Energy News Beat
The Federal Trade Commission last week gave the green light to Exxon’s acquisition of Pioneer Natural Resources.
The FTC alleged that Sheffield had colluded with OPEC and OPEC+ members to limit production and increase oil prices.
In a response to the FTC allegations, the company defended its founder, saying he had always had the U.S. oil industry’s best interest at heart.

The Federal Trade Commission last week gave the green light to Exxon’s acquisition of Pioneer Natural Resources. There was one condition attached to the approval of the $60-billion deal: that Scott Sheffield, the former CEO of Pioneer, does not join the combined company’s board.

The FTC alleged that Sheffield had colluded with OPEC and OPEC+ members to limit production and increase oil prices. The allegations shook the shale oil world, where several large consolidation deals are awaiting the trade watchdog’s approval. Now, the consolidation drive that has marked the last year in U.S. shale may have to slow down.

First, the allegations. According to a news release from last week, the Federal Trade Commission had informed Exxon that it would only approve the merger with Pioneer if Sheffield, who was going to become an Exxon board member as part of the deal, stayed out of it.

“Mr. Sheffield’s past conduct makes it crystal clear that he should be nowhere near Exxon’s boardroom. American consumers shouldn’t pay unfair prices at the pump simply to pad a corporate executive’s pocketbook,” the deputy director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition, Kyle Mach, said in the release.

“Through public statements and private communications, Pioneer founder and former CEO Scott D. Sheffield has campaigned to organize anticompetitive coordinated output reductions between and among U.S. crude oil producers, and others, including the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (“OPEC”), and a related cartel of other oil-producing countries known as OPEC+,” the Commission in a formal complaint.

The regulator then went on to motivate the attachment of its condition to the Exxon-Pioneer deal approval, saying that it sought “to prevent Pioneer’s Sheffield from engaging in collusive activity that would potentially raise crude oil prices, leading American consumers and businesses to pay higher prices for gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil and jet fuel.”

Naturally, Pioneer had something to say about the allegations. In a response to the FTC allegations, the company defended its founder, saying he had always had the U.S. oil industry’s best interest at heart. The response also suggested that any communication Sheffield may have conducted with OPEC and OPEC+ members had been to the same end—to protect the U.S. shale industry.

“Mr. Sheffield and Pioneer believe that the FTC’s Complaint reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the U.S. and global oil markets and misreads the nature and intent of Mr. Sheffield’s actions,” the response said.

The actions in question were conversations with OPEC and OPEC+ officials in 2020, when pandemic lockdowns decimated global oil demand, pushing U.S. oil prices briefly below zero. At the time, Sheffield was an advocate of production cuts in the shale patch as well, in a bid to minimize the damage that the demand drop was already causing the industry, Pioneer also said.

It didn’t make any difference, however. The FTC had already made up its mind and acted on it. As a result, Bloomberg and the Financial Times are reporting that shale executives are getting spooked about future mergers in case they get caught in the crosshairs of the regulator, which has not exactly been a fan of the oil industry since 2020.

“The implications go far beyond Sheffield,” James Lucier, an analyst at Capital Alpha Partners, said in a note to clients following the news, as quoted by the Financial Times. “The FTC has not to date taken an adversarial approach toward oil industry mergers . . . This relative hands-off policy is no more.”

In a sense, the FTC’s move against Sheffield is the other shoe dropping as far as the oil industry is concerned. The regulator has been looking for a way to interfere with the consolidation drive prompted by strong financial results and limited untapped inventory. Until recently, it has been unable to find one. But now, it seems, it has.

Not everyone agrees the FTC’s attack on Sheffield needs to be taken particularly seriously. “This is the government trying to save some face — it’s irrelevant to the whole issue of antitrust,” the managing director of investment bankers Roth MKM, Leo Mariani, told Bloomberg. “This whole thing is just politics ultimately. In an election year it helps to be tough on Big Oil.”

