Joe Raia, Chief Commercial Officer at Abaxx Exchange, had a fun interview as he stopped by to give us an update. As a commercial tanker captain who moved into commodities trading, he has the knowledge and background to help guide the US Markets.

Connect with Joe on his LinkedIn here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/joe-raia-4982a417/

Follow Joe on X here: https://x.com/JoeRaia5

Check out Abaxx Exchange information here: https://abaxx.exchange/

1. Abaxx Exchange & LNG Futures Contracts

The core focus is on ABEX’s innovative physically deliverable LNG futures contracts. Joe Rea explains how these contracts are unique because they price actual waterborne LNG molecules rather than using proxy benchmarks like Henry Hub or Brent crude oil. The contracts cover three key regions: Gulf of Mexico (FOB), DES North Pacific Asia, and Northwest Europe. This addresses a major gap in the market where there was no transparent, regulated pricing instrument for LNG.

2. Pricing Benchmarks & Market Inefficiencies

A significant discussion centers on why traditional pricing proxies fail for LNG. Henry Hub has remained at $3 for 15 years while waterborne LNG ranges from $11-15, and Brent crude oil has no correlation to delivered LNG in Asia. ABEX’s contracts provide proper pricing correlation, which is critical for midstream suppliers to get fair value for their molecules.

3. Global LNG Market Dynamics

The conversation covers Europe’s energy crisis following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the shift from long-term contracts (40-50% of the market) to spot and shorter-term contracts, and the EU’s struggle to refill natural gas reserves to 85-90% capacity. There’s also discussion of Russia’s new icebreaker LNG carriers and potential sanctions implications.

4. Expansion of LNG Production & Infrastructure

Topics include the U.S. becoming the world’s largest LNG producer, with 200 MTPA coming online this year. There’s discussion of floating LNG terminals (FSRUs) as faster alternatives to building permanent facilities, and potential expansion in the Middle East with pipelines connecting to floating LNG infrastructure.

5. Precious Metals Trading

Abaxx has expanded beyond energy into metals, launching gold and silver futures contracts with physical delivery capabilities in Singapore vaults. The silver contract has been particularly successful, and these contracts address logistical issues that previously plagued gold trading between London and New York.

6. Energy Security & U.S. Policy

A major theme is energy security, including discussions of the Jones Act, U.S. tanker capacity, and the importance of American-flagged vessels. The conversation highlights how a 60-day Jones Act waiver resulted in more U.S. energy exports to Puerto Rico in 2 months than in the previous 20 years, and the need to rebuild U.S. shipbuilding capacity.

7. Geopolitical Implications

Discussion of Middle East pipeline infrastructure (Saudi Arabia’s East-West pipeline, UAE expansion, Kuwait’s plans), Iran’s territorial claims, and how geopolitical tensions affect energy markets and shipping routes through critical chokepoints like the Panama Canal and Strait of Hormuz.

8. Technology & Market Integration

Abaxx’s integration with major pricing platforms like Refinitiv, Bloomberg, and TradingView to make pricing data accessible globally. The conversation emphasizes the importance of having standardized, transparent pricing that can be referenced in trading agreements.

This episode essentially showcases how ABEX is revolutionizing commodity trading by creating transparent, physically backed futures markets that better serve the global energy and metals industries.

Thank you, Joe, for your service in the United States Merchant Fleet as a Captain and for your continued service in helping balance the markets.

Subscribe now

Watch for Abaxx Exchange to become the standard for LNG pricing, like WTI or Brent. Just saying.

We also covered the Jones Act, and even the podcast with and how the merchant marine portion of the US economy needs work.

Current levels in the EU are extremely low

Energy Dominance is displayed through your Exports

US LNG export infrastructure is rapidly scaling up, turning American shale gas into a cornerstone of global energy supply. This buildout underscores US energy dominance through exports, as highlighted in recent analyses by commodity trader and analyst Jack Prandelli
on X). His posts detail the current state of US LNG terminals and the surge in final investment decisions (FIDs), positioning the US to reshape the global LNG market.

Current Operating Capacity:110 MTPA Across Six Terminals

The US currently operates 110 million tonnes per annum (MTPA) of LNG export capacity from six major terminals, primarily in Louisiana and Texas. These facilities are already powering significant global flows:

• Sabine Pass (Cameron Parish, LA) — Cheniere Energy

• Corpus Christi (San Patricio County, TX) — Cheniere Energy

• Freeport (TX)

• Calcasieu Pass (Cameron Parish, LA) — Venture Global

• Plaquemines (Plaquemines Parish, LA) — Venture Global (Phase 1 recently ramping up)

• Golden Pass (Sabine Pass, TX) — Joint venture involving ExxonMobil and QatarEnergy

Louisiana and Texas together form the engine of US LNG exports, with Cheniere and Venture Global as leading operators. Cheniere’s facilities (Sabine Pass and Corpus Christi) represent a substantial share of current output, with strong operational track records and ongoing optimizations.

Under Construction: Adding 47 MTPA

Several major projects are advancing:

• Rio Grande LNG (~17 MTPA) — NextDecade (targeting 2027–2028)

• Louisiana LNG (~16.5 MTPA, formerly associated with Driftwood) — Woodside (targeting 2029)

• Port Arthur Phase 1 (~13.5 MTPA) — Sempra Infrastructure and partners (e.g., ConocoPhillips; targeting 2028–2029)

These projects will significantly expand Gulf Coast capacity in the coming years.

Post-FID Projects: Another 42.5 MTPA in the Pipeline

Recent FIDs signal strong momentum:

CP2 Phase 1 (Venture Global, adjacent to Calcasieu Pass) — targeting 2029–2030
Port Arthur Phase 2 — Sempra-led, with offtake from ConocoPhillips, EQT, JERA, and others
Commonwealth LNG (9.5 MTPA) — FID announced May 15, 2026; backed by Kimmeridge, Caturus, and Mubadala Energy (targeting late 2020s)

Additional momentum includes Delfin FLNG 1 (4.4 MTPA), which reached FID on June 3, 2026.

Total projected capacity by 2030: ~200 MTPA across approximately 12 terminals — nearly double today’s operating levels.The Bigger Picture: 360+ Billion Cubic Metres (bcm) of Capacity

When combining existing facilities with projects that have already reached FID, US LNG export capacity is on track to surpass 360 bcm annually. According to analysis citing Anne-Sophie Corbeau (Columbia Center on Global Energy Policy / SIPA), this scale is transformative:

• More than twice all US LNG exports in 2025

• Larger than total EU gas demand in 2025

• More than 80% of China’s entire gas consumption in 2025

• More than 60% of all global LNG trade in 2025

A bar chart from the Columbia SIPA Center vividly illustrates this dominance, comparing US capacity (existing + FID’ed) against EU/China demand and global LNG trade volumes.

What This Means for the Global LNG Market

The US is cementing its position as the world’s leading LNG exporter. Flexible, Henry Hub-linked US cargoes (with destination flexibility and hedging potential) contrast with more rigid, oil-linked supplies from traditional players. This shift is already evident as buyers lock in long-term contracts spanning 20+ years.

In the context of regional disruptions (e.g., Qatar’s reported train damage and slower restart), US supply provides a reliable alternative. Qatar’s pre-disruption capacity was ~77 MTPA; even with expansions, loss offtake to US LNG may prove difficult to fully reclaim. US projects are contracted, financed, and advancing on the ground — infrastructure that doesn’t “unbuild” easily.

Traders like Gunvor, Trafigura, and Vitol are actively positioning in US gas and LNG infrastructure, signaling long-term confidence. New buyers (e.g., Germany via Venture Global–EnBW deals, India ramping US volumes significantly, and emerging markets like South Africa) are diversifying toward flexible US supply.

Implications for Consumers Worldwide

For energy consumers in Europe, Asia, and beyond:

Greater supply security and diversification — Reduced reliance on any single region or supplier amid geopolitical risks.
More competitive and flexible pricing — Henry Hub-based contracts allow hedging and resale, potentially stabilizing costs compared to purely oil-linked alternatives.
Long-term certainty — Multi-decade offtake agreements help utilities and industries plan investments (e.g., power generation, petrochemicals, data centers).
Potential price moderation — Increased global supply from the US can help balance markets, especially as demand grows from electrification, industry, and new importers.

Overall, this buildout supports affordable, reliable energy access while accelerating the displacement of higher-emission fuels in some markets.

Investor-Relevant Forward-Looking Statements

Public companies driving this expansion offer compelling visibility:

Cheniere Energy (NYSE: LNG) — Operates the largest US platform (Sabine Pass + Corpus Christi, >53 mtpa operating + expansions). Recent quarters show record cargoes, substantial completions on Corpus Christi Stage 3 trains, and raised 2026 financial guidance (Consolidated Adjusted EBITDA and Distributable Cash Flow).

The company is advancing brownfield expansions (Sabine Pass Stage 5 and Corpus Christi further phases) and signing long-term SPAs (e.g., with CPC Taiwan through 2050). Management emphasizes reliable growth and shareholder returns via its capital allocation plan.

Venture Global (NYSE: VG) — Rapidly scaling with Calcasieu Pass operating, Plaquemines ramping, and CP2 under construction. The company is executing a modular, low-cost strategy across multiple Gulf Coast sites.
NextDecade (NASDAQ: NEXT) — Advancing Rio Grande LNG toward first gas in the late 2020s.
Sempra (NYSE: SRE) — Through Sempra Infrastructure, developing Port Arthur LNG (Phases 1 and 2) with strong offtake commitments from major international buyers.

Other developments (e.g., Delfin via potential reverse merger structures like $TGLO) add optionality in the floating LNG space. Investors should monitor regulatory progress, offtake contracting, and execution timelines, as most capacity is already backed by long-term contracts.

Full context and deeper analysis are available in Jack Prandelli’s Substack article (linked in his posts), which covers Qatar’s position, buyer behavior, and the structural advantages of US LNG.

The map and capacity comparisons shared in Prandelli’s recent posts provide a clear visual of this Gulf Coast transformation. US energy dominance is no longer aspirational — it is being built, contracted, and exported in real time. This positions American producers, infrastructure owners, and the broader economy at the center of global energy flows for the decade ahead.

Appendix: Sources and Links

This appendix compiles all key sources, data references, company statements, and links referenced in the article “Energy Dominance is displayed through your Exports”. Links are current as of June 2026.Primary X Posts (by Jack Prandelli)

• US LNG Export Terminals Map (Operating: 110 MTPA, Under Construction: 47 MTPA, Post-FID: 42.5 MTPA):
  

• US LNG Capacity Scale, Recent FIDs & Market Comparisons (including the Columbia SIPA bar chart):
  

Full In-Depth Analysis

• “Qatar Comes Back 17% Smaller” – Full article by Jack Prandelli (The Merchant Substack) with detailed US LNG pipeline, Qatar context, buyer contracts, and market implications:
  

The Merchant's News

Qatar Comes Back 17% Smaller, That's Why I'm Long US LNG Through The Restart.

QatarEnergy told its buyers what the restart looks like. 50% of capacity within 1 month of Hormuz reopening. 80% within 2…

Read more

2 days ago · 21 likes · 1 comment · Giacomo Prandelli

Capacity Data, Projections & Market Comparisons

• Columbia Center on Global Energy Policy (SIPA) – Source of the “US LNG Dominance” bar chart comparing US capacity (existing + FID’ed) to EU/China demand and global LNG trade (data from GIIGNL, ACER, CGEP):
  

https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/

• 
  (Related analysis: https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/publications/how-qatars-lng-decisions-will-impact-an-oversupplied-global-market/)

• U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) – North American LNG export capacity outlook and project details:
  https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=66384

Company Reports, Forward-Looking Statements & Investor Resources

• Cheniere Energy (NYSE: LNG) – Q1 2026 Earnings Release, raised 2026 guidance, Corpus Christi Stage 3 updates, and expansion plans:
  https://lngir.cheniere.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/339/cheniere-reports-first-quarter-2026-results-and-raises-full

• Venture Global (NYSE: VG) – Investor Relations homepage, project updates (Calcasieu Pass, Plaquemines, CP2), and financial materials:
  

• https://investors.ventureglobal.com/

• Company site: https://ventureglobal.com/

• Sempra Infrastructure / Port Arthur LNG – Project details, Phase 1 & Phase 2 updates, and offtake agreements:
  https://semprainfrastructure.com/what-we-do/lng/port-arthur-lng/
  

https://portarthurlng.com/

• NextDecade (NASDAQ: NEXT) – Rio Grande LNG project information (company investor materials available via standard NASDAQ channels).

Additional Supporting Resources

• U.S. LNG Export Terminals Status (FERC/EIA compiled data): Searchable via EIA liquefaction capacity files (linked within the EIA article above).

• General Industry Context: GIIGNL (International Group of Liquefied Natural Gas Importers) and ACER data referenced in Columbia analyses.

Energy News Beat

At The Intersection of Energy and Finance - By Sandstone Group

By Stu Turley

A shout-out to Steve Reese and the Reese Energy Consulting group for sponsoring the Podcast https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/.

Data2 if you have any business systems, can you trust A? Well, they have the patent on validation. . https://data2.zoholandingpage.com/energy

And we have WellDatabase rolling in as a new sponsor. https://welldatabase.com/

The Trump administration has announced another major negotiated settlement in its effort to unwind U.S. offshore wind development, this time with Chicago-based Invenergy. Under the June 17, 2026, agreement, Invenergy affiliates will voluntarily relinquish four early-stage offshore wind leases in exchange for approximately $765 million in reimbursement. The company will redirect that capital into domestic natural gas-fired power plants and geothermal projects.

This marks the third such deal since March 2026 and brings the cumulative total redirected from offshore wind leases to roughly $2.5–2.6 billion.

The move continues the administration’s shift from direct legal interventions (many of which faced court challenges) toward pragmatic, negotiated buyouts that provide developers with financial recovery while steering investment toward what the administration calls more reliable, affordable, and secure energy sources.

Details of the Invenergy Agreement

Invenergy will terminate four federal offshore wind leases acquired during the previous administration:

One in the New York Bight (including the Leading Light Wind project area, which Invenergy had already moved to cancel independently).

One off the Central Coast of California (near Morro Bay).

Two in the Gulf of Maine.

These leases were in the very early stages of development with no turbines installed. The $765 million reimbursement reflects (or is close to) the original lease bonus payments made under competitive auctions. In return, Invenergy has committed to investing an equivalent amount in at least five new natural gas-fired power plants in Indiana, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri, plus geothermal developments in the western United States.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum stated: “President Trump is committed to unleashing affordable, reliable American energy for our country’s communities and putting the American people first through common-sense action.” He noted that offshore wind projects relied on “costly, unreliable” subsidies and raised national security concerns, emphasizing the pivot to “dependable, secure energy infrastructure.”

Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward praised the deal for advancing the administration’s energy agenda, lowering consumer costs, and strengthening domestic energy security.

Subscribe now

Daniel Runyan, Invenergy’s Senior Vice President for Development, framed the decision in commercial terms: “At a time of unprecedented energy demand, Invenergy is focused on delivering reliable, affordable energy for our customers and supporting disciplined investment at scale.”oceanexplorer.noaa.gov

Broader Strategy: From Legal Challenges to Negotiated Settlements

This Invenergy deal builds on two prior agreements:

March 2026: TotalEnergies surrendered leases for the Attentive Energy (New York Bight) and Carolina Long Bay (North Carolina) projects, valued at roughly $928 million, with funds redirected to U.S. LNG and upstream oil & gas projects (including Rio Grande LNG).

April 2026: Bluepoint Wind (New York/New Jersey) and Golden State Wind (California) relinquished leases, with approximately $885 million redirected to LNG, oil & gas, and related infrastructure.

Together, these settlements have removed early-stage projects representing over 8 GW of potential offshore wind capacity.

The buyout approach emerged after earlier, more confrontational moves encountered resistance. On his first day in office (January 20, 2025), President Trump issued a Presidential Memorandum withdrawing all Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) areas from new or renewed wind energy leasing and directing a comprehensive review of existing practices. The administration later paused permitting, rescinded designated Wind Energy Areas (over 3.5 million acres), canceled federal funding for certain projects, and issued stop-work orders on several permitted East Coast projects citing national security and radar concerns.

Many of these actions faced legal challenges, with courts granting injunctions in several cases.

Negotiated settlements have since become the preferred mechanism, allowing voluntary termination with reimbursement rather than prolonged litigation or forced abandonment.

Positive Engagement with Wind Developers vs. Oil & Gas Approach

A notable aspect of the current strategy is the use of negotiated buyouts that give developers a path to recover a substantial portion of their lease investments and redeploy capital elsewhere. This contrasts with outright program cuts or cancellations without compensation that have occurred in other energy sectors under previous administrations.

For comparison, the Trump administration has pursued aggressive expansion of oil and gas leasing and development. It moved quickly to replace the Biden-era restrictive 2024–2029 National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program with a much larger 11th program (2026–2031) proposing up to 34 lease sales across Alaska, the Gulf of America (Gulf of Mexico), and even Pacific areas off California.

Additional mandated sales under recent legislation further accelerate activity, alongside streamlined permitting and record numbers of drilling permits approved.

In short, while offshore wind faces a deliberate unwinding through compensated settlements, oil and gas receive policy support for growth. The buyout model for wind provides developers with financial certainty and flexibility — a more collaborative exit ramp than simple lease cancellations or indefinite pauses without recourse.

Implications and Opposition

Supporters argue the deals prioritize reliable baseload power, reduce reliance on subsidies, address national security considerations, and redirect capital to projects that can come online faster amid rising electricity demand.

Critics, including several northeastern states, contend the settlements misuse federal funds and circumvent proper leasing procedures. In early June 2026, New York Attorney General Letitia James, Governor Kathy Hochul, and six other states filed suit challenging the TotalEnergies deal on these grounds. Similar opposition has emerged regarding the broader strategy’s impact on clean energy goals, jobs, and supply chains (including specialized vessels and port infrastructure).

For the maritime and offshore wind supply chain, the cumulative effect of these cancellations is expected to reduce near-term demand for installation vessels, Jones Act-compliant support ships, and related domestic manufacturing.

Taking the high road to kill offshore wind is a win for everyone, and it will be interesting to see the Lawfare that shows up.

Had to fix the Dave Chappell meme - to include “Oh, you want me to fund your Lawfare?

Looking Ahead

The Invenergy agreement reinforces the Trump administration’s “Energy Dominance” agenda by accelerating a pivot away from subsidized offshore wind toward conventional and other firm power sources. With early-stage projects largely addressed through these settlements, attention may now shift to any remaining permitted projects and the long-term leasing landscape.

Developers like Invenergy appear to be treating the deals as pragmatic business decisions in a changed policy environment, preserving capital for faster-to-deploy alternatives.

It will be interesting to see how lawfare changes the energy markets. Things are changing in real time.

If we can use the same strategy to end the “Bum Rush Subsidies” on ethanol, I would be thrilled. Ethanol does more harm than good and is a scam.

Thanks to all of our patrons, subscribers, and sponsors! Still working through the podcast lists, and tomorrow interviewing Joe Raia from Abaxx Commodity Traders on the Oil and Natural Gas markets.

Appendix: Sources and Links

• gCaptain original article (June 17, 2026): https://gcaptain.com/trump-expands-offshore-wind-buyout-strategy-with-765-million-invenergy-deal/

• U.S. Department of the Interior Press Release (June 17, 2026): https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-announces-new-energy-agreement-strengthen-american-energy-security-and-lower

• New York Times coverage (June 17, 2026): https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/17/climate/trump-wind-farms-cancel-millions.html

• Reuters (June 17, 2026): https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/trump-administration-pay-765-mln-scrap-four-more-offshore-wind-leases-2026-06-17/

• White House Presidential Memorandum on Wind Leasing (Jan 20, 2025): https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/temporary-withdrawal-of-all-areas-on-the-outer-continental-shelf-from-offshore-wind-leasing-and-review-of-the-federal-governments-leasing-and-permitting-practices-for-wind-projects/

• DOI on expansive oil & gas leasing program (Nov 2025): https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-launches-expansive-11th-national-offshore-leasing-program-advance-us-energy

• Additional background reporting from Utility Dive, AP, and others on prior deals (March–April 2026).

This article is based on official announcements, contemporaneous reporting, and public records as of June 18, 2026. Developments in ongoing litigation or future policy actions could affect outcomes.

Subscribe now

It is a wild day on the Energy News Beat Stand Up.

Make no mistake, time will tell if the Strait of Hormuz is open, but do not underestimate the importance that the Bank of London and Lloyds of London play in opening the Strait of Hormuz. They want the war to continue, and are not happy if the war ends.

As we hit Operational Bottoms for oil storage in the US it is a real problem, and President Trump ran out of time. I think that he has a plan and will get it done, but it will be done after the midterms.

President Trump at the G7 has had some major impacts on the news cycle.

