Source: ENB
Daily Standup Top Stories
Why Kamala Harris Would Be A Total Disaster For American Energy
The Biden-Harris administration’s whole-of-government war on energy perpetuates a very bleak vision of our nation’s future. President Dwight Eisenhower once declared that “pessimism never won any battle.” Yet, many Americans are understandably pessimistic these days. […]
Kamala Dodges On Fracking At Debate, Sparking Doubts Among Energy Experts
Kamala’s slick debate stance on fracking and oil has experts questioning whether her administration has really shifted its position on energy. Kamala Harris’ seemingly slick stance on the debate stage around fracking and oil production […]
Germany’s Green Gamble: How Nuclear Power Could Have Saved Billions, Slashed Emissions
Germany would have done significantly better in terms of both spending and CO2 emissions if it had gone nuclear, new report shows. A bombshell report has found that Germany could have been more […]
Offshore Wind Decimating Sea Life—Fishermen Accuse Biden-Harris Admin Of Cover-Up
With the support of the US government, the wind industry is killing whales and other sea life and ignoring warnings from marine biologists. Over the last three years, we have been documenting the […]
I See a Bull Oil Market On the Horizon
There are several critical questions facing oil and gas investors today. The two we see most often are 1: oil is going to fade away as we are near peak oil demand. And 2: Will […]
Highlights of the Podcast
00:00 – Intro
01:15 – Why Kamala Harris Would Be A Total Disaster For American Energy
04:28 – Kamala Dodges On Fracking At Debate, Sparking Doubts Among Energy Experts
07:41 – Germany’s Green Gamble: How Nuclear Power Could Have Saved Billions, Slashed Emissions
09:37 – Offshore Wind Decimating Sea Life—Fishermen Accuse Biden-Harris Admin Of Cover-Up
12:14 – I See a Bull Oil Market On the Horizon
15:49 – Market Updates
17:53 – 1PointFive’s South Texas Direct Air Capture Hub Awarded U.S. Department of Energy Funding
21:10 – Outro
Follow Stuart On LinkedIn and Twitter
Follow Michael On LinkedIn and Twitter
– Get in Contact With The Show –
Video Transcription edited for grammar. We disavow any errors unless they make us look better or smarter.
Michael Tanner: [00:00:10] What’s going on, everybody? Welcome into the Monday, September 16th, 2024, edition of the Daily Energy News Beat Stand Up. Here are today’s top headlines. First up, why Kamala Harris would be a total disaster for American energy. Sticking on the politics thing. Next up, Kamala dodges on fracking debate sparking doubt among energy experts. Next up, will go abroad. Germany’s green gamble, how nuclear power could have saved billions in slashed emissions. Interesting. Next up, some red meat for me. Offshore wind decimating sea life. Fishermen accuse Biden-Harris administration of covering it up. Next up, a nice opinion piece from Stu. Well, a little internal audit, the bull oil market on the horizon. We will then t will then tosser me. I will quickly cover what happened in the oil and gas markets and talk a little bit about oxy subsidiary 1.5. Getting themselves a nice little government subsidy. So we will cover all that. Chips guys. As always, I am Michael Tanner, joined by Stuart Turley. When you want to begin. [00:01:14][64.3]
Stuart Turley: [00:01:15] Hey, let’s start with our first story here. Why Kamala Harris would be a total disaster for American energy. And Michael, let me tease this story up with a line in here out of this story. This story’s out of The Daily Caller. And people don’t understand that in 2019 and 2019, building on the incredible innovations of the shale revolution and the pro energy policies of the Trump administration, the United States became the net energy exporter for the first time in nearly 70 years. At the same time, the country had the largest net reduction of energy related carbon dioxide CO2 emissions in the world. Throughout the Trump administration, the United States also reduced air pollution by 7%. You can have your energy and you can claim here and you can do it together. The reason I like this article is because I agree that it is going to be a disaster for the consumer, for American energy policy. [00:02:22][67.1]
Michael Tanner: [00:02:23] Yeah, I think this headline is a little bit deceiving. If I were to write this headline, I would say why Kamala Harris would be a total energy disaster for the American energy consumer. Because I do think what’s going to happen is oil prices are going to maybe not go to $150. I think that’s a little bit of you know, look here, I’m I’m being crazy. But I do think you’re going to consume usually 80 to $95 oil and that from a consumer standpoint, it’s not going to help out inflation. You’re going to see higher prices at the grocery store. [00:02:52][28.7]
Stuart Turley: [00:02:52] Exactly. [00:02:52][0.0]