President Biden and his fellow Democrats have repeatedly made it clear that the anti-oil lobby is a key voter demographic and they have been busy tending to its needs. Earlier this year, Biden’s White House paused approval of new LNG export capacity as part of these efforts. Then, just this month, Democrats in Congress announced the completion of an investigation into Big Oil that, while it did not contain anything in the way of a revelation, sought to reinforce an image of the industry as the hydrocarbon equivalent of Big Tobacco, deserving of an identical treatment.

Whether any of this will help Biden win the November vote remains to be seen, but judging by the latest in his approval ratings, there may be a possibility that most Americans have bigger problems than climate change and oil.

Source: Oilprice.com

Take the Survey at https://survey.energynewsbeat.com/

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post FTC’s Attack on Pioneer Sends Ripples Through Shale Industry appeared first on Energy News Beat.

Energy News Beat
The International Energy Agency (IEA) recommends leaving new oil discoveries in the ground to achieve global climate aims.
African and Caribbean nations face pressure to choose between economic development and climate action.
Developing countries need support from high-income countries in the form of financing for renewable energy development.

As the world focuses on transitioning to green, there are big questions about whether new oil and gas resources should be developed. On the one hand, new oil regions present the opportunity to develop lower-carbon oil and gas through less damaging operations. On the other, the International Energy Agency (IEA) and environmental organisations say it is vital to transition away from fossil fuels to green alternatives and leave any new oil in the ground, to achieve global climate aims. However, many recent oil discoveries have been made in low-income countries across Africa and the Caribbean, offering them the opportunity to develop their natural resources for significant revenues, which is difficult for many to turn down.

For decades, the Western World has been exploiting fossil fuel resources to provide power worldwide and bring in high revenues. This has led regions such as China, the U.S., and the European Union to be some of the world’s biggest polluters. High levels of greenhouse gas emissions produced from fossil fuel production and industrialisation have contributed to climate change, an issue that the governments of many high-income states are attempting to tackle through decarbonisation and a green transition. However, a global green transition will require support from governments around the globe, from both rich and poor nations.

To combat climate change, the IEA recommends that oil and gas producers decrease their production and leave any new oil discoveries in the ground. However, there is still not enough renewable energy capacity to make the switch, meaning that the global demand for fossil fuels remains high. In addition, many oil discoveries in recent years have been made in Africa and the Caribbean. These regions are looking increasingly attractive to producers looking to develop “low-carbon” oil operations and move away from existing depleted oil fields. Oil and gas majors insist that developing these regions would help decrease the carbon emissions associated with oil and gas production, as well as help low-income countries improve their economies.

The World Bank estimates that the African continent held around 40 percent of the natural gas discoveries from 2010 and 2020. Many countries have increased their reliance on the region following the Russian invasion of Ukraine and subsequent sanctions on Russian energy, as they seek out alternative gas supplies. However, environmentalists worry that developing new oil and gas regions could quash efforts to tackle climate change. To ensure there is enough energy to replace the demand for gas, significantly more investment must go into developing the world’s renewable energy and nuclear power capacity. In addition, high-income countries must provide financing for developing countries to establish their renewable energy industries and allow them to turn down the opportunity to earn high oil and gas revenues.

Nevertheless, turning down money is a difficult pill to swallow, particularly as many African and Caribbean powers view the Western World as highly hypocritical. The African Energy Chamber believes that “At a time when both African and Caribbean nations are making great strides towards developing recently discovered oil and gas reserves, countries whose development was driven by hydrocarbons are accelerating efforts to transition to a renewable energy future. This transition has seen wealthy nations establish a ‘green agenda,’ one which does not take into consideration Africa’s economic needs.”

Macky Sall, the President of Senegal – a country which discovered a deposit of 15 trillion cubic feet of gas in 2015 – explained, “How can you tell people in Africa, where half the population does not have electricity … ‘Leave your resources in the ground’?” He added, “There is no sense in that, and it is not fair. We need an energy transition that is fair.”

Meanwhile, Mohamed Irfaan Ali, the President of Guyana, a massive new oil power, stated, “Did you know that Guyana has a forest that is the size of England and Scotland combined… a forest that stores 19.5 gigatons of carbon, that we have kept alive? “I’m going to lecture you on climate change. We have kept this forest alive that you enjoy, that the world enjoys, that you don’t pay us for, that you don’t value,” in response to calls to leave its oil in the ground.

