Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Translation; "I'm part of the trump GOP, laws don't apply to us, and we can do anything we want and get away with it". All they have to do is claim "political" and run the clock out in the courts. And even if the clock ticks a bit fast, they have the GOP high court to cover for their shenanigans.
Graham plans to challenge subpoena: ‘This is all politics’
BY BRAD DRESS - 07/06/22 11:32 AM ET
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3547213-graham-plans-to-challenge-subpoena-this-is-all-politics/
Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C) legal team on Wednesday said he will challenge the subpoena from Fulton County, Ga., investigators probing former President Trump’s interference in the 2020 election in the county, calling the investigation “all politics” and a “fishing expedition.”
Atorneys Bart Daniel and Matt Austin said in a statement their client was “neither a subject nor target of the investigation, simply a witness” and said they expect to “prevail” in the legal challenge.
“Fulton County is engaged in a fishing expedition and working in concert with the January 6 Committee in Washington,” the attorneys said of the House panel investigating the rioting at the U.S. Capitol last year. “Any information from an interview or deposition with Senator Graham would immediately be shared with the January 6 Committee.”
The Fulton County grand jury on Monday subpoenaed Graham as well as Trump allies Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman.
Fulton investigators are probing Trump’s alleged attempt to sway the election in his favor in the Georgia county, including when he made a call to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger asking him to “find” enough votes for Trump to win the election. During the early January 2021 call, Trump also pressured Raffensperger to audit the election results in Fulton County.
In the subpoena, investigators said Graham had two phone calls with Raffensperger following the 2020 election.
The Jan. 6 House committee is also probing Trump’s alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election, which they say culminated in the deadly Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
Georgia grand jury subpoenas Giuliani, other Trump allies in election probe
Biden moves on abortion haven’t quieted progressive anger
In Georgia, the panel began hearing from witnesses last month, including Raffensperger. After hearing the evidence, the special grand jury will recommend to county prosecutors whether to bring a case against Trump for election interference.
Graham’s attorneys said in their statement that “Graham was well within his rights to discuss with state officials the processes and procedures around administering elections.”
“Should it stand, the subpoena issued today would erode the constitutional balance of power and the ability of a Member of Congress to do their job,” they wrote. “Senator Graham plans to go to court, challenge the subpoena, and expects to prevail.”
Cipollone to testify before Jan. 6 panel on Friday: reports
BY CAROLINE VAKIL - 07/06/22 12:04 PM ET
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/3547439-cipollone-to-testify-before-jan-6-panel-on-friday-reports/
Pat Cipollone
FILE – White House counsel Pat Cipollone departs the U.S. Capitol following defense arguments in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, in Washington, Saturday, Jan. 25, 2020. The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection has issued a subpoena to Cipollone. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
Former White House counsel Pat Cipollone is expected to testify Friday behind closed doors before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, according to multiple news reports.
A person familiar with the discussions told The New York Times Cipollone would be participating in a transcribed interview.
The Washington Post reported, citing people familiar with the matter, that the testimony is scheduled to take place for the first half of the day on Friday.
Cipollone did not respond to a request for comment. The Hill has reached out to the committee for comment.
The development comes exactly a week after the House panel issued a subpoena for the former Trump White House counsel following explosive public testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to ex-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.
During her testimony, Hutchinson said Cipollone urged Meadows to take action on the day of the riot, saying at one point “Mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die and the blood is going to be on your effing hands.”
Federal agencies warn health sector against North Korean ransomware
The former Meadows aide said Cipollone warned her that “we’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable” should former President Trump go to the Capitol on Jan. 6 and told her Trump should not be taken there.
Hutchinson, in previously recorded testimony, also characterized Cipollone’s office’s position on a fake elector scheme that was being promoted at the time as not “legally sound.”
Rebecca Beitsch contributed.
Doesn't matter if lying criminal traitor trump was stamping his feet, turning blue while holding his breath, screaming obscenities, twisting and turning and contorting violently, lunging, having a mental breakdown (probably all of the above), or actually touching the steering wheel. It's all the same crap and it's all the same thing, his intent and frame of mind is the truth.