Michael Tanner: [00:02:52] Contrary to what people think, higher prices at the grocery store have a lot to do with the transportation costs of getting that food from one place to the other. It’s not just the inputs going into the food itself, it’s the diesel to the grocery store. You’ll also see extremely higher prices at the pump. I was driving around today $2.50 cent gas. Now, that’s the that has more to do with some of the refinery stuff. It’s also partly due to what we’ve seen in the last week with oil prices. So, you know, one thing you’ll never hear out of these, you know, oil executives sitting over there in Midland, you know, at the Houston Petroleum Club or up here, Dallas Petroleum, they will never tell you that secretly they would love nothing more than $95 oil. Now, they would probably come out and say, well, that just means our cost of services are going to go up. Our margins aren’t going to necessarily stay the same. I call baloney. I think secretly they’re all sitting there like, Hey, if Trump wins, we’re going to have less regulation. We’re probably hopefully going to see, you know, service costs go down because inflation will come down a little bit. And that’s what’s really hurting our margins. But if Kamala wins, we’ll see higher prices and continue to make our nice margins. So I think ironically, the S&P companies think they’re in a win win. Now. You can’t just look at it. And that’s a very as I said, they interest you. That’s a pretty selfish look if you’re an operator. But what do you as an as a CEO and as their oil and gas company, your job to that’s your only focus. [00:04:15][83.1]
Stuart Turley: [00:04:16] If I was in there you make a. [00:04:17][1.1]
Michael Tanner: [00:04:17] Lot of money. So if I’m a consumer standpoint, it’s it’s going to hurt tremendously. There’s going to be pain at the pump. You’re going to see higher prices, restrictive oil and gas drilling. It’s going to be really tough. You bet. [00:04:28][11.0]
Stuart Turley: [00:04:28] Hey, let’s go to the next one here. Kamala dodges fracking at debate, sparking debate doubts among energy expert Michael. I started this several weeks ago to frack or not and I ask grow X on grow to create a picture of Kamala Harris in a Shakespearean role. And she’s got a sign that says to frack or not. That is the question. I got tickled at that. Well, let’s take a look at this. Demand is what largely triggers production. I think people forget that, including the vice president to the energy director. Explain the reason why the vice president is touting Biden. Increasing production and keeping afloat is because there are checks and. Balances and other actions you see from the regulators regulatory side, they actually cut the. They ban fracking and cut the production capability through their regulatory processes. And I don’t think that they’re going to be very good for oil. [00:05:26][57.2]
Michael Tanner: [00:05:26] Well, again, I think it’s how you frame it. They’re going to be great for oil prices. And so if you are a fan of higher oil prices, you have to. You you’re really conflicted because it’s going to be terrible on the consumer. I don’t think any doubt we don’t know where she stands on fracking because it’s clear in 2019, she specifically said she was going to ban fracking. And she said in the debate she’s not going to ban fracking. I’m okay with people changing their mind. This is where I, I do find it a little bit crazy when everybody wants to. Let me finish. Okay. I find it a little bit annoying when someone says, well, he changed his mind or she changed his mind is like, well, I changed my mind all the time. I actually enjoy changing my mind because it means I learned something and now I’m less wrong tomorrow than I was yesterday. So if you’re changing your mind based on the facts and admit you’re changing your mind, that’s only okay with me. And if she had just come out and said, Hey man, I was against fracking, I’ll be honest, I was against it. But I got in office. I saw how continued oil and gas production actually helps consumers. And now I’ve decided that I’m against fracking. I actually be okay with it, but that’s clearly not what she’s doing here. It’s most likely a political position that she’s taking now, which means the waters are extremely muddy when it comes to what she’d actually do. [00:06:39][72.6]
Stuart Turley: [00:06:39] Right. An example, she said, don’t why are you making these lies about whether or not I’m going to pick the guns up? And she says, Waltz and I are gun owners. And then two days later, she puts out on her own Twitter feed and says, I’m going to pick up the guns now. She is going to ban fracking. [00:06:56][16.7]
Michael Tanner: [00:06:57] I agree. I think I think the problem with, you know, the ex account is she’s not running them. It’s some 22 year old who just graduated from college who they give the social media. It’s, you know, the classic social media intern who just got the credentials. So, yes, I agree with you. You can’t believe a word she says because she’s not being honest about her flip flop. If you’re just honest about changing your mind or quote unquote, flopping, I’m okay with that because that means you’re less wrong today than you were yesterday. [00:07:25][28.0]
Stuart Turley: [00:07:25] I agree. You and I are on the same page, but I don’t believe anything that anything from a government is getting. It’s only right. Absolutely. [00:07:32][6.4]
Michael Tanner: [00:07:32] And that that is a key point here is the government never says that. They just say, well, I’ve always believed this. It’s like, well, no, we’re not stupid. Additional gaslight. [00:07:40][7.3]