1. Cushing, Oklahoma Oil Storage Crisis (Top Story)

The podcast opens with the critical issue that Cushing—the “pipeline crossroads of the world”—has hit operational tank bottoms with only ~21.64 million barrels of crude. This is a major concern because refineries may not be able to access the oil they need, and the situation could spike oil prices. Cushing is the primary delivery and pricing point for WTI (West Texas Intermediate) futures.

2. Global Oil Market Dynamics & Geopolitical Tensions

• Strait of Hormuz concerns: 20% of the world’s oil passes through this strait, creating vulnerability to disruptions

• Iran’s actions: Iran has pulled the trigger on controlling the strait, prompting neighboring Gulf states to seek alternative routes

• Tanker movements: Iranian super tankers are slipping through blockades, with 6 million barrels already moved (likely to China)

3. UAE’s Strategic Independence from Strait of Hormuz

The UAE is accelerating plans to bypass the Strait of Hormuz entirely by expanding pipelines from 1.7 to over 5 million barrels per day, with potential floating LNG terminals planned for the Gulf of Oman.

4. Alternative Pipeline Infrastructure

• Saudi Arabia’s east-west pipeline to the Red Sea (pumping ~7 million barrels/day)

• Plans to bypass the Suez Canal through the Mediterranean

• Iraq’s threat to close the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, forcing reliance on pipelines

5. Qatar’s LNG Export Restart

Qatar is preparing to restart LNG exports with tankers already positioned, which is critical for Europe’s natural gas supply (especially as they lag behind in summer refilling).

6. U.S. Power Grid Crisis

• Severe equipment shortage with power transformer lead times reaching 128 weeks (2.5 years)

• Some special orders taking up to 4 years

• New transformer facilities being built (Hitachi in Virginia by 2028, Siemens in North Carolina)

• Recommendation for homeowners to invest in solar panels and off-grid capabilities

7. California Energy & Infrastructure Problems

• Refinery closures: Only 7 refineries remain in California; losing one would spike gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel prices

• High-speed rail project: Ballooned from $9.9 billion to $231 billion with companies relocating to Morocco due to regulatory burden

• Port congestion: LA and Long Beach ports handling massive container volumes

8. Oil Price Forecasts

• Morgan Stanley lowered Brent crude forecasts to $90 in Q3 and $80 in Q4

• Current prices: WTI at ~$76-77, Brent at ~$79.58, Natural gas at $3.16

9. AI & Grid Infrastructure

Discussion of potential AI bubble concerns and the need for grid validation tools before implementation.

10. U.S. Reshoring & Industrial Recovery

The Trump administration is working to reverse decades of intentional deindustrialization, though the process faces challenges.

The podcast emphasizes that energy markets are at critical junctures with geopolitical tensions, infrastructure constraints, and strategic repositioning reshaping global oil and gas flows.

Subscribe now

1.Cushing, Oklahoma Oil Storage Hits Tank Bottom: Implications for Energy Markets, Consumers, and Investors

Cushing’s Central Role in Mixing, Blending, and Pricing

Cushing is far more than just storage. It serves as:

The primary delivery and pricing point for West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil futures on the NYMEX. WTI is the main U.S. benchmark, and physical settlement/delivery occurs at Cushing.
A major blending and mixing hub. Different grades of crude from various U.S. basins are blended here to meet pipeline quality specifications, refinery requirements, or export standards. Low inventory levels complicate these blending operations.

The heart of the U.S. pipeline network connects Permian, Bakken, and other production areas to Midwest and Gulf Coast refineries and export terminals.

Low stocks at Cushing tighten physical supply signals, influence regional price differentials (e.g., WTI vs. Brent spreads), and affect the futures curve structure (contango or backwardation). This can curb record exports as arbitrage opportunities narrow and operational constraints bite.

2.Pain at the Pump: Can It Heal or Curse the Trump Administration?

Gasoline prices at the pump are falling fast, offering consumers relief after months of pain. But this relief comes amid depleted strategic buffers and lingering uncertainty over the recent Iran conflict and deal. For the Trump Administration, the trajectory of energy prices could either reinforce its political standing or expose vulnerabilities.

Current Price Snapshot (Mid-June 2026)National averages have eased significantly from spring peaks:

Regular gasoline: $4.025 per gallon (AAA, June 17, 2026) — down ~13 cents from the prior week and nearly 49 cents from a month earlier. EIA reported $4.052/gallon as of June 16.

On-highway diesel: $5.059 per gallon (EIA, June 16, 2026).

Jet fuel: U.S. Gulf Coast spot prices around $3.37/gallon (early June); broader Argus US Jet Fuel Index near $2.80/gallon recently.

Brent crude has dropped to the $78–80 range (WTI below $76), down sharply from highs above $90–100+ earlier in the conflict period.

These declines follow a sharp spike tied to the escalation of U.S.-Iran tensions in late February 2026, which disrupted flows through the Strait of Hormuz.

Inventory Levels Signal Tight Supply and Strong Demand

Key storage data reveals a market that has been drawing down buffers aggressively:

Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR): Stocks have fallen to approximately 340–349 million barrels — the lowest since 1983. Recent weekly drawdowns reached 8.9 million barrels as part of coordinated releases to ease prices. This follows earlier levels above 400 million barrels in 2026.

Figure: Long-term SPR inventory decline to historic lows.Cushing, Oklahoma (key delivery hub): Commercial crude stocks stood at about 21.64 million barrels as of June 5, 2026, continuing a multi-week decline (e.g., –801,000 barrels in the latest reported week).

3.UAE is moving on plans to never use the Strait of Hormuz

The United Arab Emirates is accelerating an ambitious strategy to achieve zero dependency on the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical oil chokepoints. This comes amid recent regional tensions and a temporary closure of the strait following the Iran-US conflict earlier in 2026.

Bloomberg reports, citing an interview with UAE Minister of Foreign Trade Thani Al Zeyoudi, that the country is “moving toward having zero Hormuz dependency.” He emphasized: “We’re moving toward having zero Hormuz dependency and that’s regardless of whether it’s open or not. It’s going to open, and we hope that will happen quickly, but we will not stop the new plan.”

The UAE has had enough of vulnerability to geopolitical leverage and is building permanent infrastructure to reroute crude, refined products, and other energy flows away from the narrow waterway between Iran and Oman.

UAE’s Specific Plans: Ports, Pipelines, and Connectivity

The centerpiece is a major expansion of eastern ports on the Gulf of Oman (outside the Strait of Hormuz): Dibba, Fujairah, and Khor Fakkan. The UAE also plans to build at least one new harbor on its eastern coast.

Supporting this are:

• New pipelines connecting oil and gas fields to these ports.

• Expanded rail and road networks for better inland connectivity to petroleum facilities.

• Feasibility studies for consistent exports of petrochemicals, LNG, and other energy products.

In May 2026, Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Khaled bin Mohamed bin Zayed directed ADNOC to fast-track the West-East Pipeline project. This new pipeline will double crude export capacity through Fujairah by 2027.

The existing Abu Dhabi Crude Oil Pipeline (ADCOP / Habshan–Fujairah pipeline) — roughly 380–406 km long with a capacity of about 1.5–1.8 million barrels per day (mb/d) — has run at full capacity during recent disruptions. The new line will bring total bypass capacity through Fujairah to approximately 3.6 mb/d.

ADNOC is also evaluating a multi-fuel pipeline for refined products (gasoline, diesel, jet fuel) to further reduce reliance on tanker traffic through the strait.

These moves align with ADNOC’s broader goal of boosting production capacity while securing export routes.

UAE’s Habshan–Fujairah (ADCOP) pipeline provides a direct bypass from Abu Dhabi fields to Fujairah on the Gulf of Oman.

Regional Bypass Efforts: How Many Other Gulf Countries Are Involved?

While the UAE is the most vocal about achieving “zero dependency,” several neighbors are also advancing bypass infrastructure, though at different speeds and scales. The main active players are Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iraq. Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain remain heavily dependent on the strait with limited near-term alternatives.

Saudi Arabia
The kingdom operates the massive East-West Pipeline (Petroline / Abqaiq–Yanbu), a ~1,200 km route across the Arabian Peninsula to the Red Sea port of Yanbu. Design capacity: Up to 7 mb/d (after expansions and conversion of parallel NGL lines).
Recently restored to full pumping capacity during tensions, crude exports via Yanbu reached ~5 mb/d.
This is the largest existing bypass and has been a key resilience tool.

Saudi East-West Pipeline (Petroline) and UAE Habshan–Fujairah pipeline on a regional map.

Iraq
Iraq is fast-tracking alternatives for its southern oil (the bulk of exports, normally routed through the Strait via Basra). Key projects include: Basra–Haditha crude pipeline (target ~2.25–2.5 mb/d capacity) to link southern fields northward.
Expansion of the Kirkuk–Ceyhan pipeline to Turkey (Mediterranean), with plans to increase flows significantly.
Exploration of routes to Aqaba (Jordan, Red Sea) and Baniyas (Syria, Mediterranean).
Iraq has also accelerated exports via the Kurdistan–Turkey network. These efforts aim to create inland connections that bypass the southern maritime route.

Other Gulf states, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain, currently have almost no major bypass infrastructure and depend almost entirely on the Strait of Hormuz. Some early discussions or long-term considerations exist (e.g., Kuwait in preliminary talks), but new pipelines would take years and billions of dollars.

Oman: Benefits from ports like Duqm on the Arabian Sea (outside the strait) and has natural geographic advantages for some flows.

Overall, a clear Gulf-wide push for resilience is underway, driven by recent strait disruptions. Combined bypass capacity from existing and planned Saudi/UAE/Iraqi routes is significant but still falls short of fully replacing the ~20 mb/d that typically transits the strait. Expansions are permanent infrastructure investments that will grow over time.

Iran’s Leverage and Long-Term Global Market Impact

Iran has historically used threats to close or disrupt the Strait of Hormuz as leverage in conflicts. The recent temporary closure (linked to the early 2026 tensions) did cause price spikes and supply concerns. However, several factors limit its long-term effectiveness on global markets:Bypass infrastructure is scaling rapidly — Saudi and UAE pipelines alone handled substantial volumes during disruptions. UAE’s doubling of Fujairah capacity and Saudi’s 7 mb/d route provide meaningful alternatives.

Global supply diversification — The US, Russia, other OPEC+ members, and non-OPEC producers can ramp up output. Strategic petroleum reserves (especially in the US and IEA countries) provide buffers.

Economic self-harm for Iran — Closing the strait also blocks Iran’s own oil exports and disrupts its economy, making sustained action costly.
Market adaptation — Recent events showed quick rerouting, higher utilization of bypasses, and price stabilization once partial flows resumed or alternatives kicked in. An interim Iran-US deal is already paving the way for reopening after mine clearance.

As UAE Minister Al Zeyoudi noted, the new plans continue “regardless of whether the Strait is open or not.” These investments make future Iranian threats less impactful because Gulf producers are structurally reducing vulnerability. Global oil markets have proven resilient; while short-term volatility remains possible, the era of easy chokepoint leverage is eroding as infrastructure diversifies.

4.Qatar Returns Tankers in Preparation for Restarting LNG Exports

5.Iranian Supertanker Slips Out of Chabahar, Crossing US Blockade as Tehran Moves Oil Ahead of Friday Deal Approvals

6.Qatar Plans to Rapidly Restart LNG Output After Hormuz Opens – How will this impact Europe?

7.Banks Slash Oil Price Forecasts After U.S.-Iran Breakthrough

8.US Grid Equipment Shortage Deepens Impacting Repairs and New Installations

9.Another California refinery closure will threaten national and global economies

Great story from Ronald Stein and Mike Ariza. This is important.

10.California High-Speed Rail project soars to $231 Billion – “We left to work in Morocco as it is a better work environment”

Gov Newsom has yet again proved he is incompetent.

The California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) project, once sold to voters as a transformative $33 billion bullet train connecting San Francisco to Los Angeles in under three hours by 2020, now carries eye-watering cost estimates that have ballooned dramatically. The latest figures from the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s (CHSRA) 2026 Draft Business Plan put the full original Phase 1 scope at approximately $231.3 billion in today’s dollars under legacy assumptions. Even an “optimized” version is pegged at around $126 billion, with full service potentially arriving around 2040.

After nearly two decades, billions spent, and minimal operational progress, the project stands as one of the most expensive and delayed infrastructure endeavors in U.S. history.

Energy News Beat

At The Intersection of Energy and Finance - By Sandstone Group

By Stu Turley

A shout-out to Steve Reese and the Reese Energy Consulting group for sponsoring the Podcast https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/.

Data2 if you have any business systems, can you trust A? Well, they have the patent on validation. . https://data2.zoholandingpage.com/energy

And we have WellDatabase rolling in as a new sponsor.

https://welldatabase.com/

Oil prices have fallen sharply in recent days following the announcement of a U.S.-Iran framework agreement (often described as a Memorandum of Understanding or MOU) aimed at ending direct hostilities, extending a ceasefire for 60 days, lifting the U.S. naval blockade on Iranian ports, and reopening the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz.

WTI crude futures have dropped to multi-month lows around $77–81 per barrel, while Brent has fallen more than 5% into the low $80s. This relief reflects reduced immediate geopolitical risk premium after over 100 days of conflict that began with U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iranian targets in late February/early March 2026.

A formal signing is expected around June 19, 2026 (in Switzerland/Geneva per reports). The deal defers deeper nuclear negotiations while focusing on de-escalation and shipping normalization.

However, beneath the headline relief, several critical factors — highlighted in recent Energy News Beat reporting and market commentary — suggest the price drop may prove temporary or even set the stage for renewed volatility and upward pressure.

Physical Tightness at Cushing: Inventories Near Operational Limits

U.S. Cushing, Oklahoma, commercial crude inventories have plummeted amid strong refinery demand, surging U.S. exports filling global gaps, and prior Middle East disruptions. EIA data for the week ending June 5, 2026, showed stocks at just 21.64 million barrels — down from around 29 million barrels in early May and continuing a steep multi-week draw.

This level is approaching the critical operational floor of roughly 20 million barrels. Below this threshold, operators face challenges maintaining pipeline pressure and flow rates, issues with floating-roof tanks, and risks of pulling lower-quality crude contaminated with sediments, water, or sludge. At the recent draw rate of ~800,000 barrels per week, inventories could breach operational limits within 2–3 weeks.

The next EIA inventory report (week ending June 12) is due June 17, followed closely by the expiration of the NYMEX July 2026 WTI contract (first notice around June 24). This setup raises the prospect of a physical short squeeze as paper market positioning collides with tightening physical barrels at the key delivery hub. Resupply via alternative routes faces long lags (35–40+ days by tanker).

Subscribe now

Underreported Damage and a Structurally Tighter Market

In a June 16 BNN Bloomberg interview, Eric Nuttall (Partner and Senior Portfolio Manager at Ninepoint Partners) warned that “the damage in certain countries is far worse than has been let on.” Retaliatory strikes during the conflict damaged energy infrastructure across the Gulf region, hitting at least 23 oil and gas sites in nine countries (including Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and others). He referenced “enormous damage at a number of facilities — about 70 in the world,” with risks of long-term productive capacity loss from formation damage and prolonged shut-ins.

Cumulative Middle East production losses reached roughly 1.7 billion barrels. Even with the Strait reopening, normalization could take months due to full onshore storage, repair needs, and shipping hesitancy. Global onshore inventories sit at historic lows for this time of year, with U.S. stocks and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) also near multi-decade lows (SPR usable capacity around 50 million barrels).

Nuttall sees a higher structural price floor around ~$80 WTI going forward, driven by massive restocking needs. He estimates inventory rebuilding could add ~450,000 barrels per day to demand annually for the next three years.

Israel Not Backing Away from Lebanon — and Defiance on the Deal

Despite the U.S.-Iran de-escalation, regional tensions remain unresolved, particularly involving Israel and Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon.kpler.com

Recent statements underscore this:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated he will not comply with President Trump’s peace deal with Iran and will strike Iran and Lebanon “whenever he deems necessary.” He emphasized responsibility for Israel’s security and does not see eye-to-eye with Trump on the issue.

President Trump publicly rebuked Israel’s campaign against Hezbollah, stating it has gone on “too long” with too many civilian casualties. He opposed strikes destroying apartment buildings and suggested Syria could take the lead instead.

These developments indicate the MOU primarily addresses direct U.S.-Iran/Hormuz issues but does not fully resolve proxy conflicts or Israeli operations in Lebanon. Any escalation or sustained Israeli action could quickly reintroduce risk premium into oil markets.

What This Means for Markets, Consumers, and Investors

Markets: A clear disconnect exists between the paper market (reacting to de-escalation headlines with relief) and physical fundamentals (critically low key inventories, damaged infrastructure, and repair/shipping lags). Expect heightened volatility. Bullish physical signals (Cushing tightness, EIA data, contract expiry) could trigger sharp rebounds even as the deal holds. Broader equities have rallied on lower energy costs and reduced risk.

Consumers: Short-term relief at the pump is possible as prices ease and any immediate supply fears subside. However, summer driving season demand, potential logistics hiccups, and any renewed geopolitical flare-ups could reverse gains quickly. Longer-term, the need for global inventory rebuilding supports a higher baseline for fuel prices than pre-conflict levels.’'

Investors: Nuttall highlighted opportunities in energy equities, particularly undervalued Canadian producers with strong free cash flow, buybacks, and dividends. A structurally higher price floor is generally supportive for upstream producers, though near-term volatility and geopolitical uncertainty warrant caution (his fund reportedly holds significant cash). Selective exposure to companies positioned for a tighter post-crisis market appears attractive.

The Bottom Line

The Iran MOU and potential war-end narrative have delivered a welcome short-term reprieve for oil prices and global sentiment. Yet the shadows are significant: Cushing inventories nearing operational bottoms, far more extensive energy infrastructure damage than publicly acknowledged, massive cumulative production losses requiring lengthy recovery, and Israel’s clear signal that it will continue operations in Lebanon (and against Iran) as it sees fit.

Physical market realities and unresolved regional dynamics are likely to reassert themselves in the weeks ahead. Traders, consumers, and investors should prepare for volatility rather than assuming a smooth return to lower prices. The “day after” the acute crisis may prove tighter — and more expensive — than the headlines suggest.

We have about 5 interviews in the tank and will have those out soon. I think that in the interview with Erick Nuttall really hit it home. The Trump administration was running into Cushing at tank bottoms, and the SPR was down to the last 50 million barrels before problems kicked in.

I, for one, am watching, and I will not take President Trump’s joke lightly. “Don’t worry, I will just bomb them after the midterms,” or something like that.

In my opinion, President Trump ran out of runway, and now he has to get the Save America Act passed and implemented before the midterms. I am hopeful that peace does stick, but with Israel and Iran not wanting to budge, I am not betting it will remain.

What do you think?

Subscribe now

Appendix: Sources and Links

• Energy News Beat: “US Cushing Oil Supplies Near Operational Bottom” (June 14, 2026) — https://energynewsbeat.co/crude-oil/us-cushing-oil-supplies-near-operational-bottom/

• Energy News Beat: “‘The damage in certain countries is far worse than let on’: Nuttall on the state of oil” (June 16, 2026) — https://energynewsbeat.co/crude-oil/the-damage-in-certain-countries-is-far-worse-than-let-on-nuttall-on-the-state-of-oil/

• X post by

  @KarelMercx

  (June 16, 2026) —

• X post by

  @ShadowofEzra

  (June 15, 2026) —

• X post by

  @FoxNews

  (June 16, 2026) —

Additional context on the U.S.-Iran deal and price movements drawn from contemporaneous reporting by BBC, NPR, CNN, Axios, and others (June 12–16, 2026). All information current as of June 16, 2026.

The world is adding plans for a long-term problem in the Strait of Hormuz, and we cover the next steps to ensure Energy Security. Countries are not holding their breath and realize that energy security is taking center stage amid so many geopolitical issues around the world, and Energy without Choke Points is now part of many leaders’ plans.

The Energy Realities Team of Dr. Tammy Nemeth, Irina Slav, David Blackmon, and Stu Turley will address some of the changes in the world today.

1. Strait of Hormuz & Geopolitical Energy Security

The panel discusses Iran’s leverage over the Strait of Hormuz and how countries are developing alternative routes to bypass this chokepoint. They predict that within three years, Persian Gulf nations will have reduced their dependence on this route, diminishing Iran’s geopolitical power. Kuwait and other nations are negotiating pipeline deals with Oman and Saudi Arabia.

2. Europe’s Energy Dependence & Green Hydrogen Fantasy

A major focus is on Europe’s unrealistic reliance on green hydrogen and biofuels to reduce energy imports. The panel criticizes the €1 billion “hydrogen valley” project in Spain, arguing that green hydrogen cannot realistically reduce Europe’s import dependence from 50% to 24-28% by 2040. They highlight the massive infrastructure costs and note that BP and Shell have already canceled their major green hydrogen projects in Europe.

3. Norway’s Natural Gas Expansion vs. EU Restrictions

Norway is reopening closed natural gas fields and proposing 70 new exploration locations, but faces backlash from EU environmental groups. The panel notes the irony that Norway is Europe’s most reliable energy source, yet the EU restricts Arctic drilling while pushing expensive green alternatives.