And just because all the ones wanting to be a sucker doesn't excuse being an accessory and enabler to the criminality and lies. Also being part of the sheep heard or partner in the crimes (regurgitating the lies and attacks) doesn't excuse being a traitor or guilty themselves, just like the MAGA followers that do mass murder with weapons of war, they are as guilty as if they weren't mentally unstable or just being some trump/GOP sheep fodder.
Popularity doesn't make innocence. Opioids, mass murdering with weapons of war, tobacco products, pushing the trump/GOP lies, and many bad things are all real popular. Pushing opioids, procuring a weapon of war for a person knowing they are going to kill with it, selling tobacco products to and encouraging a minor to smoke, supporting insurrections, are all in the criminal codes. And even if they weren't, it still is just as wrong for anybody being an accessory to the wrongful acts and just being immoral POS human beings.
Accounts of Trump angrily demanding to go to Capitol on January 6 circulated in Secret Service over past year
https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/01/politics/secret-service-lunging-incident/index.html
Zachary Cohen
By Noah Gray and Zachary Cohen, CNN
Updated 1:24 PM ET, Sat July 2, 2022
Cassidy Hutchinson
Federal investigators raid home of Trump Justice Department official who pushed election lies
New calls for violence circulate on right-wing social media
Watch Brad Raffensperger explain why Trump lost Georgia
'I lost it': Georgia election official on threatening tweet that led him to address Trump
Jan 6 Hearing Committee Video
Listen to the daily voicemails from Giuliani that state official avoided
See the notes DOJ official took on Trump phone call
Jan 6 Oval Office meeting
Inside a key Oval Office meeting depicting Trump's pressure on officials
The sources tell CNN that stories circulated about the incident -- including details that are similar to how former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson described it to the House select committee investigating January 6 -- in the months immediately afterward the US Capitol attack and before she testified this week.
While the details from those who heard the accounts differ, the Secret Service sources say they were told an angry confrontation did occur. And their accounts align with significant parts of Hutchinson's testimony, which has been attacked as hearsay by Trump and his allies who also have tried to discredit her overall testimony.
Like Hutchinson, one source, a longtime Secret Service employee, told CNN that the agents relaying the story described Trump as "demanding" and that the former President said something similar to: "I'm the f**king President of the United States, you can't tell me what to do." The source said he originally heard that kind of language was used shortly after the incident.
Secret Service officials: Agents willing to dispute Trump SUV incident under oath 03:21
"He had sort of lunged forward -- it was unclear from the conversations I had that he actually made physical contact, but he might have. I don't know," the source said. "Nobody said Trump assaulted him; they said he tried to lunge over the seat -- for what reason, nobody had any idea."
The employee said he'd heard about the incident multiple times as far back as February 2021 from other agents, including some who were part of the presidential protective detail during that time period but none of whom were involved in the incident.
The source added that agents often recounted stories of Trump's fits of anger, including the former President throwing and breaking things.
"Not just plates," the source added, a reference to how Hutchinson testified this week that she saw ketchup on the wall and a porcelain plate shattered on the floor of the White House dining room after Trump had thrown his lunch at the wall upon hearing about then-Attorney General William Barr telling a media outlet there was no widespread fraud in the 2020 election.
The other Secret Service source, who spoke to the driver and another agent who wasn't there, said he heard about Trump verbally lashing out at his detail but not about any physical altercation. Neither source told CNN they had heard about Trump trying to grab at the steering wheel.
Three of the people present for the encounter in the presidential SUV, a modified armored version of a Chevrolet Suburban were Trump, detail leader Robert "Bobby" Engel, and the driver whose identify is not publicly known at this time.
Hutchinson herself didn't see the incident firsthand. She testified at the select committee hearing on Tuesday that she was told about it by then-White House deputy chief of staff Tony Ornato. She said Ornato told her the story in front of Engel.
She testified that Ornato told her that Engel repeatedly informed Trump on their way back to the White House after Trump's Ellipse speech that it wasn't safe to go to the Capitol.
Who is Tony Ornato and why does he matter to the January 6 committee? 02:26
According to Hutchinson, Ornato recounted Trump screaming, "I'm the f**king President. Take me up to the Capitol now." Trump then "reached up toward the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel," Hutchinson recalled Ornato saying. She added that, according to Ornato, Trump used his other hand to "lunge" at Engel.