Further, many believe that Africa’s fossil fuel problem stems from the decades-long involvement of foreign oil majors who have exploited the region’s resources. Vanessa Nakate, a Unicef goodwill ambassador, says “Oil and gas giants have sold African leaders big promises that gas is the key to development. But this week’s analysis by energy experts at the IEA makes those seem even more dubious. It predicts that beyond 2025 there could be too much natural gas in the global energy system, causing a “gas glut”.” Nakate calls for greater investment in Africa’s renewable energy sector, which would give leaders across the region a reason to leave their fossil fuel resources undeveloped.

Source: Oilprice.com

Take the Survey at https://survey.energynewsbeat.com/

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post Developing Nations Look to Balance Oil and Gas Opportunity with Climate Concerns appeared first on Energy News Beat.

Energy News Beat
The rule, mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, requires federal buildings to phase out fossil fuel usage by 2030.
The focus is on transitioning to cleaner electricity sources like wind and solar power to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Despite opposition from natural gas utilities, the rule is projected to significantly reduce carbon and methane emissions, equivalent to those of nearly 310,000 homes annually.

The U.S. Department of Energy has finalized a rule banning fossil fuels from new and renovated federal buildings. The Clean Energy for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings Rule, mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007, mandates a phased reduction in fossil fuel usage in these buildings. The law requires federal buildings and major renovations to phase out fossil fuel-generated energy consumption by 2030. This provision had been pending due to regulatory delays until now.

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm highlighted the significance of this rule, emphasizing the federal government’s commitment to energy efficiency and cost savings: “The Biden-Harris Administration is practicing what we preach. Just as we are helping households and businesses across the nation save money by saving energy, we are doing the same in our own federal buildings.”

With commercial and residential buildings contributing 13% of direct greenhouse gas emissions in 2022, primarily from burning natural gas, the focus has shifted towards electrification. This entails transitioning from gas to cleaner electricity sources like wind and solar power.

Given the absence of regulations enforcing the removal of gas-fired appliances, some federal buildings continue to install them. For instance, Independence Hall in Philadelphia plans to switch to gas-fired boilers instead of remaining connected to a city-wide steam loop for heating.

While projects that are already underway, like Independence Hall, are exempt from the new rule, its implementation aims to accelerate the electrification of federal sites as envisioned in EISA’s Section 433. Advocated by the American Institute of Architects (AIA), this provision sought to leverage government leadership to drive technological advancements and cost reductions in climate-friendly measures.

Complemented by Executive Order 14057 and other Federal Sustainability Plan initiatives, the new rule is aimed at the goal of achieving net-zero emissions by 2045, supported by DOE’s Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP). Through supplemental guidance and resources, FEMP will assist agencies in achieving compliance, facilitating clean energy deployment and phasing out on-site fossil fuel usage. This milestone reflects extensive engagement with federal stakeholders, underscoring the collaborative effort to accelerate the adoption of clean energy within the federal building sector.

The Energy Department faced delays in implementing the rule, largely due to opposition from natural gas utilities concerned about potential business losses. The American Gas Association criticized the final rule, citing cost increases and lack of environmental benefits.

However, the Energy Department’s analysis countered that the rule is projected to reduce carbon emissions by 2 million metric tons and methane emissions by 16 thousand tons, equivalent to the emissions of nearly 310,000 homes annually.

Source: Oilprice.com

Take the Survey at https://survey.energynewsbeat.com/

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post Biden Administration Bans Fossil Fuels in Federal Buildings appeared first on Energy News Beat.

Energy News Beat

Four unnamed sources have told Reuters that Saudi state-run oil giant Aramco is in talks to potentially acquire Shell’s billion-dollar gas station business in Malaysia, where the Dutch supergiant owns a network of nearly 1,000 fuel stations.

Neither Shell nor Aramco would comment on the rumor of the talks for Reuters; however, one source told the news agency that talks began late last year and could be finalized in a matter of months.

A second source told Reuters that the deal could be worth over $1 billion.