4. UK’s Net Zero Policies & Energy Crisis

The UK is tripling down on net zero policies, focusing on wind and solar while planning to monitor and control consumer energy usage rather than building reliable energy infrastructure. The panel warns this approach will lead to energy shortages and higher costs.

5. Permitting & Regulatory Delays in the West

A critical theme is how Western countries (US, Canada, UK) face years-long environmental assessments and lawsuits that delay energy projects, while Middle Eastern countries build infrastructure rapidly. Examples include:

A US refinery taking 10 years to permit (coming online in 2027)

Louisiana’s fertilizer facility facing regulatory delays

Contrast with UAE doubling pipeline capacity in one year

6. Middle East Pipeline Competition

Turkey, Israel, and UAE are positioning themselves as regional energy hubs. Israel is proposing a pipeline through Gaza to export gas to Europe, while the UAE is expanding its pipeline capacity to the Gulf of Oman.

7. Global Fertilizer Crisis & Food Security

The panel discusses how fertilizer shortages (partly due to redirected production to green initiatives) could cause food insecurity in Africa. Nigeria’s petrochemical facility with fertilizer production is highlighted as critical, though there’s concern it may be exported to the EU rather than serving African farmers.

8. Data Centers & Energy Demand

Data centers are becoming a major energy consumer and facing PR problems similar to fracking. The panel discusses:

Governor Abbott’s requirement for data centers to bring their own power

UK prioritizing data center grid connections despite insufficient electricity

Elon Musk’s proposal for space-based data centers

The irony that monitoring unreliable grids requires more energy-intensive infrastructure

9. LNG & Canadian Energy Exports

Germany is signing long-term LNG contracts with Canadian facilities (like Cassilissums), though transportation via Panama Canal or around South America is lengthy. The panel notes European buyers are now hesitant about long-term US LNG deals.

10. Rig Counts & North American Oil & Gas Activity

Baker Hughes rig counts show the US at 562 (up 7 from last year) and Canada at 180 (up 42 from last year), indicating increased shale activity in North America.

11. UK’s Political & Infrastructure Challenges

Hinkley Point C nuclear plant delayed by Natural England (headed by a former Greenpeace activist with conflict of interest)

UK’s weak defense capabilities due to net zero prioritization

Potential leadership challenge to PM Starmer

Discussion of by-elections and political instability

Overall Theme: The podcast critiques Western energy policies as unrealistic and counterproductive, highlighting the contrast between ambitious net zero goals and the practical realities of energy security, infrastructure development, and geopolitical competition.

There is nothing finished about Iran right now. In fact, the IRGC says they will be charging tolls, and JD Vance says they won’t. Well, you can’t change the spots on a leopard, and wolves bite when in a corner, and the IRGC can’t tell the truth.

Subscribe now

Iran says the US will be removing all troops, and Israel says they are not removing their troops from Lebanon, so it is a total mix-up on communications.

It seems like everyone is saying what they want their supporters to hear, and the true problem will become evident in a couple of weeks.

Cushing, Oklahoma — the critical delivery hub for West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil futures — is rapidly approaching operational limits as inventories continue their steep decline amid global supply disruptions.

Latest EIA Data: Sharp and Sustained Drawdowns

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), commercial crude oil stocks at Cushing stood at 21.64 million barrels for the week ending June 5, 2026 — down 801,000 barrels from 22.441 million the prior week.

This marks the continuation of a multi-week drawdown trend. Stocks have fallen significantly from levels around 29 million barrels in early May.

Historical context of Cushing inventories (red line: levels; yellow: weekly changes).Net outflows have dominated due to strong refinery demand and surging U.S. crude exports filling global gaps created by Middle East disruptions (particularly the Strait of Hormuz). While detailed weekly inflow/outflow breakdowns are not publicly itemized in standard EIA reports, the consistent net draws reflect high outflows to refiners and export-oriented pipelines, with inflows from key basins (e.g., Permian) insufficient to offset demand. Midstream operators have reportedly redirected some flows northward to support Cushing, but analysts describe this as a zero-sum shift that strains other regions.

Approaching the Operational Bottom

Industry consensus identifies ~20 million barrels as the critical operational threshold at Cushing. Below this level, significant challenges emerge:

• Difficulty maintaining pipeline pressure and flow rates.

• Issues with floating-roof tanks (structural concerns or operational limits).

• Increased risk of pulling lower-quality crude containing sediments, water, and sludge from tank bottoms, complicating refining and export specifications.

• At the recent pace of ~800,000 barrels per week, Cushing could approach or breach the 20 million-barrel mark within 2–3 weeks (potentially by mid-to-late June), depending on the exact pace in upcoming data. The next EIA weekly report is scheduled for June 17, 2026 (covering the week ending June 12).

Implications for Refineries

Low Cushing inventories directly impact refineries, particularly those in the Midwest connected via pipelines originating from or through the hub:Supply constraints: Potential localized shortages or the need to source alternative (often more expensive) crudes.
Quality and operational issues: Risk of degraded crude quality if tanks are drawn too low.
Cost pressures: Higher basis differentials (local Cushing prices vs. futures) and potential impacts on refining margins.
Broader system strain as the hub struggles to meet all customer demands efficiently.

Implications for Consumers

For everyday consumers, the effects are indirect but meaningful:

Upward pressure on WTI crude prices can translate into higher gasoline and diesel prices at the pump.
Increased market volatility may cause sharper short-term swings in fuel costs.
In a context of already tight global supplies, sustained low inventories at this key U.S. hub add to the risk of elevated energy prices through the summer driving season and beyond.

The June 22/24 Contract and Potential Squeeze Dynamics

The NYMEX July 2026 WTI futures contract (CLN26) expires on June 22, 2026, with the first notice day around June 24.

This period is critical. Traders who short the contract and do not close positions face potential physical delivery obligations into Cushing. With inventories near operational bottoms and limited readily available physical barrels, covering shorts or fulfilling delivery could become difficult — setting up conditions for a short squeeze as paper-market positions collide with physical scarcity.

Even if geopolitical tensions ease and the Strait of Hormuz reopens, physical resupply lags significantly. Tanker transit times (often 35–40+ days around alternative routes) mean the current drain on U.S. inventories will persist for weeks.

Insights from Chevron CEO Mike Wirth (Bloomberg Interview)

In a recent Bloomberg interview highlighted by market analyst Jack Prandelli, Chevron CEO Mike Wirth noted that global markets may be able to absorb Strait of Hormuz disruptions until early September (around Labor Day). Key buffers include:

• Lower Chinese crude demand.

• Ongoing global inventory drawdowns.

• Limited (but ongoing) tanker movements through the strait (with some vessels reportedly moving at night or with support).

Wirth estimated actual flows through Hormuz closer to ~3 million barrels per day — lower than some higher official estimates. This suggests inventories are providing a temporary cushion, but as Cushing data shows, these buffers are depleting rapidly in key physical locations.

Bottom Line: Physical Reality vs. Paper Market

Recent price softness (potentially driven by hopes of diplomatic progress) appears disconnected from the tightening physical picture at Cushing. With inventories on track to test operational limits soon, upcoming EIA data and the July contract expiration could force a reckoning between paper positions and physical constraints.

The situation underscores how quickly logistics and storage realities can override headline-driven sentiment in energy markets.

Buckle up, we are in for some turbulence.

Check out for Stu Turley on The Energy News Beat Substack: https://theenergynewsbeat.substack.com/

For David Blackmon https://blackmon.substack.com/

For Tammy Nemeth https://thenemethreport.substack.com/

For Irina Slav https://irinaslav.substack.com/

In a significant development for global energy security, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announced today that a peace deal between the United States and Iran has been reached following intensive mediation efforts. The official signing ceremony is scheduled for Friday, June 19, 2026, in Switzerland.

This builds on Sharif’s earlier statements this week. On June 12, he confirmed that a “final, agreed upon text of the peace deal has been reached,” with Pakistan working closely with both sides on next steps. On June 13, he noted the sides were “closer to a peace deal than ever before,” with finalization likely in the next 24 hours and preparations for an electronic signing followed by technical talks.

The Rapid Response 47 X account (@RapidResponse47) highlighted related developments in a post today that included media (likely a screenshot or related visual of the Pakistan statement), sparking widespread discussion.

What the Deal Entails and the Strait of Hormuz Factor

The agreement is described as a memorandum of understanding (MoU) or framework that includes:

Immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon.

Reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

Lifting of the U.S. blockade on Iranian ports.

A potential 60-day extension of the ceasefire.

The Strait of Hormuz — the narrow waterway between Iran and Oman through which approximately 20% of the world’s oil transited before the conflict — is the centerpiece for energy markets. Iran imposed strict controls over the strait since the war began in late February 2026, severely disrupting global shipping and causing chaos in oil markets.

According to U.S. and regional sources familiar with the text:

The strait would reopen immediately without tolls.

Pre-war shipping levels would be restored within approximately 30 days.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has indicated Tehran intends to maintain control and charge a “service fee” for passage (while acknowledging it is not possible to levy a traditional toll under international law). He stated Iran’s “sword will remain poised over the Strait of Hormuz indefinitely.”

Reopening the strait would represent one of the most significant positive developments for global energy supply in years, potentially easing upward pressure on oil prices and stabilizing tanker routes from the Persian Gulf.

Context: Months of Conflict and Energy Disruption

The current conflict escalated at the end of February 2026 when the U.S. and Israel launched strikes on Iran. Iran responded by restricting traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. A ceasefire was reached in mid-April, but intermittent exchanges continued, with recent escalations including Israeli strikes in Lebanon.

Pakistan has played a key mediating role, alongside support from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye. Sharif specifically thanked these partners in today’s announcement.

How Many Times Have We Been Here? Iran and the Strait of Hormuz

This is not the first time tensions over the Strait of Hormuz have dominated energy headlines:1980s Tanker War (Iran-Iraq War): Iran mined parts of the strait and attacked shipping; the U.S. responded with naval operations.

2011–2012: Iranian officials threatened closure amid tightening sanctions on oil exports. Oil prices spiked temporarily.

2018–2019: After the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA nuclear deal, Iran conducted tanker attacks, seized vessels, and downing a U.S. drone near the strait, leading to heightened alerts and insurance spikes.

Multiple other incidents involving harassment, missile threats, and proxy actions.

Iran has repeatedly used the threat (or limited disruption) of closing or controlling the strait as leverage during sanctions or military tensions. The current situation marks one of the more sustained actual restrictions in recent history.

In the last few months alone (since late February 2026), Iran has actively imposed controls on the strait as part of the broader conflict, directly impacting global oil flows and contributing to market volatility.

Energy Market ImplicationsA successful reopening could:Increase available global oil supply (including resumed or expanded Iranian exports).

Reduce shipping insurance premiums and rerouting costs (some vessels had diverted around Africa or faced delays).

Contribute to downward pressure on benchmark crude prices (recent reports already noted futures reacting positively to deal optimism, with U.S. crude around $85 and Brent near $87 in recent trading).

However, uncertainties remain:Iran has previously pushed back on exact signing timelines.

Differing interpretations exist on Hormuz fees/control.

Israel is not a direct party and has continued operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Nuclear program details and sanctions relief are slated for later technical talks.

Skepticism exists in some quarters (both in the U.S. and Iran) regarding long-term compliance, echoing past experiences with agreements like the JCPOA.

Monday Morning Update:

Iran just put this out -

BREAKING: The Strait of Hormuz will be open to free passage for 60 days, after which Iran will begin charging a “Service Fee” — Fars News

Source told Fars:

"In the final moments of the negotiations, the text of the agreement was changed, and the United States recognized the sovereignty of Iran and Oman over the Strait of Hormuz"

They will be on their chosen path, and companies and countries will plan on not shipping oil and LNG through the Strait of Hormuz without problems as long as the IRGC is in control. You can’t change the spots on a leopard, and when wolves are in the corner, they will bite. And when animals are in control of the Strait of Hormuz, they will bite.

Do you think Iran can keep their hands off the trigger?

I, for one, do not trust this peace will hold, but am hopeful. Verification is critical. Just like AI without validation is worthless, so is any agreement with the IRGC.

Buckle up, it should be entertaining, as we are two weeks away from tank bottoms at Cushing, and the last time Cushing was overfilling and the June 24th contract came due, we went negative $34. So if we are at tank bottoms, we may see a short-term spike, as it will still take months to get the balance back to the market.

What do you think?

Subscribe now

Sources:

Sources and Further Reading

• Shehbaz Sharif’s June 14, 2026 X post announcing the deal and June 19 signing:

• June 13 post on nearing finalization:

• June 12 post on final text agreed:

• NBC News reporting on deal details and Hormuz reopening: https://www.nbcnews.com/world/iran/us-iran-deal-expected-reopen-strait-hormuz-signed-days-both-sides-say-rcna349916

• Reuters on Sharif’s June 12 statement: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/pakistan-pm-sharif-says-x-post-that-final-text-us-iran-peace-deal-agreed-working-2026-06-12/

• Additional coverage from Times of Israel, Al Jazeera, DW, and others tracking the mediation and timeline shifts.

Energy News Beat Channel will continue monitoring developments ahead of the June 19 signing ceremony, with particular focus on oil price movements, tanker traffic data through the Strait of Hormuz, and any updates on Iranian export volumes. This potential de-escalation could mark a pivotal shift for global energy stability — but, as history shows with Hormuz-related tensions, markets will likely remain cautious until implementation is confirmed. Stay tuned for live updates.

The U.S. wind and solar industries are facing a sharp policy reversal. The Trump administration’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (signed July 4, 2025) and follow-on Executive Order have effectively ended the generous federal tax credits (the Production Tax Credit under Section 45Y and the Investment Tax Credit under Section 48E) that fueled much of the recent boom in intermittent renewables.

Pro-renewable advocates are loudly claiming the administration is “murdering” or dismantling an American industry through permit delays, project cancellations, and subsidy phase-outs. In reality, decades of subsidies have disguised the true system costs of wind and solar—costs now surfacing as higher electricity rates for consumers once those supports expire or projects must stand on more market-based terms.

Subscribe now

The Bryce Perspective: “The Garroting of Big Wind”

Energy analyst Robert Bryce captured the moment in his June 12, 2026, Substack post, “The Garroting of Big Wind.” He argues that Big Wind is being throttled not just by the end of subsidies but by deliberate slowdowns in federal permitting. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Department of Defense have stalled or ignored “no hazard” determinations for dozens of projects totaling ~30 GW. Without demonstrated progress by early July 2026, deadlines tied to remaining tax credits, many projects risk losing eligibility.

Bryce, a longtime critic, dismisses industry complaints with characteristic bluntness (“Well, cry me a fu***ing river”) while highlighting wind’s documented issues: landscape blight, wildlife impacts (especially birds and bats), community opposition, and low energy density. He notes the American Clean Power Association (ACPA) reported just $67.5 million in 2025 revenue—underscoring how heavily the sector relied on federal support rather than organic market demand. Bryce frames the policy shift as long-overdue accountability after tens of billions in cumulative subsidies.

Pro-Wind/Solar Claims vs. Reality

Industry groups and aligned media portray the changes as existential: “impossible to build a new wind project,” an “uninvestable climate,” lost jobs, and higher future costs from reduced clean energy supply. Outlets and advocates have used strong language framing Trump policies as a “war on wind,” “carnage,” or even “murdering” the sector, citing paused offshore projects, lease cancellations (including a ~$1 billion deal with TotalEnergies to abandon NY/NC projects), and tightened rules.

The counter-reality is that these subsidies—projected in pre-change Treasury estimates to cost taxpayers hundreds of billions over a decade for wind, solar, and related credits—artificially lowered apparent costs. When projects reach commercial operation or subsidies wind down, the full expenses (including intermittency management, backup generation, and transmission) shift to ratepayers through higher power purchase agreements (PPAs), renewable energy certificate (REC) charges, or utility rate cases.

Levelized Cost of Energy - Cost of Firming Intermittency is left off most discussions.

New York’s Rush Before the Subsidy Cliff

New York exemplifies the pre-deadline scramble. Under the 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA), the state targets 70% renewable electricity by 2030 and 9 GW of offshore wind by 2035. NYSERDA has procured multiple offshore wind projects (Empire Wind 1 & 2, Beacon Wind, Sunrise Wind, etc.) via long-term contracts with strike prices (the guaranteed payment per MWh).

Developers have since sought massive renegotiations due to inflation, supply chain issues, and higher interest rates. Requests included:

• 27% hike for Sunrise Wind (~$110 to ~$140/MWh)

• 35% for Empire Wind 1 (~$118 to ~$160/MWh)

• 66% for Empire Wind 2 (~$107.50 to ~$178/MWh)

• 62% for Beacon Wind (~$118 to over $190/MWh)

Similar large increases were sought for onshore wind and solar contracts. NYSERDA estimated these could add roughly 2.5% (offshore) + 1.5% (onshore) to residential bills—around $4.67/month combined in earlier analyses.

These costs flow directly to ratepayers via per-kWh surcharges managed by NYSERDA and the Public Service Commission. A New York State Comptroller review noted that clean energy incentives and transmission upgrades (billions for projects like Champlain Hudson Power Express and Clean Path NY) are funded almost entirely by utility customers, contributing to New York’s already high electricity rates (among the nation’s highest).

The timing is no coincidence: Developers and the state are accelerating to lock in remaining federal tax credits before the July 2026 construction-start and 2027 placed-in-service deadlines. Without those credits, many marginal projects become uneconomic at the originally contracted prices, forcing either cancellation, rebidding at higher costs, or direct ratepayer hits.

Are most of the companies foreign-owned, and do they donate to the Democrats or Republicans in charge?

Onshore wind and solar are more mixed, with many U.S.-based developers alongside foreign subsidiaries. Foreign ownership raises questions about profits flowing overseas, supply chain dependencies, and local economic benefits, especially as projects race to qualify for expiring federal tax credits before the July 2026 construction deadline.

Major Offshore Wind Projects (Foreign-Dominated)These represent the highest-capacity, most politically prioritized projects. Nearly all flagship ones are led by European companies:

• South Fork Wind — 132 MW (12 turbines)
  Developer/Owner: Ørsted (Denmark) with Eversource (U.S. utility partnership; Ørsted holds majority/control).
  Status: Operational/recently online. Powers ~70,000 Long Island homes.
  Country: Denmark.

• Empire Wind 1 — 810 MW (54 turbines)
  Developer/Owner: Equinor (Norway; took full ownership in 2024 after swapping out BP’s stake).
  Status: Under construction/advancing toward 2027 operation. Powers ~500,000 New York homes.
  Country: Norway (Norwegian government holds majority stake in Equinor).
  Sunrise Wind — 924 MW

• Developer/Owner: Ørsted (Denmark; acquired full ownership from Eversource).
  Status: Advancing. Powers ~600,000 homes.
  Country: Denmark.

• Beacon Wind (potential) — Up to ~2,400 MW in some references
  Ownership: Previously an Equinor/BP joint venture; adjusted post-2024 swaps (BP side or separate).
  Country: Varied (UK/Norway elements historically).

Total for main contracted offshore projects: ~1.866 GW, overwhelmingly developed by foreign European companies (Norway and Denmark). These are the big-ticket items NYSERDA has procured.

Onshore Wind and Solar (More Mixed)Onshore projects are smaller individually and more numerous.

Ownership includes U.S. firms and foreign subsidiaries:

Examples from recent NYSERDA large-scale land-based renewable contracts (26 projects announced/executed):Solar: Dolan Solar, Hawthorn Solar, Somers Solar, Shepherd’s Run Solar, Homer Solar Energy Center, Highbanks Solar, Horseshoe Solar, Flat Creek Solar, etc. (various counties; capacities typically 20–100+ MW range).
Wind: Agricola Wind (Cayuga County), Valcour Bliss Windpark (Wyoming County), North Country Wind Farm (proposed up to 360 MW by Terra-Gen).

Notable larger/earlier examples:

Clusters by EDF Renewables North America (French parent company, U.S. operations) — hundreds of MW across projects (e.g., in Herkimer, Niagara, St. Lawrence counties).
Terra-Gen (U.S.-based) for wind projects.
Avangrid (Spanish parent: Iberdrola) — significant via utility ownership (NYSEG, RG&E) and renewable development.

Overall onshore picture: Many domestic U.S. developers handle smaller solar farms. However, foreign entities (European: Danish, Norwegian, Spanish, French, German like RWE) are active in larger projects and utility-tied developments. There have been public concerns about foreign buyers (including non-European) acquiring farmland for solar.

By capacity in NY’s headline renewable push: Foreign-owned companies (especially Equinor and Ørsted) dominate the big offshore projects. By sheer number of smaller onshore projects, it’s more balanced with U.S. developers.

Campaign Contributions to Democrats and Gov. Kathy Hochul

Data comes from campaign finance reports, OpenSecrets, local news, and disclosures (up to recent cycles):

• Avangrid (Spanish-owned Iberdrola subsidiary, owns NY utilities and renewables): Yes, substantial donations.Donated ~$160,000+ to Hochul via employee PAC in past cycles.