Hutchinson also testified that Trump and her boss, the then-President's chief of staff Mark Meadows, were aware of the possibility of violence on January 6, 2021, and that Trump supporters had weapons when they gathered on the Ellipse that day.
Engel and Ornato have both testified to the committee behind closed doors, but their statements were not used in the hearing Tuesday.
Neither Engel nor Ornato have commented publicly on Hutchinson's testimony.
A separate Secret Service official previously told CNN that Engel denied that Trump grabbed at the steering wheel or lunged toward an agent on his detail, and that Ornato denied telling Hutchinson the same. The official did not dispute that Trump directed his agents to take him to the Capitol.
Ornato has a close relationship with Trump and his team, having previously served as head of his protective detail and then being granted an unusual leave from his Secret Service duties to be detailed to the White House as deputy chief of staff for operations.
Hutchinson's account of the alleged incident was among the most shocking portions of Tuesday's hearing -- adding to an already damning portrait of how Trump was desperate to get to the Capitol at the time.
Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, a member of the committee, said that the agents can come to the panel and dispute the claims under oath.
"No one is denying that the President wanted to go to the Capitol where this armed mob was attacking the Congress and trying to overturn the election," Lofgren said in an interview on CNN's AC360 on Wednesday night. "That is the main point shocking as the story about the limousine lurch was. The real legal import was that he wanted to go up there and nobody is disputing that."
Rep. Stephanie Murphy of Florida, another Democratic member of the committee, said on NBC's "Meet the Press NOW" that "Mr. Ornato did not have as clear of memories from this period of time as I would say Ms. Hutchinson did."
"But we are always happy folks who have recalled things to come back and talk to us," she added.
Interesting comparative conversation.
www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/vrhh7s/14_arrested_after_climate_activists_shut_down_all
White supremist trucker protest, July 4, 2022:
Maryland State Police say they responded to two traffic incidents around 8:15 a.m. on the Fourth of July. One group of truckers blocked I-270 just before I-370. Another group blocked southbound I-95 just south of route 198. No arrests were made.
Climate activist protest, July 4, 2022 (4 hours later):
The protest took place on I-495 inner loop at X30 US 29 Colesville Rd., Maryland State Police said they arrested 14 people involved in the protest, according to a spokesperson. Charges include disturbing peace/hinder passage and failure to obey a reasonable/lawful order.
Out of the 13 protestors, four were also charged with resisting arrest. One counter-protester was charged with second-degree assault a
2 Arizona election officials abruptly quit before the primaries, citing continuous threats from Trump supporters over 2020 elections
Sophia Ankel Jul 4, 2022, 4:53 AM
https://www.businessinsider.com/2-arizona-election-officials-quit-trump-supporters-threatened-2022-7
Two top election officials in Yavapai, Arizona, abruptly quit their jobs.
They said they were leaving after threats from Trump supporters denying the 2020 election results.
Election officials around the US have been under attack since Trump claimed the election was fraudulent.
Two top Arizona election officials abruptly quit their jobs before the state's primary elections, citing continuous threats from former President Donald Trump's supporters after the 2020 elections, multiple reports say.
Leslie Hoffman, the elected county recorder in Yavapai County, said on Friday that she was stepping down later this month after facing two years of "nastiness" from election deniers, The Washington Post reported.
Hoffman said elections director Lynn Constabile, who had worked for the county for 18 years, was leaving for the same reason, The Post reported. Constabile did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.
Election officials across the country had been under attack after Trump lost the 2020 president election and falsely claimed that it was fraudulent. However, Trump had won Yavapai County in 2020.
Hoffman said, according to The Post: "I'm a Republican recorder living in a Republican county where the candidate that they wanted to win won by 2-to-1 in this county and still getting grief, and so is my staff."
"I'm not sure what they think that we did wrong," she said. "And they're very nasty. The accusations and the threats are nasty."
Hoffman accepted another job outside the county, ABC 15 Arizona reported. She said the abuse she received after the 2020 election prompted the local sheriff's department to provide her with security, the outlet reported.
"The threats I have, the sheriff patrols my house periodically. It's getting to be a lot and when the job offer came, I took it," she said, ABC 15 Arizona reported.
