Stuart Turley [00:42:28] Nice.

Tammy Nemeth [00:42:29] Bye or beware. So that’s it for my stories and you can find me on Substack at TheNemethreport.substack.com. I’m not publishing anything for a few weeks just because I’m on holiday. Maybe I’ll try to put something out about what we’re seeing happening in the Middle East, but trying to just spend some time with them.

David Blackmon [00:42:57] Oh boy, so here are mine. Um, so the Senate will go with the second one. First, the Senate is caved on inflation reduction act, wind and solar subsidies. The house, house sent over a bill, the big, beautiful bill, uh, with a provision that would phase out has a hard stop on those subsidies beginning in 2026 with, uh projects that are completed before the end of 2028. Able to benefit from the tax credits, the Senate has taken that strong language, which would have ended this outflow of hundreds of billions of dollars for useless energy projects, uh, very quickly. The Senate decides, well, you know, we’ll, we’re set a soft deadline for a start of construction by the end of 2030 and we’ll give you another 10 years to get linked into the grid with it and you can keep accessing the tax breaks into perpetuity after that. So basically what the Senate language does is simply the same thing that we’ve had for the last 20 plus years on the stupid ethanol subsidies implemented during the Bush administration, that it’s just a subsidy program that never ends. And we’re gonna waste billions and billions and billions and millions of dollars into perpetually if the Senate version of this bill is passed. And guess who’s leading that effort who chairs the relevant committee that is leading the effort to defang or to perpetuate these wind and solar subsidies. Texas is own John Cornyn. Senior citizen from my state. I’m hanging my head in shame as I say that. Uh, okay. So there’s that one.

Stuart Turley [00:44:47] Is despicable

David Blackmon [00:44:49] Did I say that he needs to go, he’s going to have a strong, strong primary challenge next year from our current attorney general and Ken Paxton. And he’s probably going to lose his seat. Thank goodness. Uh, second one, Supreme court wades into Louisiana’s coastal erosion lawsuit. So we’ve had this, this raft, this lawfare basically campaign in Louisiana. In which since 2013, in which the various parishes, they’re not counties in Louisiana, they’re parishes. Local governments suing the oil and gas industry to try to extract hundreds of billions of dollars out of the industry as recompense for the coastal erosion issues in south part of the state, south of the Mississippi River. And And the lawsuits basically want to hold the industry responsible for all of it. Well, the industry is responsible for some of it, maybe 10% of it but the main culprit on coastal erosion, land loss in South Louisiana is the projects begun in the 1920s by the Louisiana state government. And in the 1930s by the federal government, the army corps of engineers to build dikes and levees to stop the annual flooding and silting processes. And in other words, impede mother nature of the Mississippi river. Okay. Which is what built that part of the state in the first place. Well, you take away the flooding and selting processes, what’s going to happen, the land is going to disappear because it’s not being replenished. As, as nature has replenished it. Millions of years. Okay. That’s the problem in South Louisiana. So these lawsuits have progressed. There’s, I’m trying to remember 31 of them now, all led by a single big law firm headquartered in Baton Rouge. And unfortunately, the Republican governor there, Jeff Landry, and his administration are supporting those lawsuits in direct contravention of the Trump uh, energy policies. So, uh, the Supreme court waited in though, and said, okay, look, we’re going to take the, we’re gonna hear this case in federal court instead of leaving it in the state courts where in April, there was a negative decision in a lawsuit involving Chevron and Exxon in which the judge who ruled who governed the case, um, had taken thousands of dollars in political contributions from the plaintiff law firm defending, you know, defending the plaintiffs. So it looks like these suits are going to have to go through federal court now, assuming the Supreme Court rules correctly. It’s going to hear the case next year. And that’s really good news for the Louisiana industry. So I just thought that was good news, actual good news on the energy front to highlight. That’s very convoluted. I know, uh, energy transition absurdities is my Substack. It’s Blackmon.substack.com come see me.

Irina Slav [00:48:14] Oh, these are mine. Oh, horrible news. Global banks increase fossil fuel funding as climate pledges crumble. It’s just the latest in a very long string of, you know, pieces of evidence that not everything is going according to plan and banks are, you know going back on their net zero plans. I’m sure we’re all shocked. I can’t quote from this story because I haven’t read it recently. Ever since I put that link. Out there, but I think the headline speaks for itself. The banks are, you know, going back on their pledges. I wonder why, despite all this, you know, ongoing conviction campaign, I’d like to call it that, everything’s fine with net zero, everything is fine with the transition, we’ll be borrowing more for the transition especially in Europe. Well, did Trump change everything? I don’t think so, because this is about last year. So they have seen the banks, the lenders, the financiers, the men with the money and women with the mone. They’ve seen it’s not working. I mean, how much more evidence do we need that this transition thing is not working? It’s really exhausting, honestly.