• Multiple large gifts to the New York State Democratic Committee (e.g., $100k, $100k, $150k in recent years to housekeeping accounts).

• PAC also contributes to federal Democrats.

• Ties to utilities that benefit from or influence rate cases and renewable policy.

Equinor (Norway) and Ørsted (Denmark): Limited or no prominent direct large campaign contributions found to Hochul or NY Democrats in available records. These companies appear to influence policy more through:

• Economic development commitments and job promises tied to project awards.

• Lobbying.

• NYSERDA procurement processes.

As foreign entities (with significant government ownership ties), they face different rules and often avoid heavy direct U.S. political giving compared to domestic utilities.
Broader context: Hochul has received major donations from utilities, energy interests, real estate, and various PACs (including some renewable-aligned). Avangrid stands out among energy players with clear ties to her campaigns and the NY Democratic Party. Other energy firms (fossil and utility) have also contributed significantly in past cycles.

Bottom line: Foreign (mostly European) companies lead the largest offshore wind projects that define NY’s renewable strategy. Some (notably Avangrid) have made notable political contributions to Hochul and Democrats, while others like Equinor and Ørsted appear to rely more on project economics and state procurement than direct campaign cash.

This structure aligns with NY’s policy push before federal subsidies fully phase out under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. For the absolute latest or granular donation amounts, checking the NY Board of Elections public reporting system or OpenSecrets is recommended, as filings update regularly.

Are most installation companies foreign-owned, and do they donate to Politicians?

Onshore wind and solar are more mixed, with many U.S.-based developers alongside foreign subsidiaries. Foreign ownership raises questions about profits flowing overseas, supply chain dependencies, and local economic benefits, especially as projects race to qualify for expiring federal tax credits before the July 2026 construction deadline.

Major Offshore Wind Projects (Foreign-Dominated)

These represent the highest-capacity, most politically prioritized projects. Nearly all flagship ones are led by European companies:

• South Fork Wind — 132 MW (12 turbines)
  Developer/Owner: Ørsted (Denmark) with Eversource (U.S. utility partnership; Ørsted holds majority/control).
  Status: Operational/recently online. Powers ~70,000 Long Island homes.
  Country: Denmark.

• Empire Wind 1 — 810 MW (54 turbines)
  Developer/Owner: Equinor (Norway; took full ownership in 2024 after swapping out BP’s stake).
  Status: Under construction/advancing toward 2027 operation. Powers ~500,000 New York homes.
  Country: Norway (Norwegian government holds majority stake in Equinor).

• Sunrise Wind — 924 MW
  Developer/Owner: Ørsted (Denmark; acquired full ownership from Eversource).
  Status: Advancing. Powers ~600,000 homes.
  Country: Denmark.

• Beacon Wind (potential) — Up to ~2,400 MW in some references
  Ownership: Previously an Equinor/BP joint venture; adjusted post-2024 swaps (BP side or separate).
  Country: Varied (UK/Norway elements historically).

Total for main contracted offshore projects: ~1.866 GW, overwhelmingly developed by foreign European companies (Norway and Denmark). These are the big-ticket items NYSERDA has procured.

Onshore Wind and Solar (More Mixed)Onshore projects are smaller individually and more numerous. Ownership includes U.S. firms and foreign subsidiaries:

Examples from recent NYSERDA large-scale land-based renewable contracts (26 projects announced/executed):Solar: Dolan Solar, Hawthorn Solar, Somers Solar, Shepherd’s Run Solar, Homer Solar Energy Center, Highbanks Solar, Horseshoe Solar, Flat Creek Solar, etc. (various counties; capacities typically 20–100+ MW range).
Wind: Agricola Wind (Cayuga County), Valcour Bliss Windpark (Wyoming County), North Country Wind Farm (proposed up to 360 MW by Terra-Gen).

Notable larger/earlier examples:

• Clusters by EDF Renewables North America (French parent company, U.S. operations) — hundreds of MW across projects (e.g., in Herkimer, Niagara, St. Lawrence counties).

• Terra-Gen (U.S.-based) for wind projects.

• Avangrid (Spanish parent: Iberdrola) — significant via utility ownership (NYSEG, RG&E) and renewable development.

Overall onshore picture: Many domestic U.S. developers handle smaller solar farms. However, foreign entities (European: Danish, Norwegian, Spanish, French, German like RWE) are active in larger projects and utility-tied developments. There have been public concerns about foreign buyers (including non-Europeans) acquiring farmland for solar.

By capacity in NY’s headline renewable push: Foreign-owned companies (especially Equinor and Ørsted) dominate the big offshore projects. By sheer number of smaller onshore projects, it’s more balanced with U.S. developers.

Campaign Contributions to Democrats and Gov. Kathy Hochul

Data comes from campaign finance reports, OpenSecrets, local news, and disclosures (up to recent cycles):

Avangrid (Spanish-owned Iberdrola subsidiary, owns NY utilities and renewables): Yes, substantial donations.Donated ~$160,000+ to Hochul via employee PAC in past cycles.
Multiple large gifts to the New York State Democratic Committee (e.g., $100k, $100k, $150k in recent years to housekeeping accounts).
PAC also contributes to federal Democrats.
Ties to utilities that benefit from or influence rate cases and renewable policy.

Equinor (Norway) and Ørsted (Denmark): Limited or no prominent direct large campaign contributions found to Hochul or NY Democrats in available records. These companies appear to influence policy more through:

• Economic development commitments and job promises are tied to project awards.

• Lobbying.

• NYSERDA procurement processes.

As foreign entities (with significant government ownership ties), they face different rules and often avoid heavy direct U.S. political giving compared to domestic utilities.
Broader context: Hochul has received major donations from utilities, energy interests, real estate, and various PACs (including some renewable-aligned). Avangrid stands out among energy players with clear ties to her campaigns and the NY Democratic Party. Other energy firms (fossil and utility) have also contributed significantly in past cycles.

Bottom line: Foreign (mostly European) companies lead the largest offshore wind projects that define NY’s renewable strategy. Some (notably Avangrid) have made notable political contributions to Hochul and Democrats, while others like Equinor and Ørsted appear to rely more on project economics and state procurement than direct campaign cash.

This structure aligns with NY’s policy push before federal subsidies fully phase out under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. For the absolute latest or granular donation amounts, checking the NY Board of Elections public reporting system or OpenSecrets is recommended, as filings update regularly.

Bookmark this article, and let’s check back in to watch the rates STEADILY increase every year, even without any data centers in the area. Just Saying.

Broader Rate Impacts and Hidden Costs

Nationally, electricity rates have risen due to multiple factors (demand growth from data centers/AI, infrastructure needs, fuel prices), but aggressive renewable mandates in states like New York and California amplify compliance and integration costs. Studies show state renewable portfolio standard compliance added an average ~0.25–0.3 ¢/kWh in some periods, with higher burdens in high-mandate states.

Wind and solar’s subsidized levelized costs of energy (LCOE) look attractive on paper, but system-level costs—backup from dispatchable sources (often natural gas peakers), expanded transmission, overbuild for intermittency, and land-use/opportunity costs—are frequently understated or socialized. When subsidies end, these realities appear in higher PPAs or rate cases.

Federal subsidies for wind and solar have dwarfed those for other sources on a per-unit basis in recent years, distorting investment signals. Ending them levels the playing field and lets markets reveal which resources deliver reliable power at true cost.

What Will the Energy Mix Look Like?

With new wind and solar builds slowing dramatically (especially onshore and offshore without credits), the mix will likely evolve toward:

Greater reliance on existing and new natural gas generation for its flexibility and affordability.

Continued operation of the current wind and solar fleet (plus any projects that qualify for remaining credits). Potential revival or extension of nuclear and other dispatchable low-carbon sources. Slower overall renewable capacity growth compared to the subsidized 2020s boom.

As stated above, bookmark this. As we see the elections start focusing on “Affordability,” we need to look at how we got here and recognize a “Bum Rush for Subsidies” from installers when you see it.

“A Bum Rush for Subsidies” is my new favorite Term.

Also, I love Dave Chappell, and had to use one of his iconic skits on this one.

EIA short-term outlooks still show renewables gaining share modestly through the late 2020s due to projects already in the pipeline and demand growth, but long-term trajectories will depend on state policies and economics without federal props.

The result should be a more reliable, cost-reflective grid less prone to the boom-bust cycles driven by temporary subsidies. Consumers in high-renewable-push states like New York may still face near-term rate pressure from legacy contracts, but the long-term trajectory favors affordability and reliability over ideology-driven mandates.

Ending the subsidy era forces honest accounting. Wind and solar have roles in a diverse mix, but only where they are genuinely competitive without perpetual taxpayer and ratepayer support. The coming years will test whether the industry can adapt—or whether the “garroting” of subsidized Big Wind simply returns energy policy to market realities.

We appreciate all of our great subscribers, sponsors, and patrons. We have some cool guests we are lining up. Buckle up and prepare.

Subscribe now

Appendix: Sources and Links

• Robert Bryce, “The Garroting of Big Wind,” Substack (June 12, 2026):

Robert Bryce

The Garroting of Big Wind

Last month, Heatmap News, a relentless cheerleader for the solar and wind sectors, ran an article headlined, “Trump Is Getting Away With Murdering an American Industry.” The article lamented that dozens of proposed wind projects with 30 gigawatts of generation capacity are now stranded because the Trump administration is deliberately slow-walking — or just ignoring — Big Wind’s permit applications…

Read more

7 days ago · 169 likes · 45 comments

• White House Executive Order: “Ending Market Distorting Subsidies for Unreliable, Foreign-Controlled Energy Sources” (July 7, 2025): https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/07/ending-market-distorting-subsidies-for-unreliable-foreign-controlled-energy-sources/

• Reuters coverage of One Big Beautiful Bill Act and tax credit changes (July 2025)

• Empire Center for Public Policy, “New Wind Energy Costs Blow the Doors Off Projections” (2023, with ongoing relevance): https://www.empirecenter.org/publications/new-wind-energy-blows-doors-off-projections/

• New York State Comptroller, “Renewable Electricity in New York State: Review and Prospects”: https://www.osc.ny.gov/files/reports/pdf/renewable-electricity-in-nys.pdf

• NYSERDA and PSC filings on offshore wind contract adjustments (various 2023 references in reporting)

• Treasury Department tax expenditure estimates (pre- and post-OBBBA context)

• EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2026 and Short-Term Energy Outlook (various 2025–2026 releases)

• Additional reporting: Heatmap News, New York Times, AP, Reuters on permitting delays and project status (2025–2026)

All facts drawn from publicly available government, regulatory, and analytical sources as of mid-2026. Rate impact figures are estimates from the time of contract renegotiation requests and may vary with final PSC decisions.

This was a fun discussion about the serious issue of gasoline, diesel, and fertilizer price increases for farmers, ranchers, and consumers in California. Make no mistake, the actions taken by the Newsom administration have driven consumer prices to some of the highest in the United States. Gavin has taken California from almost energy independent to total dependence on imports.

We have Mike Ariza, a downstream expert, who has been on the podcast several times. A great resource for boots-on-the-ground information on the California downstream market. Connect with Mike on his X account. @MikeAriza4531

Also, we had Joseph Huitt, who is with the Bordin-Huitt California Almond Ranch. Check out their family products for honey and specialty almonds at

https://bhalmondranch.com/

1. California’s Energy Crisis & Fuel Dependency

Mike Ariza, an energy expert, explains that California has become dangerously dependent on fuel imports (40% dependent). Two major refineries were converted to renewable diesel in 2023, taking 350,000 barrels of crude oil processing offline. This resulted in no gasoline or jet fuel production from those facilities. The Iranian conflict further disrupted supply chains, cutting off jet fuel, diesel, and gasoline shipments from Asian refineries. President Trump’s waiver of the Jones Act allowed fuel from Gulf Coast refineries to reach California, preventing potential $10+ gasoline prices and shortages.

2. Agricultural Challenges & Rising Costs

Joseph from Borden Hewitt Ranch discusses the severe economic pressures on family farms:

• Red Diesel prices skyrocketed from $3.17/gallon in February to $4.79-$6.60/gallon by March

• Fertilizer costs doubled from $300-$500/acre to $400-$700/acre due to Strait of Hormones closure

• Almond prices have remained below the $2/pound break-even point for five years

• Payment delays: Farmers receive paychecks every 3-4 months, not weekly, creating cash flow challenges

3. Water Rights & Agricultural Restrictions

Joseph describes severe water restrictions in California’s San Joaquin Valley, where farmers are prohibited from irrigating during peak heat seasons (June-July) despite canals being full. Banks only finance half the land value due to water limitations, effectively halving farm viability.

4. Regulatory Overreach & Equipment Restrictions

• EPA regulations prevent farmers from repairing their own equipment without manufacturer access

• A diesel mechanic was jailed for helping farmers and truckers repair engines

• Software restrictions: Farmers can’t access tractor software updates, limiting their ability to fix equipment independently

• Tuning restrictions: Rice farmers need extra horsepower to navigate clay fields but face penalties if caught modifying engines

5. GMO Seeds & Agricultural Contracts

Discussion about restrictive seed contracts where farmers must purchase new seeds annually and cannot replant saved seeds from previous years, creating ongoing dependency on seed companies.

6. State Taxes & Economic Burden

Multiple taxes burden California farmers:

• Cap and Invest (called “Theft and Invest”)

• Road taxes

• 37 cents for bullet train funding

• 80 cents for other state initiatives These taxes are passed directly to consumers through higher food prices.

7. Food Supply Chain Vulnerability

If California loses refinery capacity, diesel shortages would collapse logistics, resulting in:

• Only 3-5 days of food supply in metropolitan areas

• Port of Los Angeles unable to operate

• Food distribution across the entire country disrupted (LA is the largest food importer during winter)

8. Family Farm Viability & Future Generations

Joseph, at 25 years old, represents the challenge facing young farmers. While passionate about farming, he’s pursuing a master’s degree in biological science (studying avian influenza) because farming alone cannot support a family. His mother advised all children to pursue other careers while farming as a side activity—a common reality for modern family farms.

Overall Theme: The podcast highlights how interconnected energy, agriculture, and regulatory policy are in California, and how state policies are making it increasingly impossible for family farms to survive while threatening regional and national food security.

Hat tip to the Great John Rich for being named the Special Envoy to Farmers for the USDA. We have reached out to him to see about getting him on the podcast.

“ Cap and Invest is the biggest one and I now call that Theft and Invest. “

Mike Ariza, Downstream Energy Expert

“ California should be producing its own fuel. We know that, okay? California should we produce in its own field to the point where we are exporting fuel from here to countries like New Zealand and sending Hawaii. “

Mike Ariza, Downstream Energy Expert

“ there’s no way that you can, especially with the fuel prices and the fertilizer prices, “

Joseph Huitt, Bordin-Huitt California Almond Ranch

https://bhalmondranch.com/

Also, make no mistake: President Trump's Administration's pause of the Jones Act helped solve the crisis in California. We are not out of the woods yet, but he bought time.

Below is just one aspect of the US Mainland shipments to Puerto Rico - we shipped out more in two months than in twenty years. The Jones Act makes sense only if you have enough ships flagged under the United States. So, which came first, the new tankers or the shipyards? This is why Californians have not hit tank bottom yet.

Good luck if Gavin Newsom gives President Trump or Secretary Wright any credit.

Hat tip to John Rich as the new Special Envoy for American Landowners with the USDA. He is leading by example and getting involved.

Energy News Beat

At The Intersection of Energy and Finance - By Sandstone Group

By Stu Turley

A shout-out to Steve Reese and the Reese Energy Consulting group for sponsoring the Podcast

https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/.

Data2 if you have any business systems, can you trust A? Well, they have the patent on validation. . https://data2.zoholandingpage.com/energy

And we have WellDatabase rolling in as a new sponsor.

https://welldatabase.com/

What a day on the EnergyNews Beat News Desk, we have 10 big stories for you, and as we were filming this, President Trump calls off the plans - wow, changed everything. Stops by the Energy News Beat Stand Up as we used one of his stories on blackmon.substack.com.

Make no mistakes, this war will end in one of two ways. World War III, or the Venezuelan-style controls on Iran, as they have shown themselves to be an untrustworthy neighbor and have murdered tens of thousands of their own citizens.

As David and I were signing on to film the podcast, President Trump called off the strikes to take Kharg Island, and I am hoping this is to reposition assets and give some surprise to their capture. The oil markets dropped to $87. 94 for WTI, and this brings up the Paper trading versus the Physical delivery price of $140.

1. Iran Geopolitical Crisis & Military Strategy

The hosts extensively discuss U.S.-Iran tensions, focusing on President Trump’s shifting positions on military strikes and seizing Cargo Island. They analyze three phases of military action: (1) stabilizing oil prices by moving ships through the Strait of Hormuz, (2) degrading Iran’s military capabilities, and (3) direct action inside Iran. A key point is that without “Venezuelan-style controls” on Iran’s oil exports, hostile actors could profit significantly.

2. Oil Markets & Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR)

The podcast explores why physical oil prices exceed $140 while futures trade below $100. Key factors include China’s reduced crude imports (4 million barrels/day reduction), alternative export routes bypassing the Strait of Hormuz (7-10 million barrels/day), and tanker truck alternatives. Critically, they warn that the U.S. SPR is dangerously low—only 6.1 weeks away from the safe operational level of 300 million barrels.

3. Global Energy Infrastructure & Pipeline Development

Multiple countries are building alternatives to the Strait of Hormuz to reduce Iran’s leverage. Kuwait is negotiating pipelines with Saudi Arabia and UAE. Japan signed a major LNG deal. This reflects a broader theme: the world is reducing dependence on chokepoints Iran controls.

4. U.S. Energy Policy & Data Centers

Governor Abbott’s directive requires data centers in Texas to fund their own electrical infrastructure, protecting the grid. Texas is becoming the data center capital (second only to Virginia), with massive natural gas reserves in the Permian Basin to support expansion.

5. Natural Gas Pipeline Expansion

Kendra Morgan’s Gulf Express pipeline expansion will come online soon, preventing flaring and enabling 4.5 BCF of new Permian outbound capacity by 2026—a significant development for energy markets.

6. Banking & Investment in Fossil Fuels

The world’s 65 largest banks invested $906 billion in fossil fuels in 2025, with the Iran conflict expected to escalate exploration, production, and energy security spending. The ordering of 250 supertankers signals long-term confidence in oil demand.

7. Political Concerns & Congressional Dysfunction

We express frustration with President Trump’s inconsistent messaging on Iran policy and criticize Congress for its lack of support, calling for primary challenges against most incumbents.

10 Big Stories today.

1.Trump: US Will ‘Assume Total Control’ Of Iran’s Oil Infrastructure

This first story was from Substack and was very cool until 5 min before we started, and then it became stale.

2.President Trump Announces Plans to Strike Iran Again and Take Control of Kharg Island, Echoing Venezuelan-Style Oil Controls

This is incredibly important, and I will go on record and say that we have to gain control of the Iranian oil money, as they have lost the right to control their own destiny.

Trump’s Statement on Truth Social and Kharg Island

President Trump posted on Truth Social that the United States will hit Iran hard tonight following recent airstrikes. He further stated that “at some point in the not too distant future, we will be taking Kharg Island and other oil infrastructure points and assume total control of their Oil and Gas Markets.”

Kharg Island is Iran’s primary oil export terminal in the Persian Gulf, handling approximately 90% of the country’s crude oil exports. It has been a repeated target of U.S. strikes on military infrastructure in recent months, while oil facilities have largely been spared so far.

Trump’s language explicitly references the administration’s recent actions in Venezuela, where U.S. forces captured Nicolás Maduro, and the U.S. has taken a leading role in overseeing oil production and revenues. In Venezuela, American companies were positioned to repair infrastructure, and oil sales proceeds were directed under U.S. oversight to benefit both nations.

Venezuelan-Style Controls: Stu Turley’s Analysis on Energy News Beat

Energy News Beat host Stu Turley has repeatedly argued that “Venezuelan-style controls” represent the clearest path to a decisive outcome in the Iran conflict. In recent podcast episodes and Substack analysis, Turley emphasized that without such controls—effectively cutting off the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from oil revenues—Iran will continue funding proxy groups like the Houthis and destabilizing the region.

Turley noted that seizing or controlling Kharg Island and implementing similar oversight mechanisms could starve the regime of funds while potentially allowing for a transition that benefits the Iranian people and stabilizes global energy flows. This approach mirrors the post-Maduro strategy in Venezuela, where oil infrastructure repair and revenue control were central to U.S. objectives.

Why this matters:

Secretary Scott Bessent just posted on X, “Any damage it inflicts on our allies in the Gulf will be paid for with funds extracted from Iranian Accounts.