Stuart Turley: [00:07:41] Yeah. Hey, let’s go over to Germany. Green Energy Gamble How nuclear could Have Saved Billions, Slashed Emissions. Let me tell you this one right in here. Right in this article. This article is from Breitbart. Let’s take a look. In a declassified document produced just months before the Russian invasion revealed that the Merkel government, which at the time included Chancellor Olaf Schwartz, believed that increasing Germany’s reliance on gas from Russia through the Nord Stream pipeline would not jeopardize a secure energy supplies to Germany and the EU. Hoo hoo! That was wrong. But by over and large, the by if. Additionally, if Germany had invested further in nuclear in 2002, it would have seen emissions fall by 73%, nearly three times the current rate, while still saving €300 billion 321 compared to the Green in the Year agenda. They just lost a ton of money and national security by their energy policies. [00:08:43][62.6]
Michael Tanner: [00:08:44] And Germany is generally considered the manufacturing hub, the high manufacturing hub of the EU. I mean, you talk about some ball bearings, you talk about all of the really precision manufacturing that goes on. German energy used to be a thing. It was German engineered, it was great. It was always considered world class. And the problem with manufacturing is that it’s energy intensive. Then you create higher energy costs. It not only just cost you more from an energy standpoint, if you’re trying to turn on your life, it also drives heavy industry out of your country because they need to at least make over. I mean, that’s you know, we live in a capitalist society. In order to encourage people to do things, you have to provide them an opportunity to make a profit. If you don’t want to provide people the opportunity to make a profit, you’re a communist. It’s as simple as that. [00:09:31][47.2]
Stuart Turley: [00:09:32] Absolutely. I like it. And I thought this was a great one. Shout out to Brett Bach. Yes. All right. Let’s go to your favorite topic here. Offshore wind decimating sea life. Fishermen accuse Biden here and admin of cover up. Got to give a shout out to our buddy there, Michael Shellenberger. Love him. Why now be in part because the recent collapse of a giant wind turbine which I covered with David Blackmon, Irina Slav and Tammy Nemeth on the energy reality off the coast of Massachusetts, which scattered, jagged pieces of fiberglass. Take a moment. This video is an outstanding video When the Offshore. Or when developers came commercial, they are now not able to find lobster, they’re not finding fish, they’re not finding all of these things. But Michael, I did not know until I started getting into this and following. Michael Schellenberg The microplastics, how much wind farm material actually gets into the fish. It’s not just the dead whales, and I know that you don’t mind a dead whale or two, but it’s actually all of the fish in the microplastics is huge. [00:10:36][64.6]
Michael Tanner: [00:10:37] Well, we’ve decimated our our fish population, not necessarily from the wind farm, but just from overconsumption, overfishing, all that stuff. Yeah, I mean, it’s it’s clear I’m no fan of the whales, and this might be the one positive byproduct of offshore wind. The microplastics, I think, are interesting, though, from the standpoint of, you know, that’s something everybody can agree on. I read some stuff the other day. We eat a credit cards worth like a credit card, thin and wide worth of plastics every single year. And I mean, think about everything you buy comes in plastics. And a lot of the food you eat is directly sourced from the. I think it’s interesting. There’s a great graph. It’s not on it’s it’s in the source article. It’s not necessarily in here, but they show a graph of the whale population. I mean, it’s completely crashing. That slope is massively downward. We lost eight last year, you know, down from 348 to 340. The lifespan of these whales are going down, thank goodness again. But I think it’s interesting that the fishermen who generally you would consider clearly as environmentalists are trying to bring this to the attention of anybody who will listen and nobody will listen only when it’s politically convenient do people care about the environment. I think that’s the overarching thing to remember here, is that it’s only politically convenient to talk about the environment when it favors you, when it doesn’t mouth shut. [00:11:57][80.2]
Stuart Turley: [00:11:58] And I and I and I just really am tired of it’s about pollution and energy poverty. If you married good policies to end energy poverty with the environment, we would have low cost energy, right? [00:12:12][14.3]
Michael Tanner: [00:12:12] We would. We absolutely would. [00:12:13][1.0]