While Shell owns a network of just under 1,000 fuel stations in Malaysia, along with a 50% share in the 300,000-barrel-per-day Pengerang refinery, Aramco presently does not own any fuel stations in the country, though it does operate stations in other venues alongside French TotalEnergies and South Korean S-Oil Corp, Reuters noted.

The alleged talks are taking place against the backdrop of Shell’s attempt to sell a refinery in Singapore that supplies the fuel stations it owns in Malaysia. If reports are true, talks are progressing against the backdrop of new offshore exploration deals handed to Shell in late January when seven new production-sharing contracts were awarded. State-run Petronas awarded contracts for six exploration blocks and one discovered resource opportunity (DRO) in the Sarawak basin and the Northwest Sabah basin as well as for basins in Peninsular Malaysia, World Oil reported in late January.

Shell has been refocusing on its most profitable businesses and is said to be seeking to divest 500 fuel stations this year and next. In total Shell owns some 950 fuel stations in Malaysia.

Shell is also pursuing efforts to sell its Bukom refinery and petrochemical plant in Singapore, The Star of Malaysia reported.

In addition to offshore exploration, fuel stations and a refinery, Shell also produces oil and gas offshore Malaysia and is a JV partner in LNG projects there, as well.

Source: Oilprice.com

Take the Survey at https://survey.energynewsbeat.com/

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post Saudi Aramco in Talks to Buy Shell Gas Stations in Malaysia appeared first on Energy News Beat.

Energy News Beat

One of the recent positives for bonds and non-energy stocks could have run its course after Saudi Arabia raised the price of its flagship crude to Asia for a third consecutive month, according to Bloomberg markets live reporter Garfield Reynolds

Over the weekend, state-owned Saudi Aramco raised the June official selling price of Arab Light crude for customers in Asia by 90 cents to $2.90 a barrel above the regional Oman-Dubai benchmark, Bloomberg reported. It compares with an increase of 60 cents forecast in a Bloomberg survey of six refiners. Prices for other lighter and heavier varieties were also increased from May.

The hike highlights Saudi Arabia’s efforts to keep the market tight amid fading war risk in the Middle East, which has helped drive oil prices in London lower. Most traders and analysts predict that the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies will extend their output curbs, potentially to the end of the year.

Crude took a marked step lower last week thanks to a surge in US inventories and optimism that Middle East tensions can cool further, but there’s a decent chance it’s busy finding a new floor rather than settling in for sustained declines according to Reynolds who notes that if Israel and Hamas can agree on a truce — a substantial if with the status of talks unclear after the latest round in Cairo — that would likely set off a fresh, rapid drop in the short term for crude.

But even then it looks as though Saudi Arabia and the other producers would be likely to respond with further efforts to trim supply to prop up prices.

With two-year US inflation swaps sitting at ~2.5% that shows bonds remain vulnerable to sticky oil prices even with WTI under $80/barrel.

Source: Oilprice.com

Take the Survey at https://survey.energynewsbeat.com/

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post Saudi Arabia’s Price Increase Could Indicate Oil Price Floor appeared first on Energy News Beat.

Energy News Beat

The post A Century-Old Company The Government Owns Wants To Solve A Big Energy Problem appeared first on Energy News Beat.

Energy News Beat

An 800-MW, four-hour battery is “not a realistic option” for replacing Talen Energy’s 1,280-MW, coal-fired Brandon Shores power plant near Baltimore, according to the PJM Interconnection.

The Sierra Club’s proposed battery storage solution to fill in for the retiring power plant fails to address all reliability problems with the planned shutdown and probably couldn’t be built in time, PJM said Friday in a letter to Paul Pinsky, director of the Maryland Energy Administration.

“While a large battery could reduce the severity of the reliability concerns in the [Baltimore Gas & Electric] system following the eventual retirement of the Brandon Shores and Wagner units, the battery concept would not replace the need for [a reliability must-run] agreement or address the system reliability needs in the near and longer term,” PJM said.