Market Reaction to Strikes on Iran and Kharg Island Threats

Markets are highly sensitive to developments involving Iranian oil infrastructure and the Strait of Hormuz (through which ~20% of global seaborne oil typically flows). Previous rounds of U.S. strikes on Iranian targets, including military sites on Kharg Island, have triggered sharp moves in energy prices:

Oil prices typically surge on escalation fears due to supply disruption risks. Historical reactions in this conflict have seen Brent crude rise $5–15+ per barrel in short order when strikes intensify or Hormuz/Kharg threats emerge.

As of June 11, 2026, WTI crude futures are trading around $89–91 per barrel, with Brent in the mid-$90s range amid ongoing volatility and a persistent risk premium.

Stocks often react mixed-to-negative on broader risk-off sentiment, while safe-haven assets like gold rise.
Analysts at firms like Barclays and Eurasia Group have warned of potential spikes toward $100+ for Brent if Iranian exports face sustained disruption or if the Strait of Hormuz remains heavily restricted.

A successful U.S. move to control Kharg Island and Iranian oil infrastructure could eventually increase global supply (by redirecting or restarting exports under new management), but the short-term effect is almost certainly higher prices and heightened volatility as markets price in uncertainty.

Broader Implications

President Trump’s strategy combines maximum pressure with the threat of decisive action on Iran’s economic lifeline. By targeting military capabilities tonight and signaling future control of oil assets, the administration aims to force negotiations or regime concessions while preventing further proxy attacks.

The oil markets just changed again, and let’s not forget that the U.S. still controls the money from Iraq through a different monetary setup, and it would not surprise me if it has shifted toward Venezuelan-style controls to move it away from the Fed. As shown above, the combined oil output from Iran, Iraq, and Venezuela has been about 44% and is now potentially under the United States’ financial controls. One thing to note is that the Iraq system is funneled through the Fed, and it is a privately held organization missing trillions of dollars, and some have indicated it may be a slush fund for foreign countries. The Venezuelan controls implemented by Secretary Scott Bessent appear to be working and helping Venezuela, so this may be a great path forward.

Energy markets remain on edge. Any confirmed move toward “Venezuelan-style” controls on Iranian oil could reshape global supply dynamics, reduce funding for Iran’s proxies, and create new opportunities for Western energy companies—much like the post-conflict plans unfolding in Venezuela. With Secretary Scott Bessent’s comments about the damage caused in the Gulf, I am very hopeful. I would rather pay for damages caused by Iran’s IRGC than allow them to give it to the Houthis or other proxy fighters.

3.Why Oil Is Still Below $100 a Barrel When Physical Oil Is Over $140

4.The Tale of Two SPRs and Different Uses: US and China Navigate the Iran War Supply Shock

The United States is using our SPR to save the world markets, and China is using theirs for China, China, and China.

At the current pace, the SPR could approach or breach commonly cited critical low levels within 5–7 weeks (by mid-to-late July 2026), assuming the release program continues at observed rates. The maximum technical drawdown capability is 4.4 million barrels per day, but actual releases have been more measured.

This drawdown is explicitly intended to supply the global market and ease price pressure amid Middle East disruptions.

China’s Opposite Approach: Living Off Stockpiles

China holds the world’s largest combined strategic and commercial oil inventories—estimated at ~1.3–1.4 billion barrels as of late 2025/early 2026 (government SPR portion ~360 million barrels; commercial/refinery stocks making up the bulk). It added aggressively in 2025 at an average ~1.1 million barrels per day.

In stark contrast to the US:

Sinopec (China’s largest refiner) bought zero Saudi crude for a second straight month.
Saudi July allocations to China: only 12 million barrels (~387,000 barrels per day)—a record low.
Aramco cut its Official Selling Price (OSP) by $ 6 per barrel, yet Chinese buyers largely stayed away because prices remain well above pre-war levels.
China’s May crude imports hit a decade low; refiners are cutting runs at a loss.

China is deliberately drawing down its own stockpiles rather than paying “war premiums.” This buyer strike removes significant demand from the physical market, helping cap rallies. However, these inventories are finite. When Beijing eventually must re-enter the market for secure barrels (recent high-level meetings between China’s energy administration and Aramco officials signal this tension), it could trigger the next leg higher in prices.

Same tool (reserves), opposite strategies: The US floods the global market via SPR releases; China insulates itself by self-supplying from pre-built buffers.

Price Impact and the Paper vs. Physical Disconnect

Despite the most complicated supply disruption mix in history (Iran production risks, Hormuz concerns, broader regional effects), benchmark futures prices have remained relatively contained. As of June 11, 2026, Brent traded around $92/barrel and WTI near $89–91/barrel—far below what many expected given 100+ days of conflict.

Physical markets told a different story earlier in the conflict, with dated Brent and spot grades surging to record premiums (sometimes $30–60+ above futures). By early June, physical premiums had “fizzled out” as refineries recalibrated buying patterns and abating immediate shortfall fears took hold, according to Bloomberg reporting.

However, a notable paper (futures) vs. physical disconnect persists in analyses:Massive crude inventory draws (including SPR and Chinese commercial stocks) are occurring with muted price response.
Traders and observers (including economist Chris Martenson) highlight “wild trades” on the futures tape—e.g., sudden sales of 6 million barrels in a single minute causing price drops with limited follow-through reaction. This has fueled claims of market capture, government-leaning interventions (direct or indirect shorting to manage inflation), or simply overwhelming supply from reserves masking underlying tightness.

The Bloomberg piece notes physical crude grades ripped higher early in the war before easing, with few signs yet of a strong resurgence in premiums.

Who Wins If the Economists Are Right?

If analysts highlighting the unsustainable disconnect (physical tightness masked by reserve draws and possible futures-market dynamics) are correct, the current price suppression is temporary. Key triggers for a sharp re-rating include:

US SPR approaching operational lows (weeks away at current rates).
Chinese stockpiles are running low enough to force a return to the market.
Any escalation or prolonged Hormuz disruption would reduce effective supply further.
Physical delivery realities are catching up as commercial inventories tighten globally.

Potential winners:

Physical crude holders and producers are able to deliver real barrels at higher realized prices.
Those positioned for the eventual re-entry bid from China or a post-SPR exhaustion squeeze.
Long-term bulls who viewed the futures suppression as artificial.

Potential losers:

Consumers and downstream industries are facing a delayed but sharper price spike.
Futures shorts or those betting on prolonged containment.
Policymakers relying on reserve releases as a durable buffer (the SPR is not infinite, and refilling takes time—years at realistic rates).

This is not a simple supply/demand story. It is a high-stakes interplay of government reserve policy, buyer strikes, futures-market dynamics, and finite buffers colliding with real-world supply risks. The “tale of two SPRs” has bought time and moderated prices so far—but the clock is ticking on both the US drawdown and China’s stockpiles.

5.Full Story on the Downed Apache – Part of Getting 22 Tankers through the Gulf

6.Kuwait Oil Chief Seeks Pipeline Alternatives to Skirt Hormuz

7.Japan Inks Major LNG Deal as Energy Markets Focus Away from Hormuz

8.Texas Gov. Abbott Directs PUC and ERCOT to Shield Texans from Data Center and Infrastructure Costs

This is a great thing for Texas, and I have again reached out to John Rich as he was nominated by President Trump as an Agriculture Ambassador to help protect our great American Farms.

9.Kinder Morgan’s Gulf Coast Express Expansion About to Come On Line – And It Will Impact More Than Natural Gas Prices

10.World’s 65 Biggest Banks Pumped $906 Billion Into Fossil Fuels in 2025. The Iran War will escalate exploration and production, pipelines, and energy security spending and financing.

Energy News Beat

At The Intersection of Energy and Finance - By Sandstone Group

By Stu Turley

A shout-out to Steve Reese and the Reese Energy Consulting group for sponsoring the Podcast https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/.

Data2 if you have any business systems, can you trust A? Well, they have the patent on validation. . https://data2.zoholandingpage.com/energy

And we have WellDatabase rolling in as a new sponsor.

https://welldatabase.com/

New York’s electricity grid is facing growing reliability risks, according to the state’s grid operator. In its latest assessments and the 2025 Power Trends Report, the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) warns that electricity reserves have shrunk significantly over the past five years. A net decline of 1.5 gigawatts (GW) in available supplies since 2019 has left the state—home to nearly 20 million people—at heightened risk of shortfalls during peak summer and winter demand.

The NYISO’s Summer 2026 Capacity Assessment shows the baseline reliability margin has fallen to just 417 MW—the lowest in recent history—under normal conditions. This is down sharply from prior years (e.g., roughly half of 2025 levels in some comparisons). Extreme weather or higher-than-expected demand could push margins negative without emergency measures.

Excellent X post from Lee Zeldin

Lee Zeldin on X

New York’s Electricity Mix: Still Heavily Reliant on Dispatchable Sources

New York’s power generation remains anchored by reliable, dispatchable resources, even as the state pushes aggressive renewables targets.2024 Energy Production (NYISO data): Dual-fuel (gas/oil) and gas: ~51% combined.
Nuclear: ~21%.
Hydro: ~21%.
Wind: ~5%.
Solar: <1%.
Waste-to-energy and other: ~2%.

Subscribe now

Summer 2025 Installed Capacity:

Fossil fuels (primarily natural gas) account for roughly 59%, when including dual-fuel and oil units; nuclear ~9%; hydro ~11%; wind ~7%; solar ~2%. More than 10,000 MW of fossil capacity (25% of the total fleet) is over 50 years old.

Renewables have grown, but solar and wind remain intermittent and low in actual energy contribution relative to capacity.

Where New York Imports Power—and Why It Matters

New York imports significant electricity to balance its grid, primarily hydroelectric power from Canada (Quebec and Ontario via Hydro-Québec and IESO). Imports from Canada once supplied up to 11% of NYISO needs (2016–2022) but have fallen sharply—to 5% in 2023, 3% in 2024, and around 2% through mid-2025—due to drought, wildfires, and internal Canadian constraints. Additional imports come from PJM Interconnection (covering parts of the Mid-Atlantic and Midwest) and ISO-New England, though flows can reverse during regional stress events.

These imports provide essential reliability support, but declining Canadian hydro availability and transmission limits add uncertainty.

High Costs for Consumers and Businesses

New Yorkers already pay some of the nation’s highest electricity rates. As of recent 2026 data: Residential average: 27–28.55 ¢/kWh (about 50% above the national average of ~18 ¢/kWh).
Commercial average: 22–22.54 ¢/kWh (also well above national levels).

Rates in New York City (Con Edison territory) are even higher due to delivery charges. Winter price spikes have reached $300/MWh in extreme cold, driven by natural gas constraints and aging infrastructure. Businesses face added pressure from these costs plus regulatory compliance.

Why NYISO Is Sounding the Alarm: Fossil Retirements + Intermittent Renewables

The core issue is simple math: fossil-fuel retirements are outpacing new generation additions. Since the 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA), 4,315 MW have retired while only 2,274 MW of new resources (mostly renewables) have come online—a net loss of over 2,000 MW. Many retiring plants are “peaker” units needed for high-demand periods, forced out by stricter emissions rules from the state Department of Environmental Conservation.

NYISO highlights: An aging fossil fleet (>10,000 MW over 50 years old) with rising outage risks.

Intermittent wind and solar, which require backup when the sun doesn’t shine or wind doesn’t blow (capacity factors vary widely).

Rising demand from building/vehicle electrification and new large loads (data centers, etc.), projected to add thousands of MW by 2030–2040.
Winter reliability is emerging as a bigger threat than summer as the system shifts toward winter-peaking.

NYISO CEO Rich Dewey and VP Aaron Markham have stressed that “new carbon-free resources are not being added fast enough” and that “reliability margins are declining,” with “performance issues with aging generators” and “an absence of new dispatchable resources.”

Solar Farms Displacing Farmland: A Growing Concern

Utility-scale solar has boomed in New York, but much of it is sited on prime agricultural land—flat, cleared, and near transmission. Between 2019 and 2024, roughly 4,200 MW of new solar capacity displaced an estimated 21,000 acres of farmland (industry rule of thumb: 5–7 acres per MW). Statewide, New York lost 364,000 acres of farmland in recent years, with utility solar contributing to a portion. Farmers and rural communities report soil compaction, loss of productive cropland, herbicide use under panels, and altered landscapes. Agrivoltaics (co-locating crops/livestock) remains rare in practice in New York projects.

Critics argue this trade-off undermines food security and rural economies while prioritizing urban renewable mandates.

Canadian Company Solar Projects and Decommissioning Questions

Canadian investors, including pension funds like the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB, which acquired Pattern Energy in 2020), have backed multiple New York renewable projects. Pattern and related entities have been linked to large-scale developments such as Flat Creek Solar (Montgomery County). Broader complaints have surfaced about foreign (including Canadian) firms acquiring large tracts—sometimes protected or agricultural land—for solar to serve distant load centers.

New York’s standard decommissioning rules (via ORES permits) require full removal of panels, inverters, roads, and fencing, plus site restoration to prior agricultural use, backed by financial security bonds (often 150% of estimated costs, updated periodically). If mounting posts cannot be fully extracted, they are typically cut off below grade (commonly ~3 feet) and covered with soil per local approvals—not entire panels buried.

Standard practice and NY permits emphasize full equipment removal and land restoration, funded by the project owner—not landowners or taxpayers. But I can’t find any that have been funded.

And yet, we have almost no land reclamation processes in the United States. If California is our example, we are in trouble.

Legacy Abandoned California Wind Farms (e.g., Patterson Pass)Patterson Pass Wind Project (Alameda County, built 1985 by EDF Renewables): 20.5 MW peak from small 1980s-era turbines. It operated until ~2014, then was shut down and largely left in place. YouTube videos (e.g., evmoFPV 2023) and 2025 analyses correctly show derelict turbines still standing. This is a genuine legacy case from an era with weak or nonexistent decommissioning requirements and inadequate financial assurances. No recent public updates confirm full removal or bond-funded restoration.

Altamont Pass (the most famous early site): Thousands of 1980s turbines were removed through repowering. Examples include the Scott Haggerty project (569 old turbines → 23 modern ones, operational since ~2021) and multiple others (Golden Hills, Summit, etc.). Most of the old fleet has been replaced with far fewer, taller, more efficient, and bird-friendlier turbines. Thousands of turbines have already been decommissioned and recycled or scrapped as part of these projects.

Broader California wind context: Early small turbines (often <100 kW) became uneconomic and were phased out. Repowering (remove old, install new on same land) is the dominant strategy today, not full abandonment. No evidence of a new wave of abandoned modern wind farms.

These 1980s cases highlight exactly the problem you’re worried about: weak early contracts and bonds left some sites as eyesores. But they predate today’s stricter rules.

Ivanpah Solar Power Facility

In early 2025, owners (NRG Energy et al.) sought to exit power-purchase agreements and close parts of the plant in 2026 due to underperformance (~70–80% of expected output) and high costs. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) unanimously rejected the shutdown in December 2025, ordering the facility to stay online for grid reliability, rising demand (data centers, electrification), and to avoid stranding transmission investments.

Funding and budget status: The original $2.2 billion project had $1.6 billion in federal loan guarantees (partially repaid; ~$780 million possibly still outstanding per audits). Continuation costs fall primarily on ratepayers/utilities (PG&E and SCE), not direct state general-fund “corruption” or taxpayer bailouts. Critics note extra annual costs (~$105 million/year in some estimates), but CPUC prioritized keeping 392 MW of existing clean generation amid California’s renewable targets and demand growth. Retrofit proposals (e.g., adding molten-salt storage) are being discussed to improve performance rather than full closure.

Bottom line: Ivanpah is a concentrated solar power (CSP) “power tower” technology (different from flat-panel PV farms). It’s being kept running by regulators, and ratepayers are paying higher electricity bills through the utilities— not abandoned. And the original $1.6 billion DOE loan guarantee is still partially outstanding. I am trying to find out “partially”. Is it 50%? Don’t know, the loan is still outstanding, but an estimate states that the “Green Energy Plant kills millions of birds, bats, and other wildlife, and still keeps costing ratepayers and consumers in California $105 million per year. It is neither profitable nor sustainable.

Recycling Rates, Timeline, and the Upcoming Wave

Recycling rate: I have found the figure of ~5% is close to current reality. NREL/EPA data still put U.S. solar panel recycling below 10% (most non-recycled panels go to regulated landfills when volumes are small). The main reasons are low volumes today + high recycling cost vs. cheap landfilling. Infrastructure is scaling, and states like Washington and California are adding extended producer responsibility rules.

Timeline clarification: Utility-scale solar’s big end-of-life wave is not starting in ~4 years. Most large farms were built after 2010 (70%+ of U.S. capacity since 2019). With a 25–35–year design life, the major surge hits in the mid-2030s to 2050 (projected 1 million tons of waste by 2030 → 10 million tons by 2050). Wind repowering is already well underway in places like California. We are not on the cusp of an immediate crisis; we are in the planning/preparation phase.

Bonds and Financial Assurance in California

Older projects (like Patterson Pass) often had weak or no adequate bonds — a real gap from the 1980s.

Modern California rules are stronger but still fragmented (county-level for many solar/wind projects). A 2025 national assessment gave California middling grades on financial assurance for renewables. Many states (including CA) now require bonds, escrow, or letters of credit to be updated periodically and based on the engineer’s estimates. No widespread taxpayer-funded cleanups have occurred yet for post-2010 projects.

The concern is valid for the future: If bonds prove underfunded when the big wave hits, or if recycling lags, costs could fall on landowners, ratepayers, or taxpayers. Legacy California wind examples prove it can happen. But regulators and the industry are actively tightening rules precisely because of those early lessons. Repowering success in Altamont shows one path forward.

The 1980s California wind farms you’ve seen on YouTube are cautionary tales from a time before strong decommissioning standards. Today’s projects operate under tighter requirements, and California is aggressively repowering rather than abandoning. Ivanpah is staying online by regulatory order, not being left to rot. The recycling/bond challenge is real and growing — but it’s an emerging issue with years to address, not an immediate disaster. If you have a specific YouTube link or project name, I can dig into its exact status.

Net Zero Policies and Their Toll on Consumers and Businesses

New York’s CLCPA (2019) mandates 70% renewable electricity by 2030, 100% carbon-free by 2040, and net-zero economy-wide emissions by 2050. While aimed at climate goals, the transition has coincided with rising electricity costs, shrinking reserves, and regulatory hurdles. A state memo projected potentially thousands in higher annual energy bills per household under aggressive cap-and-invest scenarios, though disputed by advocates. Business groups have petitioned regulators to pause mandates, citing affordability and reliability risks.

High energy prices and “over-regulatory overreach” are frequently cited by industries considering relocation out of state. Governor Hochul has signaled openness to adjustments amid lawsuits and cost concerns.

The result: consumers face higher bills today, while the grid’s buffer against outages shrinks. The Green Energy narrative is failing, and it is not that I am against the environment.

They cannot show me that wind and solar at scale on the grid are a useful, environmentally friendly, and sustainable project for grid stability or for promoting Energy Dominance.

Wherever wind and solar are placed into service, there is a pattern of deindustrialization.

And with Germany and California as the poster children of green energy policies, we all get to pay the bill, only to have the UN admit that the Climate Fear Mongering was based on wrong information.

New Yorkers and residents of other states like Virginia, California, Ohio, and Illinois are in for some tough times that are like self-imposed wounds.

And the rest of the states are also facing self-fulfilling wounds if we don’t get involved in local elections and make our voices heard.

Energy, AI, and Data Centers can be done right. - In the words of Larry the Cable Guy, we can “Git-R-Done!”

Appendix: Sources and Links
All data were drawn from official NYISO reports and reputable outlets (accessed June 2026). Full links:

• Reuters on shrinking reserves: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/new-york-states-electricity-reserves-are-shrinking-grid-operator-says-2026-06-09/

• NYISO 2025 Power Trends Report: https://www.nyiso.com/documents/d/guest/2025-power-trends-report

• NYISO Summer 2026 Capacity Assessment: https://www.nyiso.com/documents/20142/57796669/S2026%20Capacity%20Assessment%20for%20OC.pdf

• EIA on Canadian imports: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=66144

• Electricity rates (EIA/NYSERDA/ ElectricChoice): https://www.electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-by-state/new-york/ and https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php

• Farmland/solar impacts: Ithaca Week analysis and American Farmland Trust reports.

• Decommissioning standards: NYSERDA and ORES permit documents (e.g., Flat Creek Solar).

• Pattern/CPPIB transaction: https://patternenergy.com/pattern-energy-and-canada-pension-plan-investment-board-complete-transaction/

New York’s energy transition is ambitious—but the data shows reliability and affordability are paying the price. As NYISO warns, synchronizing retirements with truly dispatchable clean resources is critical. Stay tuned for updates from the grid operator.

Subscribe now

Thanks again for all of our great Subscribers, Patrons, and sponsors. We have a lot more rolling through production right now!

Dr. Beatriz Canamary stopped by the Energy News Beat podcast, and we had a great discussion about energy, exports, and our maritime industry, including shipbuilding and the Jones Act.

I am going to just be brutally honest for a moment, and say that I have been for totally repealing the Jones Act for years. After my discussion with Dr. Canamery, my opinion has shifted toward a more “let’s get the problem solved and leave the Jones Act in place long-term” stance.