Tammy Nemeth [00:49:37] Well, you know, Irina, to add to that, there was the Bank of International Settlements, which is like the central bank for the central bankers. Last week, they produced their voluntary climate disclosure rules for the central banks. And I guess there was this massive fight because they wanted to make it mandatory. And the Americans said, no way, we’re not don’t make this mandatory. So, they’ve been working on these rules for a very long time. And so they issued them but said they’re just voluntary. So the minute that there is a favorable administration in Washington, they’ll just make them mandatory. This is like how it always works. It starts voluntary and then it makes it mandatory. All we can hope is that reality continues to keep them awake and say, this is ridiculous. We should be able to keep investing in these things.

Irina Slav [00:50:32] Yeah, because if they make it mandatory, then banks will suffer, banks will lose money. Banks don’t like to lose money, and banks are the ones running the show. So you can’t do it. They won’t have it. The second story is . UK issues tougher environmental rules for new North Sea oil and gas, really. I’m you know I cringe every time I see a headline about the UK and energy because it’s it’s painfully obvious that these people don’t know what they’re doing first they want to ban it but they want go ahead with certain kinds of exploration because yeah they grudgingly acknowledge that the country still needs oil gas and it’s kind of better to to source it locally instead of imported. But now they’re doing tougher environmental rules. Which is it? Really? Do you want to kill it or do you want keep it on life support and how do you expect the industry to work productively and meaningfully if you’re keeping it on live support with tough environmental rules and banning new exploration but allowing exploration in adjacent deposits or something?

Tammy Nemeth [00:51:55] I Know, just like, because they apparently some report came out saying, yeah, actually, oil and gas is cheaper than the wind and solar that we have on the on the grid. It was like hidden in some big document. And it was making the rounds on X that you know, they’ve made this admission. But and then they’re like, oh, we’re gonna we’re going to open up. Well, you’re not going to Open up if you put these tougher environmental rules. Yeah, who’s gonna do it? Who’s gonna Plus they still have they keep doing mutually exclusive things exactly and because they still have that massive windfall profits thing so like a company is going to make that investment have to do this environmental gauntlet and you’re going to be like taxed into oblivion you’ll make no profit yeah yeah Why bulldoze? But thank you for sharing that story. Get my blood boiling.

Irina Slav [00:52:51] That was it for me. You can find me at Irina Slav on Energy, where I rant about energy mostly. I’m branching out into other topics because it’s repetitive.

Stuart Turley [00:53:06] All right. What I actually had the same topic that we just covered on this one has net zero caught up to the UK’s Don Quixote green energy dream, reconsidering North sea oil amid energy crisis. And, uh, I’m like, Holy cow, Batman. And so I, I basically went through that story and basically came down to the last. Uh, Way to go, Patrick. UK is just kicking the can down the road until they find some new energy schemes so they can tax its subject more. Outstanding point, Patrick, way to go. And I also loved the Tom Mumford’s comment that we just shared a second ago. But my bottom line on this one is will the UK prioritize affordability and security or double down on its climate leadership? And will, and as energy Ed Miliband prepares to decide on, uh, Roseman and Jack jaw, the world will watch. Uh, I absolutely find this man needs to be a Wallace and Gromit character rather than a leader for the UK. Uh, he’s absolutely a Muppet. I’m not sure if he’s a Mupit or Wallace and grommet character yet. I haven’t figured that out yet, but let’s go ahead. We’ve already covered the. Uh, regional conflict. We’ve already covered that and Doug Sheridan gave a great, uh, a LinkedIn article, and I absolutely love Doug. Uh, the wall street editorial board writes Trump’s decision to strike Iran, three most significant nuclear sites help rid the world of a grave nuclear threat and a large step toward restoring USD, uh deterrence. Uh, it also creates an opportunity for a more peaceful mid East Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities. He has a great point. His take as the board points out, Trump made clear that he’s for 40 years. Iran has been saying death to America, death to Israel. And this is absolutely right. Now, finally, an American president has taken the Mullahs at their word before it was too late. His take number two. No question that Iranian leadership should get what, what’s coming to them. Good on Trump and America’s military for delivering it. I’m actually very proud of president Trump for not going anything further. Weaving through what the Iranians have said, if you use, like we talked about the beginning of the show, uh, if use resources, we will attack those. And he says, okay. And he uses resources outside the area. Uh, I also don’t, I am tired of wars. I do not want the United States in any war. And I think we knew not need to have any business having the CIA doing a regime change. Uh, the CIA has been doing its own regime change in the United States for way too long. And, uh, I think that that just needs to end. So, uh you can find me. On the energy newsbeat.substack.com or you can also find me on energynewsbeat.co or energynewsbeat.com and it’s a lot of fun. I got a great team of people trying to keep me out of the pokey there.