Hoffman and Constabile's resignations come weeks before the state's primaries, which start on August 2. Early ballots are set to be mailed out next week.
Hoffman told The Post she was confident the primaries would run smoothly, and that remaining staff are "going to be very diligent on researching anybody that they would consider to appoint."
While Trump won Yavapai County in 2020, President Joe Biden ultimately won the state of Arizona, which was once a Republican stronghold.
Last month, a former Georgia election worker testified at the January 6 committee's public hearing about the attacks she and her family received after Trump's loss.
Wandrea "Shaye" Moss, who is Black, said she received violent and racist threats from a group of election deniers, which forced her to leave her job, hide her identity, and live in Airbnbs for two months at the FBI's recommendation.
"I felt horrible," she told the panel. "I felt homeless. I can't believe this person has caused this much damage to me and my family to have to leave my home."
According to video by CNN in this feed it's been a story among the SS passed around quite a bit.
“The first source telling us that there were many people talking about the former president being very angry, lashing out at the individuals in the car and demanding to go to the capitol on that day, and that even that he lunged in the direction of the front seat” pic.twitter.com/DuvKnCiBgz
— Acyn (@Acyn) July 1, 2022
So true. When such abusive and undemocratic power is used, sooner or later the masses will riot and react. Then it just becomes a continuous reactive mess. Sad.
And this is what the fossil fuel industry has lied, connived, and paid for. Of course we are the ones paying and going to be paying a lot more real soon.
US supreme court rules against EPA and hobbles government power to limit harmful emissions
Court sides with Republican states as ruling represents landmark moment in rightwing effort to dismantle ‘regulatory state’
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/30/us-supreme-court-ruling-restricts-federal-power-greenhouse-gas-emissions
A West Virginia coal-fired power plant. The case, brought by West Virginia, was backed by a host of other Republican-led states including Texas and Kentucky. Photograph: David Hawxhurst/Alamy
Oliver Milman in New York
@olliemilman
Thu 30 Jun 2022 10.38 EDT
The US supreme court has sided with Republican-led states to in effect hobble the federal government’s ability to tackle the climate crisis, in a ruling that will have profound implications for the government’s overall regulatory power.
In a 6-3 decision that will seriously hinder America’s ability to stave off disastrous global heating, the supreme court, which became dominated by rightwing justices under the Trump administration, has opted to support a case brought by West Virginia that demands the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) be limited in how it regulates planet-heating gases from the energy sector.
Gun violence survivors at a rally outside the supreme court, 3 November 2021.
US supreme court overturns New York handgun law in bitter blow to gun-control push
Read more
The case, which was backed by a host of other Republican-led states including Texas and Kentucky, was highly unusual in that it was based upon the Clean Power Plan, an Obama-era strategy to cut emissions from coal-fired power plants that never came into effect. The Biden administration sought to have the case dismissed as baseless given the plan was dropped and has not been resurrected.
Not only was this case about a regulation that does not exist, that never took effect, and which would have imposed obligations on the energy sector that it would have met regardless. It also involves two legal doctrines that are not mentioned in the constitution, and that most scholars agree have no basis in any federal statute.
However, the supreme court has sided with West Virginia, a major coal mining state, which argued that “unelected bureaucrats” at the EPA should not be allowed to reshape its economy by limiting pollution – even though emissions from coal are helping cause worsening flooding, heatwaves and droughts around the world, as well as killing millions of people through toxic air.
“Capping carbon dioxide emissions at a level that will force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate electricity may be a sensible ‘solution to the crisis of the day’,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the opinion. “But it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme in Section 111(d). A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body.”
Roberts was joined by the conservative justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The three liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer dissented. It is the most important climate change case to come before the supreme court in more than a decade.
But the ruling could also have sweeping consequences for the federal government’s ability to set standards and regulate in other areas, such as clean air and water, consumer protections, banking, workplace safety and public health. It may prove a landmark moment in conservative ambitions to dismantle the “regulatory state”, stripping away protections from Americans across a wide range of areas.
It could fundamentally change what the federal government is and what it does. And, as justice Elena Kagan pointed out in her dissent, it could leave technical decisions to a political body that may not understand them.