Stuart Turley: [00:12:14] Let’s go to the last one here. This was an article. I see a bull market on the horizon. And there’s two reasons why this is for me. Stuart Turley A legend in my own mind. Michael So when we sit back and take a look, years ago when I worked at Intel, Moore’s Law states that for every two years the number of transistors will double in the transistors. And that has not been proven wrong yet. Moore’s Law There is another side of this is why I think that we’re in a not going to see an energy transition and that there is a bull market for we are seeing the failure of the TV market and everybody is out there saying, wait, the EV and the gasoline demand and the and the diesel demand is going to go down and we are going to have all these EVs. There are EVs going everywhere that are failing. The UK just announced that they’re going to have to go to hybrids and they’re really they’re really going to extend the hybrids and allow them to continue on. So we are seeing some fight back on this. [00:13:20][66.2]
Michael Tanner: [00:13:21] We’re absolutely seeing some fight back. I think this is a great article. We’re probably going to include some of this in an e-book that we’re going to release here soon. I think the one thing you point out is we need all forms of energy. The difference is we live in a capitalist society. So people are going to gravitate towards not only the most cost effective, they’re going to navigate towards the most cost effective source. And the cost isn’t necessarily the price. Cost is efficiency costs. How easy it is to get, you know, if it takes you two hours to charge your EV car and you’re only saving a penny or gallon of electricity, people are going to use that because your time is worth more than that. So cost involves a lot more than just, what’s the actual physical price? I love that first question you ask will oil is oil going to fade away as we near, quote unquote peak oil? I mean, I think it’s pretty obvious every year people have paid peak oil. Peak oil is just around the corner, just around the corner. And they keep revising it. So obviously, eventually there will come a time when we will probably reach peak oil. I mean, I. [00:14:18][57.8]
Stuart Turley: [00:14:19] Agree. [00:14:19][0.0]
Michael Tanner: [00:14:19] At some point it maybe won’t. I mean, that’s the other the other argument is that will never reach peak oil because prices will continue to rise to the point where uneconomic oil becomes economic. I you know, people always ask me, well, well, are we going to run out of oil? It’s like, well, maybe, but not really, because it’s not a matter of we don’t know where oil is. We know where a lot of oil is. Question is, is it economic to go get it? And will the government allow you to go get it? I mean, there’s a lot of stuff in China that they’re drilling as much as they can, but we got all this stuff in the Arctic. We got much more off the coast and Gulf of Mexico. So it’s going to be very interesting. Love this article. Highly recommend checking out our E book and you’ll have a lot more of this kind of stated ice. [00:14:56][36.7]
Stuart Turley: [00:14:56] Cool. Well done. [00:14:57][0.8]
Michael Tanner: [00:14:57] All right. Well, let’s go ahead and jump over to a quick finance wrap up. Before we do that, guys, we got to pay the bills, as always. The news and quote unquote analysis you just heard is brought to you by the. World’s greatest website, the energy news become the best place for all your energy and oil and gas news. Stu and the team do a tremendous job making sure that website stays up to speed. Everything you need to know to be the tip of the spear when it comes to the energy and the oil and gas business. Go ahead and hit that description below. All of the links to the timestamps. Links to the articles. Check us out on substack. The energy news beat.substack.com. And you can also check out Invest in Oil dot energy news beat.com for our exclusive A direct working interest opportunity that we are partnering up with the team at Pecos Country operating and great Rey Trevino great great friend of the show go ahead do that guys again that’s invest in oil dot energy news beat.com. [00:15:48][50.3]
Michael Tanner: [00:15:49] The pretty wild Friday Stu Not much going on We only saw about a half a percentage point rise on the on the S&P 500. Nasdaq was up about 4/10 of a percentage point. Two year yields down about 1.6 percentage points. Ten year yields were actually down about 6/10 of a percentage point. We see Bitcoin still trading right just below 60,000, 59 eight and about $800. Crude oil kind of tumbled mainly due to the fact that a lot of that Gulf of Mexico production was coming back online. It was down to 68, 65, because it looks to open here as we record this mid-afternoon here on the 15th. Markets will open here in a bit. Looks to open probably somewhere a little above $69. But currently the market closed somewhere around 68, 65, Brant oil down to 72, 21. Natural gas down two percentage points after reaching highs of the $2.40, we’re down about two percentage points, $2.35. The actual contract on Friday raised about 1.2 percentage points at 100 up to 128 55. I mean, Stu, what are you seeing in the oil markets? I know we just talked about this, but from a from a short term pricing standpoint, you were talking about something during the intro or you you’re seeing some market manipulation going on. You think? [00:16:59][69.4]
Stuart Turley: [00:16:59] Yes, I think we’re going to stay around at 75 to 85 range. We know that OPEC needs 90 to 80 5 to 90 really to meet their needs. So I really think it’s a safe bet in that area. [00:17:12][12.7]