Tammy Nemeth [00:56:40] Out of the pokey.

David Blackmon [00:56:43] I don’t think you’re in any danger of going to the pokey, are you?

Stuart Turley [00:56:46] Oh, no, but when you when you’re under attack like I am, it means I’m on the right track. So I have a badge of honor for being trying to be silent. So I guess that’s a good thing.

David Blackmon [00:57:06] I just want to say, I agree with Stu’s final comments there that, uh, or I guess Doug Sheridan’s comments that you were talking about that, it is a positive thing that, if, if as we’re being told, Iran’s ability to refine uranium, uh, has been ended for nuclear weapons. I mean, they have had that program for a long time. Uh, so that’s a net positive. It’s a something to be happy about. But I’m just like you, I’m sick of wars in the Middle East, don’t want the U S involved in a long-term war in the middle East. I’m glad if that mission was successful, I am glad we did it. And, um, the question now becomes what comes next in terms of if there is a regime change in Iran.

Stuart Turley [00:57:58] One thing I would like to close out and say is as the light is shining upon us from Tammy Nemeth and.

Tammy Nemeth [00:58:09] I think it’s like a halo

David Blackmon [00:58:12] I couldn’t figure out what that was for a second there.

Stuart Turley [00:58:14] Wow, I see the light look like the second coming I Truly believe that we need to understand how we got here the United States caused this problem Hillary Clinton got involved and got a lot of the uranium started processes with Iran under Bill Clinton Yes, Hillary Clinton helped start it. Then you had billions of dollars funding this problem by Barack O Hussein Obama started this problem. And then you had a president. I’m not sure who I am. Biden, uh, finish it by providing, I believe is it 8, 800 billion dollar, whatever the number is in billions and billions of dollars, as Carl Sagan would say. Uh, that have been allowed into Iran so they could have their proxy wars. And I, I just find it despicable that the Democrats are now saying, Oh, Trump is the dictator when they got us here. Quick, put up a solar panel.

David Blackmon [00:59:35] Good advice, Tom.

Tammy Nemeth [00:59:36] Yeah, for the for the whole 20 minutes of sun we’re gonna have today. I don’t know. I could be powering my iPad. For sure.

Stuart Turley [00:59:45] But look at the bright side, at least Canada is not trying to block the sun while trying to promote solar panels.

Tammy Nemeth [00:59:53] Uh,.

Irina Slav [00:59:54] No.

Stuart Turley [00:59:57] Yeah. Not that we know. They do try to follow.

Tammy Nemeth [01:00:01] You know, Canada and the UK seem to be attached at the hip because Carney and Starmer are good friends and he’s got all these connections with the British Royal Family and all this kind of stuff. And there’s an institute in Victoria that is pushing this idea of geoengineering. They’re having a special talk about it this week about putting particles in the sky. And they’re really trying to normalize this. And then there’s this new institute in the University of Chicago, No big surprise. That was set up by David Keith, who came from Harvard, and he’s really big into the whole geoengineering thing. So, who knows, he’ll be doing it.

David Blackmon [01:00:42] All funded by the Park and Gates Foundations. And rockefeller let’s not leave the rocket though

Tammy Nemeth [01:00:53] Don’t forget the Rockefellers for sure.

David Blackmon [01:00:55] Forget never forget the rock.

Stuart Turley [01:00:58] Well, there goes your YouTube channel.

David Blackmon [01:01:00] There I go.

Tammy Nemeth [01:01:01] Oh, yeah. Yeah,.

David Blackmon [01:01:04] be back by next week.

Stuart Turley [01:01:06] All right. With that, like, subscribe, share. We will have this all out on our Substack channels. We appreciate every one of the comments. Tom, Patrick, Jeff. I mean, all of you, all of you guys, Robert, LinkedIn user, Mr. LinkedIn user. You might want to get your name changed. It’s OK. You can go to Travis.

Tammy Nemeth [01:01:31] Its Travis.

David Blackmon [01:01:32] Travis Lynn. All right

Tammy Nemeth [01:01:35] Thanks everybody.

Irina Slav [01:01:36] See ya. Bye