“First, members of Congress often don’t know enough – and know they don’t know enough – to regulate sensibly on an issue. Of course, members can and do provide overall direction. But then they rely, as all of us rely in our daily lives, on people with greater expertise and experience. Those people are found in agencies,” she wrote.
Several conservatives on the court have criticized what they see as the unchecked power of federal agencies, concerns evident in orders throwing out two Biden policies aimed at reducing the spread of Covid-19.
Last summer, the six-to-three conservative majority ended a pandemic-related pause on evictions over unpaid rent. In January, the same six justices blocked a requirement that workers at large employers be vaccinated or test regularly for the coronavirus and wear a mask on the job.
The Biden administration was supported in the EPA court case by New York and more than a dozen other Democratic-led states, along with prominent businesses such as Apple, Amazon and Google that have called for a swift transition to renewable energy.
The administration has vowed to cut US emissions in half by the end of this decade but has floundered in its attempts to legislate this outcome, with a sweeping climate bill sunk by the opposition of Republican senators and Joe Manchin, the centrist Democratic senator from West Virginia.
The federal government also had the power of administrative regulations in order to force reductions in emissions but the supreme court ruling will now imperil this ability.
The supposed SC is nothing more than a political arm of the GOP. This is part of what they have lied, connived, and paid for. They are not part of a democratic system and how civil wars or major uprisings happen. I definitely foresee civil unrest in the future, with mass arrests much like Putin's system. That will do great for our economy along with the fossil fuel destruction of our climate and it's coming expense.
Supreme Court revives GOP-drawn Louisiana voting map halted for likely racial bias
BY JOHN KRUZEL - 06/28/22 5:57 PM ET
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3540405-supreme-court-revives-gop-drawn-louisiana-voting-map-halted-for-likely-racial-bias/
The Supreme Court on Tuesday voted 6-3 to reinstate a Louisiana voting map that had been blocked by a federal judge who found that the state’s new GOP-drawn redistricting plan likely discriminates against Black voters.
The court’s conservative majority voted to revive Louisiana’s new U.S. House districting map, over a dissent from the three liberal justices. The move came in a brief unsigned order issued without comment under the court’s so-called “shadow docket.”
Additionally, the justices added the case to their docket for their next court term, which begins this fall. They are slated to hear arguments in October over a similar Voting Rights Act challenge to Alabama’s new voting maps.
The Tuesday order pauses a ruling issued earlier this month by U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick, an Obama appointee, who found Louisiana’s new redistricting plan likely violates federal voting protections by diluting the franchise of Black voters.
The judge ordered the GOP-held legislature to draw a new map that created a second majority-Black congressional district in Louisiana. Under the original plan, large numbers of Black voters were consolidated into a single majority-Black congressional district, with remaining Black voters dispersed throughout the state’s five other districts.
Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards (D) vetoed the Republican-drawn congressional district maps in March, saying he thought the maps did not accurately reflect the makeup of Louisiana, a state where almost 33 percent of residents are Black. The GOP-held legislature overrode his veto later that month.
The Louisiana-based federal judge, in her June 6 preliminary ruling, said the challengers were likely to ultimately prevail in their case. The plaintiffs include a group of Louisiana voters who are backed by the NAACP and other voting rights advocacy groups.
Ketanji Brown Jackson sworn in as Supreme Court justice
Read full text: Supreme Court decision curbing EPA climate powers
“The Court concludes that Plaintiffs have demonstrated that they will suffer an irreparable harm if voting takes place in the 2022 Louisiana congressional elections based on a redistricting plan that violates federal law,” Dick wrote in a 152-page ruling.
“Voting is a fundamental political right, because it is preservative of all rights. Once the election occurs, there can be no do-over and no redress for voters whose rights were violated, and votes diluted by the challenged plan.”
In response, Louisiana’s Republican Secretary of State Kyle Ardoin asked a New Orleans-based federal appeals court to halt the ruling, but was rebuffed. This prompted Ardoin’s ultimately successful request to Justice Samuel Alito, who handles emergency matters arising from Louisiana, and who referred the matter to the full court.