Michael Tanner: [00:17:12] Yeah, Another interesting note. We saw a US oil and gas rig counts drop on Friday plus eight. So pretty large movement week over week relative to what we’ve been seeing. Still 51 rigs south of what it was at the same time last year. But you know, some you know, obviously picking up rigs is a is a lagging indicator per se. It’s not necessarily because of what happened last week, but some of the stuff that’s been happening over the past couple of weeks, it was interesting to note that we did see Kotara Energy CEO Tom Jordan shout out Colorado School Mines alumni. He said that they are actually dropping their last Marcellus rig in order to kind of balance out what’s going on with natural gas prices. So super interesting there. You know, the only other thing I saw still here we go, 1.5, which is an Oxy subsidiary there, South Texas Direct Air capture hub, awarded US Department of Energy funding. And so I’ll just read some read straight from the release here. 1.5, a wholly owned subsidiary of Occidental, announced on Friday that the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations What a weird name will provide up to get this numbers to $500 million to support the development of South Texas direct air capture. This award is a milestone. Further and further, blah, blah blah blah, blah. The funding will be provided in multiple tranches. The initial award of $50 million World Nance 1.5 is ongoing work currently at that DACA. Upcoming activities include engineering, permitting and procurement of long lead equipment and continued community engagement. Access to whatever to further 1.5 community benefits plan. I want to get in on a $50 Million Community Benefits plan to you to your hard earned tax dollars is going guys. The total award value for the South Texas DAC hub is expected to be up to $500 million and potentially increase up to $650 million for the development of an expanded regional network in South Texas. And now, folks, you see why Warren Buffett loves oxy. You don’t love it. He likes the oil and gas, but he loves this stuff. He loves free money. He loves it when the government loans his company’s money. Why he bought banks after 2008, Because guess what? He knew they were going to get a lot of Tarp money. He loves oil and gas companies that are trying to go out and get literally 650 million free dollars from the U.S. taxpayer to do direct air capture, which we know I needed to bait direct air capture. Who knows if it’ll work or not. But we are subsidizing this as a contract to the point of $650 million to the tune of Oxy. Who should have this money lying around? What this tells me in an economic it’s just blows my mind still blows my mind. [00:19:52][159.5]
Stuart Turley: [00:19:52] Is absolutely ludicrous. [00:19:53][1.1]
Michael Tanner: [00:19:54] I mean, this is what I’ve been saying for for a while. You know, people say, well, why is or, you know, you know, Warren Buffett, Berkshire, they’re all in on energy. They’re all in on energy. Well, then why are they on oxy? Why are they investing in oxy? There are better oil and gas. Yeah, they’re a bit of oil and gas company. Is to invest it right here, baby. Right here. There’s $650 million free reasons why he wants in on this. Yes, I read this article. I said, it’s it’s they’re just saying it without saying it. Right. I mean, you do agree with me with that that analysis. [00:20:23][29.4]
Stuart Turley: [00:20:24] I agree. 300%. [00:20:25][0.5]
Michael Tanner: [00:20:26] Well, hey, go, folks. I got 300% agreement from Stu. If only we could agree on the whales. If only we could get an agreement on the whales we want. That’s all I’ve got. What should people be worried about this week? [00:20:35][9.5]
Stuart Turley: [00:20:36] Let’s be praying for President Trump. They just had shots fired at his golf course with an AK 47 found in the bushes. I don’t know any other details other than that. So shots fired around the president, the former president. I haven’t heard of each other, but let’s keep praying for him. We don’t want. [00:20:53][17.4]
Michael Tanner: [00:20:53] Anybody. I don’t see it on Twitter yet. I do. Good. That’s why you’re on a you’re on a crazy side of Twitter. I’ll give you that much. [00:20:59][6.0]
Stuart Turley: [00:21:00] Thank you. [00:21:00][0.3]
Michael Tanner: [00:21:00] In a good in a in a good way. Yeah. Everyone needs to follow Stu on X if you really want to scare yourself. [00:21:05][5.0]
Stuart Turley: [00:21:06] And fortunately, I talk to people from all over the world, and that’s the sad part. [00:21:09][3.3]
Michael Tanner: [00:21:10] Now, you you you get it there. All right. We got we recorded some great interviews last week. We’re going to have some great stuff coming up this week, guys. So buckle up. I will be out of the chair Wednesday, Tuesday and Wednesday. So you’re going to hear a show with us tomorrow and then Stu’s going to wrap the week up for us. So I apologize in advance, but he’ll do a great job holding the fort down. Guys, as always, thank you for checking us out on the world’s greatest podcast and website energy news. Me for Stuart Turley I’m Michael Tanner. We’ll see tomorrow, folks. Tip. [00:21:10][0.0][1239.5]
– Get in Contact With The Show –
Energy News Beat