But we need a plan to get to a balance. I will have some key Jones Act information below following the video.

Dr. Canamary has a new book coming out, and we will be lining up an interview. Connect with Beatriz on her LinkedIn here: Https://www.linkedin.com/in/beatrizcanamary/

on her Substack.

1. U.S. Maritime Industry Revitalization

The core focus is rebuilding America’s shipbuilding capacity. The U.S. currently represents only 0.4% of global ship production (down from over 50% post-WWII), while China dominates with 60% and South Korea adds another 20%. The discussion emphasizes the need for strategic investment in shipyards, workforce development, and predictable cargo demand to justify the expansion of shipbuilding.

2. Energy Security & Dominance Through Maritime

Energy exports (oil and LNG) are central to U.S. dominance, but they’re currently transported on international vessels rather than U.S.-flagged ships. The podcast explores how securing cargo on American vessels strengthens both energy security and the maritime industry. The Strait of Hormuz crisis is cited as a wake-up call about supply chain vulnerabilities.

3. Global Choke Points & Geopolitical Risks

Eight major maritime choke points (Strait of Hormuz, Red Sea/Houthis, Strait of Malacca, etc.) are contested and sometimes weaponized. Insurance companies can effectively shut down shipping by canceling coverage, as Lloyd’s of London did during the Iran strike. The discussion highlights the need for U.S. insurance alternatives and control over critical passages.

4. Nuclear Technology in Maritime

Nuclear propulsion for ships and floating nuclear power plants is presented as an innovation differentiator for the U.S. The ABS (American Bureau of Shipping) has frameworks for approving nuclear projects, and companies like Nano Nuclear are developing micro-reactors designed for maritime use. Nuclear is positioned as cleaner than traditional fuel oil and a competitive advantage.

5. Autonomous & Advanced Maritime Technology

A new IMO (International Maritime Organization) framework for autonomous commercial ships was recently approved, with a mandatory code coming in 2032. The U.S. is positioned to compete through innovation in automation, AI, and autonomous vessels rather than on cost—since labor-intensive competition with China/Korea is unwinnable.

6. Maritime Prosperity Zones

The U.S. should develop regional maritime clusters (similar to Europe’s model) with specialized capabilities—some regions for tankers, others for icebreakers, etc. The American Maritime Industrial Coalition is mapping supply chains and regional expertise to accelerate production.

7. Trade Agreements & Bilateral Partnerships

Strategic trade agreements with U.S. allies can secure cargo flows through American ports on U.S.-flagged vessels, creating demand signals for shipbuilding without direct government subsidies. This creates a win-win for allies seeking energy independence.

8. The Ships for America Act

A bipartisan bill with 126+ seats of support, expected to pass by year-end. It includes tax incentives and supports the broader maritime revitalization strategy outlined in the National Security Strategy and Maritime Action Plan.

9. Geopolitical Shifts & New Trading Blocs

The podcast discusses emerging energy-based trading blocs, China’s port dominance (129 ports globally), and concerns about China’s influence in South America (Peru, Brazil). It also touches on the Monroe Doctrine and regional security in the Western Hemisphere.

10. Ports as Strategic Infrastructure

Dr. Canamari’s forthcoming book explores ports as intelligence hubs, infrastructure assets, and strategic military/trade assets. The discussion covers climate resilience, digital twins, automation, and how ports are increasingly weaponized in global trade wars.

This is a comprehensive discussion of how maritime infrastructure, energy, innovation, and geopolitics intersect to shape U.S. competitiveness and national security.

Dr. Canamary’s key points are really important: the United States has to modernize and automate. Through autonomous loading and ship management, savings can be made. The problem with autonomy is that the labor unions fight it, when they should retrain their unions to embrace it and be part of the path forward. More on that in future podcasts.

Subscribe now

The Jones Act: What Is It and Should We Keep It?

The Jones Act—formally Section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920—requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports (including territories like Puerto Rico, Hawaii, and Alaska) must be carried on vessels that are U.S.-built, U.S.-owned, U.S-flagged, and at least 75% U.S.-crewed. Enacted in the aftermath of World War I, it was designed to maintain a strong domestic merchant marine for national security and economic resilience.

Senator Wesley Jones (R-WA) sponsored the legislation, which passed Congress in June 1920 and was signed by President Woodrow Wilson. Its core goal was to ensure the U.S. had a reliable fleet of ships and skilled mariners to support commerce in peacetime and serve as a naval auxiliary in wartime—lessons learned from heavy losses of merchant ships in WWI.

Over a century later, the Jones Act remains a lightning rod. Proponents argue it protects American jobs, shipbuilding capacity, and energy security. Critics say it drives up shipping costs, especially for petroleum products like crude oil, gasoline, diesel, LPG, and LNG, contributing to higher energy prices and forcing regions like California and Puerto Rico to import from foreign sources rather than buy American.

With U.S. energy production at record levels, the law’s limitations are increasingly felt.

From Maritime Powerhouse to Shrinking Fleet: The Numbers Tell the Story

The U.S. once had a robust Jones Act-compliant oceangoing fleet. In 1950, there were 434 such vessels. By 2018, that number had fallen to 99. As of 2025, the large oceangoing Jones Act fleet stands at approximately 93 vessels (31 cargo ships and about 54-56 tankers), with the tankers making up the vast majority of capacity for moving petroleum products.

These ships are older on average than the global fleet, with many general cargo vessels averaging 25-35 years old. Older vessels mean higher operating and maintenance costs, which get passed on to shippers—and ultimately to consumers in the form of elevated fuel and goods prices.

The decline mirrors broader deindustrialization. U.S. shipyards capable of building large oceangoing commercial vessels have shrunk dramatically—from dozens in the mid-20th century to just a handful today. In the 1970s, the U.S. built about 5% of the world’s commercial tonnage (15-25 ships per year). Today, it builds 0.1-0.2%—just 3-5 large vessels annually—while China, South Korea, and Japan dominate.

Steel manufacturing, critical for shipbuilding, followed a similar path. U.S. steel production peaked in the 1970s but has declined amid foreign competition and policy shifts (including reduced subsidies in the 1980s). The U.S. now produces far less steel relative to global output, raising costs for domestic shipyards and making it harder to compete or even build new Jones Act vessels affordably.

Expensive Ships, Expensive Deliveries: The Energy Cost ConnectionJones Act-compliant tankers cost roughly three times more to build than foreign equivalents (e.g., $100-135 million for a medium-range tanker vs. far less abroad). Operating them is also costlier due to U.S. crew wages, regulations, and the age of the fleet. As a result, domestic waterborne shipping of petroleum products can cost 2-4 times more than comparable international routes.

This creates perverse outcomes:

California imports refined products from Asia or routes U.S. Gulf Coast gasoline through the Bahamas (export it first, then import) to bypass Jones Act restrictions—despite abundant domestic supply. California’s specialized CARB-compliant fuels add complexity, but the Jones Act makes intra-U.S. shipping uneconomic.

East Coast and other regions often source fuel from overseas rather than the Gulf Coast, even as the U.S. exports record volumes of energy.

Studies estimate the Jones Act adds hundreds of millions annually in higher energy costs nationwide, with East Coast gasoline, jet fuel, and diesel prices elevated by $0.63–$0.82 per barrel in recent analyses.

Puerto Rico: A Stark Case Study

As a U.S. territory, Puerto Rico falls under the Jones Act. It has no domestic refining capacity and relies heavily on imported petroleum and LNG for power (fossil fuels still dominate its grid). Without Jones Act-compliant LNG tankers (none exist in the fleet), the island has long sourced energy from foreign suppliers like Trinidad & Tobago, driving up costs.

Recent events highlight the bottleneck—and the potential. In 2026, amid global energy disruptions from the Iran conflict, the Trump Administration issued a temporary 60-day Jones Act waiver for energy products. This allowed foreign-flagged vessels to carry U.S. fuel directly to Puerto Rico. In the waiver’s early period, Puerto Rico received over 1.8 million barrels of fuel from the U.S. mainland—shipments that far exceeded typical Jones Act volumes in recent decades and demonstrated what unrestricted access to U.S. energy could achieve.

Under strict Jones Act rules, such domestic energy flows have been severely constrained for years due to the lack of suitable vessels. The waiver proved that U.S.-produced energy can reach PR affordably when shipping capacity exists—but the U.S. fleet simply isn’t there right now.

The Path Forward: Keep the Jones Act, But Fix the Capacity Crisis

The Jones Act’s original intent—national security and a viable U.S. merchant marine—remains valid. A strong domestic fleet supports jobs (hundreds of thousands tied to Jones Act operations), protects against foreign supply disruptions, and ensures sealift capability in emergencies. Repealing it outright would further erode U.S. shipbuilding and maritime expertise.

But deindustrialization over the past 60 years has left us with too few, too-old ships. Short-term, this means we cannot efficiently move our own abundant energy to domestic markets like California or Puerto Rico. We are effectively exporting U.S. energy while importing foreign substitutes at higher delivered costs.

The solution is not repeal, but revival:

Short-term: Targeted waivers during crises (as done in 2026) to prevent supply shocks, while prioritizing U.S. energy flows.

Medium to long term: A national plan to rebuild capacity. Congress and the administration should incentivize the construction of new Jones Act tankers and vessels—through targeted subsidies, tax credits, or public-private partnerships. Buy and reflag modern tankers where possible, but prioritize U.S. shipyards to meet the “built in the U.S.” requirement. Revive steel production and related supply chains. Invest in workforce training for shipbuilding and merchant mariners.

Keep the Jones Act’s core protections intact once capacity is restored. This hybrid approach leverages America’s energy strength without sacrificing security.

With U.S. petroleum production booming, the Jones Act should enable—not hinder—American energy dominance. By addressing the manufacturing gap we created over decades of deindustrialization, we can make the law work as intended: cheaper, more reliable domestic energy delivery and a stronger maritime backbone for the 21st century.

Unfortunately, the Unions are needed, but sometimes they actually hinder the process. This is one time the Unions may need to work on how they capture many of the jobs, as we have to modernize to remain competitive. We have lost the American Compdive drive and manufacturing we once had, and we have to find new ways of doing business to restore our great heritage.

I am looking forward to Dr. Canamary’s book coming out and seeing how her plans shake up energy, shipping, and Energy Dominance over the next 100 years.

Energy News Beat

At The Intersection of Energy and Finance - By Sandstone Group

By Stu Turley

A shout-out to Steve Reese and the Reese Energy Consulting group for sponsoring the Podcast https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/.

Data2 if you have any business systems, can you trust A? Well, they have the patent on validation. . https://data2.zoholandingpage.com/energy

And we have WellDatabase rolling in as a new sponsor.

https://welldatabase.com/

The world is changing, and the energy markets are at the center stage. Today was the host accompanied by Stu Turley, and Dr. Tammy Nemeth on the . Irina Slav was out, but we covered her story Post-War Oil Trade Could Look Nothing Like It Did Before Hormuz.

Tank bottoms are starting to show up in the US, and we are about to see some problems.

1. Middle East Conflict & Oil Trade Routes

The hosts extensively discuss the closure of the Strait of Hormuz due to the Iran-Israel conflict and its impact on global oil trade. They analyze how workarounds have emerged—including Saudi Arabia’s Red Sea pipeline (7 million barrels/day), UAE’s expanded pipeline capacity (3 million barrels/day), and increased production from Venezuela, Guyana, and Suriname. The key insight: the anticipated oil crisis with $150/barrel prices keeps getting delayed because alternative supply routes are replacing the disrupted Strait capacity.

2. Global Energy Security & Supply Resilience

The panel emphasizes that energy markets are more resilient than expected. They discuss how companies and countries are adapting through innovation and investment, while government policies (particularly in Western nations) are the main obstacle to appropriate market adjustments.

3. UK & European Energy Policy Failures

Heavy criticism of the UK’s “Clean Power 2030” plan, which aims to eliminate gas from the grid by 2030. The hosts argue this is economically destructive—projecting consumer bills will increase by £700/year despite government promises of £300/year savings. They contrast this with the U.S. approach under the Trump administration.

4. U.S. Coal & Energy Infrastructure Revival

Discussion of Trump’s executive order activating the Defense Production Act to keep coal plants open and support new coal infrastructure ($700 million). The hosts argue coal is essential for baseload power and data center development, and that modern coal plants are cleaner than ever with advanced particulate filters.

5. Mining & Critical Minerals

The panel discusses the necessity of domestic copper and coal mining in the U.S. to reduce dependence on China-dominated supply chains. They criticize anti-mining activists for being hypocritical—if truly concerned about the environment, mining should happen in regulated Western countries rather than in Asia or Africa with minimal environmental standards.

6. BP’s Corporate Crisis

Analysis of BP’s management turmoil—including the firing of its chairman—and speculation that BP’s “Beyond Petroleum” green agenda has been a financial disaster. The hosts suggest BP may eventually be absorbed by Shell, which could relocate to the U.S. to escape UK tax policies.

7. Virtual Power Plants & Consumer Privacy

Concern about Google’s partnership with Voltus to create a “virtual power plant” in PJM that controls consumer thermostats, appliances, and EV charging. The hosts argue this represents government/corporate control over personal energy consumption and freedom.

8. Canadian Energy Policy Contradictions

Discussion of Canada’s mixed signals—Mark Carney championing pipelines domestically while cozying up to the U.S. internationally. Environmental assessments continue to delay projects despite promises of expedited approvals.

9. Rising Oil & Gas Rig Activity

Confirmation that rig counts are increasing in the U.S. and Canada due to higher oil prices from Middle East tensions, supporting the hosts’ earlier prediction of a return to “drill baby drill” policies.

Overall Theme: The podcast emphasizes that energy security starts at home, markets ultimately prevail over government ideology, and Western nations’ anti-development policies are creating opportunities for other countries while undermining their own economic interests.

Subscribe now

The bottom line is that the global oil, gas, and LNG markets are changing. Also, the world is demanding energy security. As I say all the time: “Energy Security Starts at Home’ and more countries are absolutely budgeting to create pipelines, increasing drilling programs, and not relying on any energy source through a potential choke point in the supply chain.

Some key slides.

Middle East's key pipelines and Choke points.

Florida’s Energy Mix with the George Bush spelling pointed out by Tammy.

As we discussed, Venezuela really kicked into exports. With Chevron and ExxonMobil now looking at places around the world with fewer geographic handicapped issues.

“ The markets are determinative at the end of the day, and the markets want and need more oil from places outside of the Persian Gulf. “

David Blackmon, Forbes, Daily Caller and Substack Author

Tammy brought up the Trump Executive order on coal.

President Trump Signs the Defense Production Act for Coal Plants Nationwide

Funding Breakdown and Project Scope

The $700 million package includes:$425 million via the DPA to modernize and upgrade 13 existing coal-fired power plants across 10 states: West Virginia, Kentucky, North Carolina, Indiana, Tennessee, Arkansas, Arizona, Oklahoma, North Dakota, and Wisconsin.
$185 million in Department of Energy grants to support two new coal plants (in Alaska and West Virginia—the first new U.S. coal plants since 2013) and to restart one coal-fired facility in Maryland.
$75 million via the DPA for the long-delayed Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal (OBOT / West Gateway) in Oakland, California. This export hub is projected to handle up to 12 million tons of coal annually from western states like Wyoming and Montana, opening new markets in Asia.

While today’s announcement focuses primarily on power plants and export logistics, it aligns with the April DPA’s explicit inclusion of coal mining and supply-chain enhancements. No specific mine production targets (e.g., additional tonnage) were detailed in the funding allocation, but the measures are expected to sustain and expand domestic coal output by keeping mines viable through increased plant demand and export opportunities.

Companies Investors Should Watch

The funding is expected to benefit several key players in the coal and utility sectors.

Confirmed or likely beneficiaries of the plant upgrades and related projects include:

Duke Energy Corp. (NYSE: DUK) – Major operator with coal assets in states like North Carolina and Indiana.
Hallador Energy Co. – Focused on coal production and power generation, with operations aligned to Midwest and Appalachian projects.
Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. (part of OGE Energy Corp., NYSE: OGE) – Direct beneficiary in Oklahoma.
American Electric Power Company Inc. (NYSE: AEP) and at least one subsidiary – Strong presence in West Virginia, Kentucky, and other listed states.

Broader coal producers such as Peabody Energy (NYSE: BTU), Arch Resources (NYSE: ARCH), and Warrior Met Coal (NYSE: HCC) stand to gain indirectly through sustained demand for Powder River Basin and Appalachian coal, especially with the new export terminal enabling shipments to high-demand international markets. Rail operators involved in coal transport (e.g., Norfolk Southern, CSX) could also see positive ripple effects.

Analysts note that these investments could improve plant economics, extend asset life, and position these companies for long-term revenue stability in a policy environment prioritizing energy dominance.

Buckle up, we are in for some wild times.

California is about to get entertaining. If you live in California, you had better leave before it turns into a zombie apocalypse as the Democrats steal every election from here on out.

Energy News Beat

At The Intersection of Energy and Finance - By Sandstone Group

By Stu Turley

For David Blackmon

David Blackmon's Energy Additions

There is no 'Energy Transition' taking place. Instead, what is taking place is the most massive addition of energy in all its forms in the history of mankind. Learn all about this energy addition and the public policies that drive it here.

For Tammy Nemeth

The Nemeth Report’s Substack

The Nemeth Report delivers sharp, evidence-based analysis on energy, environment, and climate policy. Dr. Tammy Nemeth challenges net-zero ideology, green energy myths, and selective environmental activism with realism and common sense.

For Irina Slav

Irina Slav on energy

All things energy. Challenging the dominant narrative because facts matter.

In yesterday’s article “As legislators look to write meaningful bills to help consumers, some are missing the mark before they start” I mentioned I was working on a series, and it did not take long for the next politician to excuse sloppy policies and false consumer-protection claims.

The really sad part about energy policies is that they are the baseline for our modern lives, work, and recreation, and they exemplify bad energy policies when everything gets expensive. And Illinois is following the typical bad blue policies around energy, taxes, and regulatory overreach. And speaking of taxes and regulatory overreach, it speaks volumes if you lose one of the greatest football teams in the US because your greedy systems were trying to extort like a mob boss more tax money.

On June 5, 2026, Pritzker directed the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity (DCEO) to stop processing new agreements under the Data Center Investment Program effective July 1.

This move mirrors Ohio’s decision in late May, when DeWine ordered the Ohio Tax Credit Authority to halt new sales and use tax exemptions for data centers while a Joint Data Center Committee reviews their growth and impacts.

Both states cite concerns over exploding electricity demand, grid strain, and costs being shifted to everyday ratepayers. Data centers are power hogs—often consuming as much electricity as small cities—and the AI boom is only accelerating that. But here’s the uncomfortable truth that neither governor is fully confronting: halting tax credits is only part of the problem. Data centers done right are not the enemy—they’re a critical part of America’s energy future. The real issue is the energy policies in blue states like Illinois that make reliable, affordable power scarce and expensive in the first place.

The Backdrop: AI-Driven Demand Meets Policy Failure

Pritzker’s order came after the Illinois legislature stalled on his February proposal to raise electricity rates specifically for data centers to shield residential bills.

He’s now calling for a “comprehensive framework” during the fall veto session that would protect affordability, natural resources, and “responsible growth.” Ohio’s pause is framed more neutrally as a study period after the state reportedly lost $1.6 billion in expected tax revenue from these incentives in 2025 alone.

Neither action bans data centers outright—Pritzker and DeWine both emphasize they want “responsible” development—but both are using the incentive lever to force concessions on costs and infrastructure. This comes as data centers nationwide face backlash over water use, noise, farmland conversion, and grid upgrades. Yet the demand isn’t going away. U.S. data center power needs are projected to triple by 2028. Tech giants need 24/7 firm power, not intermittent wind and solar that go dark when the wind stops blowing or the sun sets. Virtue Signaling or Real Reform?

Let’s be blunt: these executive orders smell more like political theater than a genuine solution. In Illinois, a deep-blue state, Pritzker is a Democrat pushing policies that sound good on paper—make Big Tech pay their “fair share”—while the underlying energy regime remains stacked against abundance. Illinois already has aggressive renewable portfolio standards, carbon pricing pressures, and mandates that prioritize intermittent sources over dispatchable natural gas, coal, or nuclear. The result? Electricity rates in blue states average about 38% higher than in red states, according to recent analyses.

Illinois’ own POWER Act (Protecting Our Water, Energy, and Ratepayers), introduced earlier this year, would force new data centers to pay for grid upgrades and source a chunk of their power from renewables.

That sounds responsible until you realize it doubles down on the same policies driving up costs for everyone else. Data centers expose the fragility of these systems—they don’t create the supply shortage; bad policy does. As Stu Turley wrote in The Energy News Beat just yesterday, legislators are “missing the mark before they start” by treating data centers as the villain instead of fixing the disease—policy-driven supply shortages from renewables-first mandates, premature plant retirements, and cost-shifting via net metering and cap-and-trade.