New York mayor suggests Giuliani falsely reported claim of assault in store
Eric Adams says he watched security video that undercut Rudy Giuliani’s account, which led to man being charged with assault
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/29/eric-adams-rudy-giuliani-falsely-reported-claim-assault-new-york
Associated Press in New York
Wed 29 Jun 2022 08.35 EDT
The mayor of New York City, Eric Adams, has suggested his predecessor Rudy Giuliani be investigated for filing a false police report, after claiming he was assaulted by a heckler who clapped him on the back at a Staten Island grocery store.
“Someone needs to remind former mayor Giuliani that falsely reporting a crime is a crime,” Adams told reporters, saying he had watched security video that undercut Giuliani’s account.
Giuliani, 78, described being hit so hard it felt like being shot.
The heckler, who police said cried out, “What’s up scumbag?” as he walked away, was arrested and spent more than 24 hours in jail before arraignment on misdemeanor charges including third-degree assault.
Adams said the Staten Island district attorney, Michael McMahon, “has the wrong person that he’s investigating”.
Adams said: “When you look at the video, the guy basically walked by and patted him on the back. It was clear that he was not punched in the head. It was clear that it didn’t feel like a bullet. It was clear that he wasn’t about to fall to the ground.”
Adams and McMahon are Democrats. Giuliani, a Republican, was mayor from 1994 to 2001, gaining widespread praise for his leadership after 9/11. Now suspended from practicing law, he was a personal lawyer for Donald Trump and took on a leading role in disputing Trump’s 2020 election loss.
The supermarket incident happened on Sunday as Giuliani was campaigning for his son, Andrew, who lost in his bid for the Republican nomination for governor in Tuesday’s primary.
McMahon’s office declined comment on Adams’ remarks. A message seeking comment was left with the New York police department, where Adams was once a captain.
Giuliani gave a profanity laced response when asked about Adams’ comments by the New York Post. He called the mayor a “scumbag”.
The heckler was released without bail on Monday. He is due back in court on 17 August. Court records show he is represented by a private lawyer, who did not respond to a message seeking comment. A public defender group that represented him at his arraignment decried the man’s arrest.
Giuliani was standing with a group of people when a man walking past reached out, touched his back with an open palm and then said something as he walked away.
Giuliani said the man accused him of being “a woman killer”, which he took to be a reference to the supreme court ruling overturning the right to abortion.
In security video, Giuliani barely reacts when his back was touched.
Speaking to fellow Republican radio host Curtis Sliwa on WABC, he said it felt “like somebody shot me”. Later, in a news conference on Facebook, he said it was “as if a boulder hit me”.
Fawn Hall
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Born September 15, 1959 (age 62)
Annandale, Virginia
Alma mater Annandale High School (1977)
Occupation Secretary
Employer U.S. National Security Council (1983–87)
Known for Iran-Contra affair
Spouse(s) Danny Sugerman
(m. 1993-2005,
his death)
Partner(s) Rob Lowe
(1987)
Arturo Cruz Jr.
(1985–86)
Fawn Hall (born September 15, 1959) is a former secretary to Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North and had a small role in the Iran-Contra affair by helping North shred confidential documents.
Contents
1 Early life
2 Involvement in Iran-Contra
3 Life after the Iran-Contra affair
4 References
5 Sources
6 External links
Early life
Born in Annandale, Virginia, in 1959, Hall graduated from Annandale High School in 1977. She began working part-time in a clerical position for the United States Navy, beginning in January 1976 while she was in VGA high school.[1] After graduating, she began working full-time for the Navy at the Pentagon.
Involvement in Iran-Contra
Hall was detailed from the Navy to work at the National Security Council on February 26, 1983 as Oliver North's secretary. She worked for North until she was fired on November 25, 1986, at the height of the scandal.[1] Hall's mother, Wilma Hall, was secretary to Robert McFarlane,[2] Reagan's national security advisor, North's superior and a major player in the Iran-Contra affair.