The issue centers on Talen’s plan to retire the Brandon Shores power plant by June 1, 2025. PJM last year found that shuttering the power plant would cause major reliability problems that can most effectively be solved by building new transmission lines that would help maintain grid voltage and prevent thermal overloads.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in November approved a roughly $796 million package of transmission projects to address the plant’s retirement. PJM, however, doesn’t expect the projects to be completed until the end of 2028.

The grid operator has entered into an RMR contract with Talen to keep Brandon Shores, along with two units totaling about 700 MW at its Wagner power plant near Baltimore, operating until the transmission projects are online. The contract includes a fixed charge of about $18 million a month, or $216 million a year, plus cost recovery for fuel and other costs, according to the Maryland Office of People’s Counsel and the Maryland Public Service Commission, which have asked FERC to extend the comment period on the proposal to June 3 from May 9.

Earlier this year, Telos Energy and GridLab, backed by the Sierra Club, found that a 600-MW, four-hour battery, plus some transmission line reconductoring and voltage support projects, would be a less expensive option for reliably replacing the Brandon Shores power plant compared to an RMR contract.

The plan, including an 800-MW battery option, has several critical flaws, according to PJM’s analysis released Friday.

It is “highly unlikely” a battery system could be built by June 1, 2025, when Talen plans to shutter its generating units, PJM said. Also, it would cost about $1 billion to build a 600-MW, four-hour battery system, more than the planned transmission upgrades, and the proposed battery storage wouldn’t fully address the area’s reliability problems following Brandon Shores’ shutdown, according to the grid operator.

“While a large battery could reduce the severity of the reliability concerns in the BGE system following the eventual retirement of the Brandon Shores and Wagner units, the battery concept would not replace the need for an RMR agreement or address the system reliability needs in the near and longer term,” PJM said in the letter to the Maryland Energy Administration. “PJM’s analysis ultimately concludes that to maintain reliability in Maryland, the Brandon Shores units cannot be retired until new transmission reinforcements are in place.”

Source: Utilitydive.com

Take the Survey at https://survey.energynewsbeat.com/

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post Replacing a Talen Energy coal-fired power plant with battery storage is infeasible: PJM appeared first on Energy News Beat.

Energy News Beat

The purveyors of climate doom will not tolerate the good news of our planet thriving because of modest warming and increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide. However, a recent scientific paper concludes that an optimistic vision for Earth and its inhabitants is nonetheless justified.

Widely accepted data show an overall greening of Earth resulting from a cycle of natural warming that began more than 300 years ago and from industrialization’s additions of CO2 that started in the 19th century and accelerated with vigorous economic activity following World War II.

Also attributed to these and other factors is record crop production, which now sustains 8 billion people—ten times the population prior to the Industrial Revolution. The boost in atmospheric CO2 since 1940 alone is linked to yield increases for corn, soybeans and wheat of 10%, 30% and 40%, respectively.

The positive contribution of carbon dioxide to the human condition should be cause for celebration, but this is more than demonizers of the gas can abide. Right on cue, narrators of a planet supposedly overheating from carbon dioxide began sensationalizing research findings that increased plant volume results in lower concentrations of nutrients in food.

“The potential health consequences are large, given that there are already billions of people around the world who don’t get enough protein, vitamins or other nutrients in their daily diet,” concluded the The New York Times, a reliable promoter of apocalypse forever. Among others chiming in have been The Lancet, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and the National Institutes of Health.

Of course, such yellow journalism lacks context and countervailing facts —elements provided in “Nutritive Value of Plants Growing in Enhanced CO2 Concentrations,” published by the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia.

Any deficiency of nutrients from the enhancement of plant growth by elevated carbon dioxide “are small, compared to the nutrient shortages that agriculture and livestock routinely face because of natural phenomena, such as severe soil fertility differences, nutrient dilution in plants due to rainfall or irrigation and even aging of crops,” says the paper.

And while there is evidence of marginal decreases in some nutrients, data also show that higher levels of CO2 “may enhance certain groups of health-promoting phytochemicals in food crops” that serve as antioxidants and anti-inflammatory compounds, says the paper, which lists seven authors and more than 100 references. The lead author is Albrecht Glatzle, a member of the Rural Association of Paraguay and a former international researcher of plant and animal nutrition.