True reform would mean permitting reform for gas plants, nuclear, transmission, and pipelines; all-of-the-above incentives for co-located generation; and reliability standards that put 24/7 power first. These pauses don’t deliver any of that. They’re a weak virtue signal: “Look, we’re standing up to Big Tech!” while the grid keeps groaning under the weight of mandates that ignore physics.

Even the Bears Are Voting With Their Feet

The irony isn’t lost on anyone watching Illinois politics. While Pritzker pauses data center incentives, the Chicago Bears just announced they’re advancing their new stadium project in Hammond, Indiana, after the Illinois legislature failed—yet again—to deliver stadium incentives before adjourning.

The Bears’ board voted to move forward across the state line because Indiana had its act together. Illinois lawmakers couldn’t even pass a last-minute bill to create a local stadium authority and avoid property taxes. This isn’t just about football—it’s Exhibit A of businesses and major institutions fleeing high-tax, high-regulation blue states. When even an NFL team packs up because Springfield can’t deliver, what message does that send to data center developers who need gigawatts of reliable power? Ohio, a purple state with a Republican governor, is at least studying the issue with a joint legislative committee. But the pattern holds: without an abundant, affordable energy policy, incentives alone can’t fix what the regulators broke.

In an X post from Benny Jonson, listed below, some horrible facts appear.

Data Centers Done Right Are Needed—But Policy Must Change

No one is saying data centers should get blank checks or externalize costs. Done right, they can drive economic growth, create jobs, and even spur on-site generation (think small modular reactors or gas-fired plants co-located with the centers). But pausing tax credits without reforming the energy rules is like putting a band-aid on a broken leg. Illinois and Ohio need to look in the mirror at their own energy policies—the ones that have made blue-state electricity 38% more expensive and less reliable.

Texas has some that can be considered “Data Centers Done Right.”

Share

The Texas Model: Energy, Water, and Land Done Right

Look no further than Project Horizon, a massive 1.2 GW AI data center campus (with potential to scale to over 8 GW) being developed by Poolside Infrastructure Company in unincorporated Pecos County, more than 25 miles outside Fort Stockton in the Permian Basin. The 559-acre site sits in open desert ranchland adjacent to the historic Longfellow Ranch—nowhere near prime farmland, suburban neighborhoods, or municipal water systems.

Here’s why this matters for the AI race:

Proximity to energy sources: The Permian is a natural gas powerhouse. Project Horizon will start with an on-site power plant using aero-derivative gas turbines (with low-emission SCR systems and carbon capture capability). It has a multi-source architecture that can blend natural gas, solar, grid power, and battery storage. Developers already have partnerships lined up to deliver turbines in just over a year. No waiting for distant transmission lines or fighting grid congestion—power is right there where the fuel is produced.

Great water resources without straining supplies: Cooling is handled through a closed-loop liquid system that flows directly over the chips and rejects heat at higher temperatures to an outdoor chiller plant—no evaporative water loss. Daily water use for the entire campus is roughly equivalent to irrigating two acres of West Texas alfalfa. Toilets in the facility will actually use more water than the cooling systems. All water comes from non-potable groundwater within existing permitted allocations.

Not building on farmlands: The entire project is deliberately isolated on ranchland in the desert. No displacement of agriculture, no impact on local land prices, and minimal traffic or noise for nearby communities. CEO Robert Bonar put it bluntly: “Public resistance to data centers in other areas like Ohio and Pennsylvania is real… We believe there’s a better solution here.”

This isn’t a one-off. Across the Permian, oil producers are turning their biggest headache—produced water—into a solution for data centers. The basin generates roughly three barrels of wastewater for every barrel of oil produced, and injection disposal is running out of room (earthquakes, leaking wells, and toxic geysers have regulators worried). Treated produced water is now being positioned as a reliable, non-potable source for data center cooling.

Texas Pacific Land Corp. just closed a $43 million land deal for a power plant tied to data centers and is in talks to supply treated produced water. Multiple projects totaling over 10,000 MW of capacity are in discussion. As one energy executive noted, “If you go to West Texas, you can get your power source from natural gas and your cooling source from produced water.” It’s a perfect industrial marriage: oil fields solve their wastewater problem while powering the AI boom.

Subscribe now

The Bottom Line

Until lawmakers prioritize supply expansion and reliability over virtue-signaling mandates, these pauses will do little more than slow the inevitable while pushing investment to states that actually welcome growth. The AI revolution isn’t waiting. Neither should America’s energy policy.

I believe the world is healing. Put your tray table up and prepare for the bumpy ride, knowing that it will be better on the other side.

Line up for the week:

We have quite a lineup rolling out: Rey Trevino, Pecos Operating on oil and gas exploration; Dr. Beatriz Canamary on Energy Dominance and the importance of Shipyards, the Jones Act; Thomas Lamb, CEO of Myriad Uranium, a great Canadian company, Friday visiting with Mike Ariza, and Joe Huit on the California Farm and Agriculture impact due to horrible energy and water policies.

And tomorrow we are live on the Energy Realities at 7:00 AM Central US with David Blackmon, Dr. Tammy Nemeth, and Irina Slav.

Appendix: Sources and Links

• Bloomberg: “Illinois Governor Orders Pause on Data Center Tax Credits” (June 6, 2026) – https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-06-06/illinois-governor-orders-pause-on-data-center-tax-credits?srnd=phx-industries-energy

• The Energy News Beat Substack: “As legislators look to write meaningful bills to help consumers, some are missing the mark before they start” by Stu Turley (June 6, 2026) – https://theenergynewsbeat.substack.com/p/as-legislators-look-to-write-meaningful

• Ohio Governor’s Office: “Governor DeWine Announces Pause of Data Center Tax Exemption” (May 27, 2026) – https://governor.ohio.gov/media/news-and-media/governor-dewine-announces-pause-of-data-center-tax-exemption

• Capitol News Illinois: “Gov. JB Pritzker suspends tax breaks for data centers, urging more discussion” (June 6, 2026) – https://capitolnewsillinois.com/news/gov-jb-pritzker-to-suspend-tax-breaks-for-data-centers-urging-more-discussion/

• Chicago Tribune / The Athletic: Bears stadium updates confirming move to Hammond, Indiana (June 2026) – https://www.chicagotribune.com/2026/06/01/chicago-bears-soldier-field-stadium-news/ and related coverage

• Additional context on POWER Act and Illinois policy from Capitol News Illinois, NRDC, and energy rate reports (various 2026 dates).

Energy News Beat will continue tracking these developments. Data centers are coming— the only question is whether America’s energy policy will be ready.

Thank you to our great subscribers, patrons, and other sponsors. We love talking about energy and appreciate all of our supporters.

A shout-out to Steve Reese and the Reese Energy Consulting group for sponsoring the Podcast

https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/

Data2 if you have any business systems, can you trust A? Well, they have the patent on validation. https://data2.zoholandingpage.com/energy

And we have WellDatabase rolling in as a new sponsor.

https://welldatabase.com/

Not passing the Save America Bill may be one of the primary reasons the Republicans will lose the Midterms if they don’t stop acting like a Uni-party and helping the Democrats more than President Trump and act on what most Americans want.

Other items that are appearing to be major failures of the Republican Party are not able to articulate why people’s power bills are increasing.

I would recommend that Vice President Vance step up, take control of the Senate, and get the Save America Act passed. He has the constitutional right and authority to pull that lever. Just saying.

California is stealing the mayor and governor elections in real time, and California’s failure will ruin the Trump presidency. We are witnessing in real time what the entire midterm will look like across the U.S., with every seat stolen. The Trump administration will not recover from the loss of trust we, as Americans, have in him, and not Congress. They have failed the U.S. Citizens.

California is such a large part of the US economy that its failure will be a major drag on overall US GDP, further draining the Trump Administration.

California also just passed more laws extending its climate programs that 17 other states follow, and are a major source of the expenses listed in the infographic below.

California Extends Its Key Climate Programs, Condemning the State to High Energy Prices

U.S. Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) is once again positioning himself as a champion for everyday electricity customers.

In remarks tied to the Power for the People Act, Warner stated: “The issue is this: We’re not going to stop artificial intelligence. We have to put guardrails on it. But I also think we need guardrails on data centers.”The bill, co-sponsored by a group of Democrats, targets the more than 600 data centers in Virginia and the 4,300-plus across the U.S.

It argues that these facilities drive up costs for everyone in two ways: by spiking overall electricity demand (sometimes outpacing supply) and by requiring grid expansions whose costs are passed on to all ratepayers, not just data center operators.

To “fix” affordability and reliability, the Power for the People Act would:

Direct states to evaluate new rate classes specifically for data centers (building on the Virginia State Corporation Commission’s approach from last year) and provide technical assistance.

Order the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to require data centers to pay for local transmission upgrades they uniquely trigger.

Push interconnection rules that favor “clean energy,” battery storage, and flexibility while discouraging diesel backup generators.

On the surface, making big tech pay its “fair share” sounds consumer-friendly. But Sen. Warner and his colleagues are missing a critical point before the legislation even leaves the starting gate: the biggest driver of higher electricity bills for American families isn’t data centers — it’s the energy policies enacted in Democrat-run states.

Blue-State Policies, Not Data Centers, Are the Real Cost Driver

Reliable data show that residential electricity rates in Democrat-led (blue) states are approximately 38% higher than in Republican-led (red) states. Analyses consistently put blue-state averages around 21.3¢/kWh compared to roughly 15.4¢/kWh in red states. Over the past decade, prices in blue states have risen 32.4% while red states saw only an 18.5% increase.

This gap isn’t geography or coincidence. It stems directly from policy choices:

Aggressive renewable portfolio standards (RPS) and “clean energy” mandates that force utilities to prioritize intermittent wind and solar.

Carbon taxes and cap-and-trade programs (such as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative) that deliberately raise the cost of reliable natural gas and coal generation to fund pet projects.

Massive subsidies and cost-shifting for solar (net metering) and storage, leaving non-participating ratepayers to foot the bill.

Premature retirement of dispatchable power plants without adequate replacement capacity.

One especially costly side effect is the extra wear and tear on natural gas turbines. Because wind and solar generate power only when the wind blows or the sun shines, gas plants are forced to cycle up and down repeatedly.

Studies from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) document how this ramping and cycling increase operations and maintenance costs for fossil-fueled generators by tens of millions of dollars annually in regions with high renewable penetration — costs ultimately passed on to consumers through higher rates.

In short, blue-state energy policies add layer after layer of expense: renewables without grid resiliency, carbon pricing, and regulatory mandates that make reliable power more expensive to operate. Data centers are simply the latest large load, exposing these pre-existing problems.

The Diesel Backup Red Herring

Warner’s bill also targets diesel backup generators, pushing rules to discourage their use in favor of “clean” alternatives. But the data tells a different story about actual runtime.

Data centers rely on diesel gensets for true emergencies — when the grid fails. High-tier facilities (Tier 3 and 4 per Uptime Institute standards) are designed for minutes of downtime per year, not hours. Federal regulations already limit non-emergency operation (testing and maintenance) to roughly 100 hours per year, with many facilities running weekly or monthly tests of just 6–30 minutes. Real-world outages triggering full diesel operation are rare. The diesel “boom” at data centers is about backup capacity, not constant runtime.

Banning or heavily restricting diesel doesn’t add firm power to the grid — it just forces operators toward more expensive or less reliable options while the underlying supply shortage remains unaddressed.

Subscribe now

Shout out to Grayson Conservatives - Interactive Texas Data Center Map

This looks like an excellent resource for checking data Centers in Texas. Nice, and you can drill down on cities and even share out on socials.

What Real Consumer Protection Would Look Like

If Congress genuinely wants to protect ratepayers amid the AI-driven demand surge, the focus must shift from cost-shifting to supply expansion:

Permitting reform to slash timelines for natural gas plants, nuclear reactors, transmission lines, and pipelines.

All-of-the-above incentives for co-located generation so data centers can bring their own firm, dispatchable power instead of relying on a strained grid.

Reliability-first standards at FERC and NERC that prioritize 24/7 power over intermittent sources. The additional complexity and costs that wind and solar have imposed on US taxpayers are only now being realized. We have an $89 billion liability for wind farm land reclamation coming due soon, and I just read about a solar farm in New York that has to bury the solar panels 3 feet underground to qualify as land reclamation by a Canadian firm. That is not “Clean Energy”; it is theft and a wealth transfer.

Rejection of one-size-fits-all federal mandates that nationalize Virginia-style rate experiments and ignore the proven 38% cost penalty of blue-state policies.

The Power for the People Act treats the symptom — who pays the higher bill — while ignoring the disease: policy-driven supply shortages and cost inflation.

Consumers don’t need more creative accounting to divide a shrinking electricity pie.

They need policymakers to stop shrinking the pie with anti-supply regulations.

As Warner prepares additional data center legislation, Energy News Beat urges a return to basics: abundance through American energy production, not guardrails that punish the very infrastructure powering the future.

We will be tracking these runs by governors and legislators to help consumers, but let’s not forget the wonderful “Inflation Reduction Bill” or other named bills that do the exact opposite of what they are named.

Shout out to Kim Farrington, and hope she can run a great race in Virginia against the Democrat machine. We need great leaders who want to win for America and Americans.

Appendix: Sources and Links

• Original article on Sen. Warner and the Power for the People Act: https://www.fredericksburgfreepress.com/2026/06/05/u-s-sen-warner-data-centers-shouldnt-drive-up-energy-costs-for-consumers/

• Electricity rates by political party control (38% higher in blue states): https://www.electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-by-state/political-analysis/ and https://paylesspower.com/blog/red-vs-blue-which-states-pay-the-most-for-electricity/ (confirming ~37-38% differential).

• “Blue States, High Rates” report (IER / Always On Energy Research): https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/the-grid/blue-states-high-rates-policy-matters/ and

Energy Bad Boys

Blue States, High Rates

As we noted in our piece “States with Clean Energy Mandates Have Higher Rate Increases,” electricity prices stem from a variety of factors, including resource mix and public policies…

Read more

6 months ago · 103 likes · 63 comments · Isaac Orr and Mitch Rolling

• NREL studies on wind/solar-induced cycling costs and wear-and-tear on fossil plants: https://docs.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/59064.pdf and https://docs.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/53504.pdf

• Data center diesel generator usage, runtime limits, and testing: https://betterdatacenterproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Diesel-Generators-at-Data-Centers-Status-Impacts-and-Protective-Practices.pdf ; https://insideclimatenews.org/news/12112025/data-center-diesel-generators-noise-pollution/ ; Uptime Institute standards referenced in industry analyses.

• Additional context on blue-state carbon programs and rate impacts: https://www.americanenergyalliance.org/2026/02/whose-policies-are-increasing-electricity-rates/

Energy News Beat will keep tracking this legislation and the broader data-center energy debate. The AI boom demands real power — not more rules that make it costlier for everyone else.

Subscribe now

“ Iran will have permanent control over the Strait of Hormuz. As though that necessarily, in and of itself, is bullish for oil prices. I would argue that, in fact, it isn’t. “

Doomberg, Substack Author, Energy Analyst

This was another great discussion with , and we had over 100k listens and views, plus even more impact from social media during his last visit. This discussion included several key quotes, and I have about 10 of them listed below the video.

Make no mistake, the global energy, oil, and gas markets have changed permanently.

“Energy security starts at home. Energy dominance is displayed through your exports. “

Stu Turley, Energy News Beat Podcast Host

1. Geopolitical Control of the Strait of Hormuz

The hosts explore Iran’s potential permanent control over the Strait of Hormuz and what this means for global energy markets. The key insight is that while many assume this would drive oil prices higher, the real issue is about sanctions and U.S. dollar hegemony—Iran would need sanctions lifted to collect tolls, which threatens the dollar’s position in the global financial system. Long-term, alternative pipelines and infrastructure will mitigate any supply disruptions.

Subscribe now

2. North American Energy Dominance

A major focus is on how the Western Hemisphere (particularly the U.S. and Canada) is becoming an energy powerhouse through:

• Natural gas production and LNG exports (growing from near-zero to ~30 BCF/day by decade’s end)

• Oil development in Argentina (Vaca Marta), Guyana, Venezuela, and Brazil

• Pipeline infrastructure like Mountain Valley Pipeline

• The concept of “energy security starts at home” and exporting energy as a display of dominance

3. Qatar’s LNG Disruptions and Helium Crisis

While Qatar supplies 20% of global LNG, the real story is helium—Qatar controls about a third of the global helium market. Helium is critical for semiconductors and MRIs, and there’s no easy replacement. Recent attacks have disrupted Qatar’s production.

4. The AI Bubble and Market Dynamics

The hosts discuss:

• The SpaceX IPO as a potential “top of the Ponzi cycle” with a $1.75 trillion valuation

• How AI is simultaneously a transformative technology AND a massive bubble (like railroads and the internet before it)

• The importance of AI validation and verification—AI without accountability wastes money

• How companies must be built with AI at their core to survive; large legacy companies may struggle to adapt

5. AI Implementation and Business Transformation

Practical discussion on:

• How AI can eliminate inefficiencies (e.g., reducing invoice processing from 2 months to 2 minutes)

• The need for human oversight and “AI-aware” workers vs. “AI-ignorant” ones

• Authentic human content creation remaining valuable in an AI-saturated world

• How small, lean businesses with owner mentality adapt faster than bloated corporations

6. Future Economic Blocs and Global Realignment

The hosts predict a shift toward new trading blocks: the U.S., India, Russia, Saudi Arabia, UAE, China, and Japan forming alternative economic structures, with the EU and UK potentially falling behind.

Subscribe now

Some of the key articles and points that we were talking about.

New Found Gas

Will Canadian hydrocarbon development displace Europe’s reliance on the US? - Doomberg

One can’t help but marvel at how politicians have driven an artificial wedge between Canada and the US, brimming as both countries are with decent, caring, and giving people. The two nations share a culture rooted in pioneering independence and are blessed with a seemingly endless natural bounty that underlies their respective wealth, making the synergies of collaboration far more lucrative than the spoils of competition. Despite these inherent ties, global energy buyers increasingly view Canada as a source of diversification away from excessive reliance on its southern neighbor. Indeed, the ocean zone just beyond Newfoundland is holding an attractive energy bounty, rich with a fuel that Europe finds itself in desperately short supply of:

“There’s an estimated $400 billion worth of natural gas in an ocean basin off Newfoundland, and one analyst believes that assessment could position the province as a major player in the natural gas sector. On Monday, June 1, the Newfoundland and Labrador government released the second phase of a resource assessment for the Jeanne d’Arc Basin, a shallow-water area 350 kilometres east of St. John’s.

The first study of the basin assessed resources available within existing discovery and production licences. It estimated the areas contained somewhere between 8.1 to 11.3 trillion cubic feet [tcf] of recoverable natural gas. The second phase identified an additional 10.2 to 25.5 trillion cubic feet in adjacent and unlicensed areas. Combining the results and the range of estimates, the studies have determined that the best estimate is likely 27.6 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas.”

While proximity to Europe would advantage the shipping of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from offshore Newfoundland, such logistical considerations are hardly determinative. Whether these resources ultimately get developed is instead a complex mix of political, regulatory, and economic considerations, the inspection of which lays bare both the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead as Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney works to unstick his country’s energy. Will he get it done?

Doomberg’s Point on Iran is spot on, and the changes we are seeing may be permanent. How they shake out has yet to be written, but here is some of the back story we were talking about.

Home>Crude Oil>The Hormuz Squeeze Is Redrawing Global Oil and Gas Markets for Good – By Energy News Beat Channel

The Hormuz Squeeze Is Redrawing Global Oil and Gas Markets for Good – By Energy News Beat Channel

The Strait of Hormuz has long been the world’s most critical energy chokepoint—handling roughly 20 million barrels per day (b/d) of oil and a significant share of global LNG before the 2026 crisis. But Iran’s de facto closure of the strait since late February 2026, amid escalating conflict, has forced a permanent rethink. Even if shipping resumes, the “Hormuz Squeeze” has accelerated diversification that markets will not reverse. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iraq are fast-tracking bypass infrastructure. Non-Middle East producers in Latin America, the U.S., and beyond are ramping up exploration and LNG exports. And consuming nations are reevaluating energy security through a harder lens of resilience over reliance.

The Wall Street Journal captured this shift early: Gulf states are investing heavily in pipelines, rail, storage, trucking, and new ports to bypass the strait. What began as a crisis response is becoming structural change.

Iran’s Enduring Grip: No Nuclear Deal, No Surrender of Control

Under the scenario outlined—where Iran retains full control of the Strait of Hormuz and refuses any meaningful nuclear monitoring, material surrender, or de-escalation—the risk premium on Gulf exports becomes permanent. A recent X post by Mario Nawfal highlighted backchannel diplomacy: Iran relayed three conditions to Washington via Pakistan, including a veiled nuclear demonstration threat (“a detonation of a nuclear device on Iranian soil… as an irreversible sovereign demonstration of capability to control escalation dominance”). The immediate silence from Washington underscored the new reality: Iran’s nuclear ambitions and strategic leverage are non-negotiable.