In one mishap, Hall transposed the digits of a Swiss bank account number, resulting in a contribution from the Sultan of Brunei to the Contras being credited to a Swiss businessman's bank account instead of the intended account.[3]
In June 1987, Hall, herself, began two days of testimony in front of the United States Congress. She confessed to altering, shredding a large number of documents (so much was destroyed, she said, that the office shredder jammed), and smuggling others in her boots and inside her clothing and giving them to North on November 25, 1986, who was fired after his role in orchestrating potentially illegal aid to the Nicaraguan Contras became public.[4][5] Among her other testimony was a claim that, "Sometimes you have to go above the law."[5] Journalist Bob Woodward recorded that her legal defense justification was summarized in her words: 'We shred everything'.[6] In 1989, in exchange for her testimony against North for Iran-Contra affair, she was granted immunity from prosecution.[7]
Life after the Iran-Contra affair
After the Iran-Contra affair broke, Hall briefly went back to work for the Navy in 1987 for less than 6 months. She was invited to the 1987 White House Correspondents' Dinner by journalist Michael Kelly.[8] After her congressional testimony in June 1987, she left government service and signed with the William Morris Agency[9] and unsuccessfully pursued a media career in the Washington, D.C., area. She later moved to Los Angeles, California, and pursued a modeling career for several years.[10] In April 1993, she married Danny Sugerman, former manager of The Doors.[10][11]
The Sugermans lived in the Hollywood Hills.[10] It was reported that Sugerman introduced Hall to crack cocaine shortly after their marriage. She developed an addiction and suffered a non-lethal overdose in 1994. Afterward, she went into rehab.[10] Sugerman died in 2005 of lung cancer, and in 2007 Hall listed the house for sale for almost $2.5 million.[10][12]
Since 2012 Hall has lived a quiet life in West Hollywood, working at a bookstore and staying out of the public eye.[
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fawn_Hall
I'd be happy at this point to have one major charge stick and it being the first US president to go behind bars. Along with the whole pack of GOP accessory's to their crimes. Have my doubts though.
I think witness tampering would be a better one to put in there. A form of the already obstruction charges, but it does stand on it's own.
https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/federal-witness-tampering
Well he wasn't taken out kicking and screaming, just screaming and lunging. Remember, all the GOP (except for a few) joined, supported, and enabled this guy and all of his actions and evil. They still are.
He thought it through alright, just thought wrong and obviously had to change what he originally thought, and he's still having a tough time. Yes, this war is going to last for some time, but IMO if a gang comes in to your home, blows up your car and garage with your kid in it, invades your home, rapes your daughter and 12 year old son, and then says if you want to end this nightmare, give me your living room and by the way we're taking your first born, well, that's just plain wrong. Even if it appeases your neighbors, so they wouldn't suffer any inconveniences and just get it over with already.
Me, I would be saying you can pry my place from my cold dead fingers, that is if any of you are left. And if I was a neighbor, I would be grabbing my gun, brothers, my grandson in the Marines and go help kick some asses out of there, no matter what the cost.
I don't take anything as gospel. But if I did, it sure wouldn't be from any Western Putin sympathizers arm chair analysists who doesn't know their ass from hole in the ground.
Russian-language Ukrainian TV channel aims to topple Putin
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/07/russian-language-ukrainian-tv-channel-aims-to-topple-putin
Ilya Ponomarev funds the channel’s $1m-a-year news operation from the proceeds of his investments.
Photograph: Anastasia Taylor-Lind/The Guardian
February Morning, founded by former Russian MP Ilya Ponomarev, broadcasts to audience in Russia
Luke Harding in Kyiv
Tue 7 Jun 2022 00.00 EDT
In a 19th-century building in the heart of Kyiv, a group of journalists were hard at work. Olga Volkona, a TV presenter, was preparing to interview a military expert. In a nearby room, reporters were posting content to Telegram, YouTube and Facebook. Others were preparing for the launch next week of an online newspaper.
The channel, February Morning, has one ambitious and seemingly impossible goal: to topple Vladimir Putin. Unlike other media outlets operating in Ukraine, it is exclusively aimed at an audience living in Russia. Its 70 staff are Ukrainian and Russian. Some of them work in provincial Russian towns, as part of an undercover network.
The channel’s founder, Ilya Ponomarev, used to be a member of Russia’s parliament. In 2014 he was the only deputy to vote against the annexation of Crimea. A vengeful Kremlin then chucked him out of the Duma and barred him when he was on a trip to the US from re-entering his own country. Based in Kyiv, he became a Ukrainian citizen in 2019.