Among other points made by the paper are the following: Throughout a majority of geological history, atmospheric CO2 concentrations have been several times higher than today’s, which are less than optimum for most plants; atmospheric warming from even a quadrupling of CO2 concentrations would be small compared to natural temperature fluctuations since the last glacial advance more than 10,000 years ago.

Having virtually no scientific basis, the “green” movement’s hostility to carbon dioxide seemingly ignores the gas’s critical role as a plant food. As the paper notes, “CO2 is the only source of the chemical element carbon for all life on Earth, be it for plants, animals or fungi and bacteria — through photosynthesis and food chains.”

The so-called greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide— perversely exaggerated to support climate fearmongering—  is a life-saving temperature moderator that keeps Earth from freezing over.

The obvious benefits of CO2 is “an embarrassment to the large and profitable movement to ‘save the planet’ from ‘carbon pollution,’” write the authors. “If CO2 greatly benefits agriculture and forestry and has a small, benign effect on climate, it is not a pollutant at all.

More CO2 is good news. It’s not that complicated.

Source: Dailycaller.com

Take the Survey at https://survey.energynewsbeat.com/

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post GREGORY WRIGHTSTONE: Scientific Report Pours Cold Water On Major Talking Point Of Climate Activists appeared first on Energy News Beat.

Energy News Beat

Spot charter rates for the global liquefied natural gas (LNG) carrier fleet remained steady this week, while European prices rose compared to the previous week.

Last week, charter rates dropped slightly compared to the week before.

“Freight rates in the Atlantic and Pacific basins stayed steady this week, with the Spark30S Atlantic spot rate decreasing by $750 per day to $42,500 per day, and the Spark25S Pacific rate increasing by $500 per day to $46,250 per day,” Qasim Afghan, Spark’s commercial analyst told LNG Prime on Friday.

“The month-averaged rate for April is the lowest in four years for both the Atlantic and Pacific basins,” he said.

LNG shipping rates remained steady this year despite the ongoing shipping constraints via the Panama and Suez canals.

Platts, a part of S&P Global Commodity Insights, also said in a report last week that the numbers of available vessels did not affect LNG shipping rates this year.

According to the agency, in April, the number of available spot vessels in the Atlantic basin soared to around 13 to 14 vessels, and it the Pacific to around 16 vessels, before falling back in the past week to around 12 to 13 ships.

In Europe, the SparkNWE DES LNG front month dropped compared to the last week.

“The SparkNWE DES LNG front month price for June delivery is assessed at $9.508/MMBtu and at a $0.175/MMBtu discount to the TTF,” Afghan said.

He said this is a $0.351/MMBtu increase in DES LNG price, and a $0.015/MMBtu narrowing of the discount to the TTF.

Levels of gas in storages in Europe rose compared to the last week.

Data by Gas Infrastructure Europe (GIE) shows that volumes in gas storages in the EU were 62.61 percent full on May 1.

Gas storages were 61.74 percent full on April 24, and 60.22 percent full on May 1 last year.

In Asia, JKM, the price for LNG cargoes delivered to Northeast Asia, settled at $10.410/MMBtu on Thursday.

Moreover, US LNG exports dropped in the week ending May 1, with the Freeport LNG terminal shipping only one cargo during the period, according to the EIA.

Freeport LNG said in March it will operate with only the third train until “sometime in May” when it expects to bring back online the first and the second train.

According to reports, the third LNG train tripped offline on April 9 and on April 23 as well.

Besides Freeport LNG, Chevron Australia, a unit of US energy giant Chevron, is working to resume full production from its Gorgon LNG terminal in Western Australia following a “mechanical fault” which is affecting one LNG production train.

Chevron expects repair activities to “take a number of weeks”.

In Europe, Norway’s Equinor restarted its 4.3 mtpa Hammerfest LNG export plant on April 27 following a gas leak.

Source: Lngprime.com

Take the Survey at https://survey.energynewsbeat.com/

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post Spot LNG shipping rates steady, European prices rise appeared first on Energy News Beat.