This locks in long-term market fragmentation. Oil and LNG flows that once relied on the strait now carry a persistent geopolitical surcharge. Buyers will pay premiums for non-Gulf barrels, and producers outside the region will capture market share.

Pipelines: The New Bypass Highways

Gulf exporters have dusted off—and accelerated—decades-old contingency plans:

Saudi Arabia’s East-West Pipeline (Petroline) runs 1,200 km from Abqaiq to Yanbu on the Red Sea. Capacity up to 7 million b/d (with ~5 million b/d exportable). Flows have surged since the closure, rerouting crude away from Hormuz. From Yanbu, oil can reach Europe via the SUMED pipeline through Egypt.

UAE’s Abu Dhabi Crude Oil Pipeline (ADCOP): Links Habshan fields to Fujairah on the Gulf of Oman (~1.5–1.8 million b/d). Already handling over half of UAE exports pre-crisis; flows to Fujairah jumped post-closure. A second parallel pipeline is now ~50% complete and on track for 2027 completion, effectively doubling bypass capacity.

Iraq’s Routes: The Kirkuk–Ceyhan pipeline to Turkey’s Mediterranean coast has ramped to 250–650 kb/d and could hit 1.6 million b/d. A new Basra–Haditha line (planned 2.25–2.5 million b/d) is in early construction, targeting 2026–2027 flows.

These pipelines cannot fully replace the Strait’s ~20 million b/d capacity, but they provide 4.7–5.5 million b/d of immediate relief and growing redundancy.

Tanker traffic has shifted dramatically: vessels now queue around Africa or reroute via Red Sea ports.

Accelerated Exploration Away from Middle East Choke Points

The squeeze has supercharged upstream investment outside the Gulf:

Latin America leads non-OPEC growth. Brazil’s pre-salt fields (Buzios, Mero) and new FPSOs pushed output toward 4 million b/d in 2025, with more additions in 2026. Guyana’s Stabroek Block (ExxonMobil-led) hit over 900 kb/d by late 2025 and eyes 1.7 million b/d by 2030. Argentina’s Vaca Muerta shale is booming, with oil output forecast to reach 810 kb/d in 2026. Together, these three countries account for half of projected global crude growth in 2026.

U.S. shale and offshore continue steady expansion, feeding both domestic needs and LNG feedgas.
Africa (Namibia, Angola deepwater) and other basins see renewed interest as “safe” barrels command premiums.

These barrels bypass Hormuz entirely—no tankers needed through contested waters.

LNG Markets: From Qatar Shock to Atlantic Basin Dominance

Qatar—historically the Gulf’s LNG powerhouse—has been hit hardest. Iranian strikes damaged Ras Laffan, sidelining ~17% of its capacity (12.8 million tons per year) for 3–5 years. Production halted at parts of the complex, and a strait closure blocked shipping. Europe and Asia face multi-year supply gaps.

Enter the new LNG export hubs:

United States: The undisputed leader. Existing terminals (Sabine Pass, Corpus Christi, etc.) plus new ones like Plaquemines (Phases 1–2), Golden Pass, CP2, and Corpus Christi Stage 3 are flooding the market. U.S. capacity is exploding, with exports projected to grow sharply in 2025–2026. Atlantic routes avoid Hormuz entirely.

Canada: LNG Canada doubling output; Pacific Coast projects advancing.
Australia and others: Steady but now gaining share as Gulf LNG falters.

By 2030, non-Middle East LNG (led by the U.S.) will dominate flexible supply, shifting trade patterns permanently toward the Atlantic and away from vulnerable chokepoints.

Energy Security in a New Light

The Hormuz Squeeze forces a paradigm shift. Nations can no longer treat Gulf supply as a reliable baseload. Strategies now emphasize:Diversification: Prioritize U.S./Latin American oil and LNG over Gulf volumes.
Infrastructure: More cross-border pipelines, storage, and floating regasification.
Resilience: Strategic reserves, domestic shale/LNG, and accelerated renewables where viable.
Geopolitical hedging: Long-term contracts with “safe” producers; renewed focus on overland pipelines (e.g., Central Asia to China/Europe).

Europe, Asia, and even China are already pivoting—ramping U.S. LNG, eyeing Latin American barrels, and exploring non-Gulf routes. The era of cheap, concentrated Gulf supply is ending. Markets are fragmenting into more resilient, multi-polar networks.

The Long-Term Outlook: A Redrawn Map

With Iran’s control of Hormuz and nuclear ambitions intact, the global oil and gas map is redrawn for good. Prices carry a permanent risk premium. Non-Gulf producers thrive. Pipelines become strategic arteries. LNG trade shifts westward. And energy security is no longer about volume alone—it’s about avoiding single points of failure.

The Hormuz Squeeze didn’t just disrupt flows. It accelerated the future.

We even talked about AI and data centers and covered some key points.

“ There’s a giant bubble going on. A lot of people are going to lose a lot of money, and AI is going to radically change things. “

Doomberg, SubStack Author, Energy Analyst

“ AI without validation and verification is worthless. “

Stu Turley, Energy News Beat Podcast Host

We even talked about John Brewton’s AI Capabilities with validation and real-world use of Data2 products. There will be two types of companies. Those who are successful using AI through validation, and those who go bankrupt. We are seeing cracks in the AI market, and those who don’t understand how to implement the best solutions will overspend on implementations and fail to realize the savings everyone expects.

Thank you to our great subscribers, patrons, and other sponsors. We love talking about energy and appreciate all of our supporters.

A shout-out to Steve Reese and the Reese Energy Consulting group for sponsoring the Podcast https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/

And we have WellDatabase rolling in as a new sponsor.

https://welldatabase.com/

Subscribe now

Kim Farrington is a candidate for U.S. Senate in Virginia, running on an America First platform, and she stopped by the Energy News Beat podcast for a real discussion of what Virginia and America really need.

I want to be just brutally honest for a moment. I really liked her attitude and commitment to Virginia, as well as her backing of the America First movement. I asked her some tough questions, and she had no prep time or idea that I would ask her such pointed questions.

She addressed all of my concerns with flying colors, and I believe she would act in the best interests of Virginians and support President Trump’s America First Agenda.

One of the most pointed questions was “If you were Speaker of the United States Senate, would you pass The Save America Act to ensure voter integrity and IDs for U.S. Citizens only?”

Please reach out to Kim at the Campaign website to donate or contact her office.

https://kimforvirginia.com/

She responded, “Absolutely. We will need the votes, and I’m disappointed and sort of shocked that we don’t have the votes yet. But yes, I would so support the SAVE Act. It’s so important to... I’m all about internal controls and auditability and accountability, and we’ve got to have accountability in all of our processes, especially our elections.

1. Political Campaign & Candidacy

Kim Farrington is running as a candidate for U.S. Senate in Virginia to replace Mark Warner. She emphasizes her extensive listening tour (19 months, 48,000+ miles) where she engages directly with Virginia voters to understand their concerns and propose data-driven solutions.

2. Government Fraud & Inefficiencies

A central theme of her campaign is combating fraud and waste in federal government. With 33 years of federal service experience, Kim claims to have identified over $236 billion in fraud and inefficiencies and aims to write legislation to recover these funds for taxpayers.

3. Energy Policy & Grid Management

Extensive discussion on Virginia’s energy mix (56% natural gas, 26% nuclear, 8% solar, 3.4% coal, etc.) and the challenges of renewable energy integration. Key points include:

• Wind and solar subsidies and their true costs to consumers

• Grid resiliency and the need for proper data on renewable performance

• The importance of nuclear energy as clean, reliable baseload power

• Environmental liabilities from wind and solar farms (estimated $89 billion)

4. Second Amendment & Constitutional Rights

Kim’s strong support for the Second Amendment (influenced by her Texas parents who owned a gun store) and her alignment with President Trump’s agenda on constitutional issues.

5. Voting Integrity & Election Security

Support for the SAVE Act to protect voting through internal controls, auditability, and accountability in election processes.

6. Data-Driven Policy Making

Kim’s commitment to consulting experts and relying on data rather than ideology when making policy decisions, particularly regarding energy, data centers, and government spending.

7. Support for Trump’s Agenda

Emphasis on “America First” principles and support for President Trump’s anti-fraud task force and cabinet appointments.

Thank you again for your commitment to our Great Country and your service. I know you will do well on the election path. Please use Energy News Beat as a resource, as we want to help you get fact-based information for your discussions.

Your support for President Trump is very much appreciated. - Stu

Subscribe now

A shout-out to Steve Reese and the Reese Energy Consulting group for sponsoring the Podcast https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/

.

Data2 if you have any business systems, can you trust A? Well, they have the patent on validation. . https://data2.zoholandingpage.com/energy

And we have WellDatabase rolling in as a new sponsor.

https://welldatabase.com/

We have 8 huge stories, and David Blackmon, Forbes, Daily Caller, and Substack Author stopped by.

There are a lot of moving parts in the Energy Markets right now, and we bring the 8 biggest stories. We talk about the right way to do data centers, and the implications of the Iran War.

David Blackmon's Energy Additions

There is no 'Energy Transition' taking place. Instead, what is taking place is the most massive addition of energy in all its forms in the history of mankind. Learn all about this energy addition and the public policies that drive it here.

1. Data Centers & Infrastructure Development

• West Texas Data Center Project: A Forbes story about a responsible data center development near Fort Stockton that addresses activist concerns through sustainable practices (minimal water usage, closed-circuit cooling, local hiring, onsite housing)

• Data Centers Moving to Unincorporated Areas: Developers are shifting massive data centers to rural, unincorporated areas to avoid citizen decision impacts and regulatory hurdles

• Grid Interconnection Challenges: Texas ERCOT is grappling with 410 gigawatts of large load interconnection requests, 87% from data centers

2. Oil & Gas Production & Federal Lands

• New Mexico’s Dominance: Lea and Eddy counties account for 78% of onshore federal oil production, representing 14% of total U.S. onshore production

• Federal Lands Significance: 29% of total U.S. production comes from federal lands and the Gulf of Mexico

• Trump Administration’s Role: Companies stockpiled federal leases during the first Trump administration, allowing continued drilling during Biden’s lease sale moratorium

3. Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) Drawdown

• The SPR is being drained at record pace and approaching “deadpool” (critical minimum levels)

• Current levels around 365-378 million barrels, with projections to hit deadpool by August

• California facing severe refined product shortages (jet fuel, diesel)

4. Renewable Energy & Climate Policy Costs

• Climate Lawfare: Democratic state attorneys general sued the Trump administration over ending offshore wind projects

• Financial Impact: $2 trillion spent on net zero pathways, including $690 billion on renewables, with only 3% energy gains

• Comparison: $10 trillion could build 267 nuclear reactors instead of wind/solar

• California’s CARB Program: Gavin Newsom expanded emissions regulations despite energy challenges

5. Refinery Operations & Safety

• U.S. crude refiners pushing runs to maximum levels, creating safety concerns

• Skipping periodic maintenance to meet demand increases risk of incidents

• Valero stock performance highlighted as investment opportunity

6. Geopolitical Tensions & Energy Security

• Iran Strikes: Iran’s Revolutionary Guard striking targets in the Gulf, including Kuwait’s airport

• LNG Tanker Concerns: Multiple LNG tankers going dark (transponders off) in the Persian Gulf, raising security concerns

• Risk of Escalation: Potential for major price spikes if geopolitical tensions worsen

7. Maritime & Shipping Policy

• Discussion of the Jones Act and its impact on shipping efficiency

• Upcoming interview with maritime expert Dr. Beatrice Canamara about alternative solutions

• $5 billion Texas shipyard upgrade for Coast Guard Icebreakers

8. Agricultural Land & Environmental Concerns

• Debate over data center development on farmland vs. renewable energy installations

• Wind and solar farms permanently damage agricultural land through chemical leaching and deep foundations

• $89 billion land reclamation fee coming due for renewable installations

The podcast presents a comprehensive energy news briefing with emphasis on the intersection of energy policy, geopolitics, environmental concerns, and economic impacts.

We had 8 big stories today: 1.West Texas Data Center Project Addresses Activist Concerns Head-On

2.Unprecedented Dominance: Two NM Counties Account For 78% of Onshore Federal Oil Production

3.Data Centers Are Moving to Unincorporated Areas to Avoid Citizen Decision Impacts – Energy News Beat Exclusive Analysis

4.State Attorneys General Sue Trump Administration Over Payment Ending Offshore Wind ProjectsHow Much Has Climate Lawfare Cost US Consumers?

5.SPR Draw Down at Critical Levels and May Surpass the Biden Abuse

6.US Crude Refiners Are Pushing Run Rates to Maximum Levels: Safety Concerns, Maintenance Trade-offs, Export Boom, and Investor Implications

7.Iranian Strikes in the Gulf Raise Stakes for Gulf States

8.Vitol Says Europe and US Aren’t Facing Up to Oil Supply Crunch: How Will This Rubber Band Snap Impact Consumers and Investors?

We have some great interviews lined up this week. We have Rey Trevino, Pecos Operating from the Fort Worth Petroleum Club, Dr. Beatriz Canamary on shipping and the Jones Act solutions, Doomberg on Friday, Kim Farington for US Senate, and Thomas Lamb, CEO of Myriad Uranium.

Energy News Beat

At The Intersection of Energy and Finance - By Sandstone Group

By Stu Turley

A shout-out to Steve Reese and the Reese Energy Consulting group for sponsoring the Podcast https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/.

Data2 if you have any business systems, can you trust A? Well, they have the patent on validation. https://data2.zoholandingpage.com/energy

And we have WellDatabase rolling in as a new sponsor. https://welldatabase.com/

You don't want to miss this episode of the Energy Realities podcast with Irina Slav, Dr. Tammy Nemeth, David Blackmon, and Stu Turley as they cover the latest global trends in investments in energy. The IEA has released a report, and it will cover the real-world viewpoints on it. Bring your questions!

We had some wild comments on the live show, and we appreciate the real comments and commentators who want to make a positive difference.

1. Global Energy Investment Report (IEA)

The hosts analyze the International Energy Agency’s report on $3.4 trillion in global energy investments. Key findings include:

• Most investment going to grid upgrades, storage, wind, and solar

• Declining investment in upstream oil and gas for the third consecutive year

• Concerns about future supply crises despite rising demand

2. Oil & Gas Supply Crisis

A critical theme throughout the discussion:

• Oil demand expected to rise through 2040-2050, but investment is declining

• Concerns about structural supply shortages in the near future

• CEO warnings (Chevron, ExxonMobil) about prices potentially reaching $120-140/barrel

• Strategic oil reserve refilling needs globally

3. Net Zero Policies & Their Consequences

Extensive critique of climate mandates:

• European countries struggling with energy costs and deindustrialization

• California’s climate policies threatening remaining refineries

• Subsidy expiration affecting renewable project viability (solar/wind subsidies ending July 31st)

• ESG and climate disclosure requirements creating business uncertainty

4. Natural Gas & LNG Markets

• EU natural gas storage critically low (some countries at 9-15% capacity)

• Investment in natural gas reaching decade highs

• LNG export capacity challenges and geopolitical implications

• Methane regulations and compliance issues

5. Arctic & Offshore Exploration

• Competition with Russia over Arctic resources

• Challenges in developing North Sea, Alaskan, and Canadian Arctic reserves

• Pipeline infrastructure bottlenecks (particularly in Canada and New York)

• Marcellus Shale gas production lacking export outlets

6. Renewable Energy Challenges

• Solar investment falling in China

• Subsidy dependency making projects unprofitable

• Data centers using natural gas/diesel despite “renewable” capacity claims

• Environmental concerns about solar panel durability and waste

7. Regulatory & Political Barriers

• Lengthy approval processes for energy projects

• Inconsistent policies across administrations

• EU’s “Brussels Effect” creating compliance pressure

• Antitrust concerns preventing industry coordination

8. Economic & Financial Implications

• $300 trillion needed for energy transition (McKinsey) vs. $3.4 trillion actual investment

• Diesel shortage warnings (Russia banned exports)

• Energy security becoming a geopolitical dividing line

• Inflation and energy cost impacts on consumers

The overarching theme is a fundamental mismatch between net-zero policy ambitions and economic reality, with the hosts arguing that current policies are unsustainable and will lead to energy shortages and higher costs.

Subscribe now

It is going to be a busy week.

Doomberg live on Friday covering the Global oil and Gas Markets; Dr. Beatriz Canamary on Thursday on the Critical port infrastructure; Kim Farrington for the US Senate; Rey Trevino, Pecos Operating, on the Texas Oil and Gas markets; and Thomas Lamb, CEO of Myriad Uranium.

Check out for Stu Turley on The Energy News Beat Substack: https://theenergynewsbeat.substack.com/

For David Blackmon https://blackmon.substack.com/

For Tammy Nemeth https://thenemethreport.substack.com/

For Irina Slav https://irinaslav.substack.com/

This was a fantastic interview by Maria Bartiromo on Fox News with Secretary Scott Bessent. This has lots of great points, and I want to set the stage for the frustration people are feeling with the war in Iran and how President Trump is handling the situation.

I truly believe there are two sides to this story, and we are not getting all of the details.…

Read more

Todd Royal is an author, a true Nuclear expert, and a great friend of the Energy News Beat Podcast. I had an absolute blast visiting with Todd, and we covered a lot of great topics. Being in the rapital raising business for nuclear is an outstanding part of our Energy Dominance requirements. We need modular nuclear, mines, and critical minerals.

Todd is an outstanding energy resource and industry leader. I recommend connecting with him https://www.linkedin.com/in/172466/

1. Nuclear Power as the Solution to Energy Demand

The hosts emphasize nuclear energy as the most viable solution to meet growing electricity demands, particularly for AI data centers. They highlight nuclear’s exceptional capacity factor (95%+), reliability, and ability to run continuously—far superior to renewables. The discussion includes the reopening of Three Mile Island and the potential to restart 20 of the 94 U.S. reactors.

2. AI Data Centers and Power Requirements

A significant focus on the massive electricity demands of AI data centers and the challenges they create. The conversation explores the tension between needing this infrastructure and concerns about farmland usage, grid strain, and rising electricity costs. They discuss potential solutions like revenue-sharing models similar to oil royalties.

3. Climate Policy and “Climate Orthodoxy”

The speakers critique what they call “climate orthodoxy”—the ideological push for renewables and net-zero policies that they argue have harmed economies. They discuss how Democratic-led states have higher electricity costs (38% higher) and how climate policies have destroyed economies in Europe, California, and other regions.

4. Renewables vs. Nuclear Economics

A detailed comparison of levelized costs of electricity (LCOE) and total cost of electricity, arguing that renewables require expensive backup systems and storage. They propose that $10 trillion spent on wind and solar could have built 2,000 nuclear reactors instead, providing clean, reliable baseload power.

5. Energy Security and Geopolitics

Discussion of global energy security, including LNG exports, the Strait of Hormuz, and Europe’s energy crisis. They argue that energy dominance and security should start at home through reliable domestic power generation.

6. Regulatory and Political Barriers

The hosts contend that the real obstacles to nuclear expansion aren’t technical or financial, but political—including the NRC’s historical anti-nuclear stance, environmental regulations, and permitting delays that make projects expensive and slow.

7. Climate Science Skepticism

They challenge mainstream climate narratives, citing scientists like Roger Pielke Jr. and Judith Curry, and reference the UN’s recent acknowledgment that climate change may not be as catastrophic as previously claimed. They discuss data manipulation allegations and the RCP 8.5 climate model controversy.

8. Economic Impact of Energy Policy

The conversation ties energy costs to broader economic issues like inflation, housing shortages, and manufacturing costs. They argue that cheap, abundant nuclear power could reduce inflation and boost economic growth.

9. Data Center Backlash and Opposition

Discussion of organized opposition to data centers funded by billionaires and NGOs, which has halted $152 billion in economic activity. They explore the need for better communication and compromise between tech companies and local communities.

10. Policy Solutions

Recommendations include passing the SAVE Act, implementing revenue-sharing agreements for data centers, building power plants dedicated to data centers, and reforming carbon markets and subsidies.

The podcast presents a pro-nuclear, skeptical-of-renewables perspective on energy policy and its economic implications.

Thank you, Todd, for your great industry leadership.

We have some great interviews lined up next week.

Monday is the Energy Realities and the IEA reports with , and

Doomberg live on Friday covering the Global oil and Gas Markets, Dr. Beatriz Canamary on Thursday on the Critical port infrastructure, Kim Farrington, for the US Senate, and Rey Trevino, Pecos Operating on the Texas Oil and Gas markets.

Waiting for the Strait of Hormuz issue to calm down and then reapplying to get Secretary Chris Wright on the podcast to cover Nuclear, and energy demand growth.

A shout-out to Steve Reese and the Reese Energy Consulting group for sponsoring the Podcast https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/

.

Data2 if you have any business systems, can you trust A? Well, they have the patent on validation. . https://data2.zoholandingpage.com/energy

And we have WellDatabase rolling in as a new sponsor.

https://welldatabase.com/