“I love this idea,” Ponomarev said, pointing to the white-blue-white flag that forms the channel’s live studio backdrop. It is the Russian tricolour “minus the red blood”, he said. It was also the flag of Veliky Novgorod, one of Russia’s oldest cities, famed for its medieval democracy until its takeover by Ivan the Terrible.
The most effective way of ending Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is to bring down the regime in Moscow, Ponomarev said. With Putin in power, there is every prospect the conflict could drag on for years, even decades. “Our job at the end of the day is an uprising of the masses,” he said. “We need individuals to see they are not alone.”
Ponomarev conceded it would be difficult to persuade Russians conditioned by years of state TV propaganda to turn on their government. But he said there were two groups who formed a promising constituency. One was younger urban liberals and supporters of the jailed opposition leader Alexei Navalny. Many have recently emigrated.
The other was Russia’s frustrated working class, fed up with corruption and misrule. Often leftwing and largely disorganised, they had not fled abroad and were more likely to carry out acts of civil disobedience, he said. Since February, activists have burned down several Russian military recruitment offices, tasked with sending soldiers to Ukraine.
The former MP claimed “limited” credit for these mini-attacks, which have featured extensively on February Morning’s media outlet, Rospartizan. The channel gives tips on bomb making and how to thwart Russia’s FSB spy agency by turning off mobile phone location settings. These “small tricks” were taught in the early Putin era at left-faction summer camps, he said.
Russia’s opposition is famous for its internal feuds and backbiting. Ponomarev has previously been critical of Navalny. He described him as an ally in the struggle to get rid of Putin but alleged that Navalny’s controlling tendencies made him unfit to be president. Ponomarev said his vision was of a decentralised bottom-up Russia where local communities make their own decisions.
Natalya Sindeyeva, owner and founder of Russian TV channel Dozhd
Defiant to the last, Moscow’s media star takes aim at Putin’s brutal clampdown
Read more
February Morning’s Ukrainian chief editor, Larisa Rybalchenko, said it would take time before she and her editorial colleagues change Russian society. “It will be a long journey. There is a lot of disinformation out there, especially about the war. But it’s essential for Russia and for Ukraine,” she said. Last week Russian troops seized her home town, Svitlodarsk, in the Donetsk region.
Since the invasion, the Kremlin has launched an unprecedented media crackdown. It has closed down the country’s last independent sources of news, including the paper Novaya Gazeta, the radio station Echo Moskvy and the TV channel Rain. Numerous journalists have been branded “foreign agents”. Using the word “war” is a criminal offence; the Kremlin term is “special operation”.
Ponomarev said he was looking for western sources of funding for his channel. But he said London and Washington were wary of promoting “regime change” in Russia, even though that is what they privately want. The Biden administration is providing Kyiv with $40bn in arms and humanitarian aid. It says it is not trying to remove Putin.
Asked whether he was now a foreign agent in the eyes of the Kremlin, Ponomarev said: “I would be proud if they called me that. Terrorist, extremist, it’s an act of recognition.” He added: “Unfortunately they are really smart. They have ensured there are no visible political figures among leftists and nationalists. We need to offer a credible vision for Russia’s future.”
The channel wants to build a second studio on its balcony, which overlooks central Kyiv and a sky of screeching summer swifts. The news operation costs $1m a year. Ponomarev said he covered running costs himself, from funds accumulated during a successful career as a Silicon Valley investor. His own political views were those of a “left-libertarian anarchist”, he said.
The young rebels plotting in tiny groups against the mighty Russian state were similar to the social revolutionaries of more than a century ago, he said. They fought to bring down the tsar and to give land to the peasants. In February 1917 they succeeded in removing the government – only to see the Bolsheviks and Lenin take over the revolution and seize power.
“Elites in Russia are dissatisfied. But right now they are not scared enough,” said Ponomarev. “They need to see the ghost of 1917.”
Seems like Putin's war of attrition is lacking a bit.
Somewhat like todays times. People then were in an irrational exuberant state, borrowing money from the banks, much like margin today, thinking they could be millionaires easy. They bid up artificially stock prices. Times were good, unemployment low, and the Fed had bad timing.
https://www.history.com/news/1929-stock-market-crash-warning-signs#:~:text=It%20started%20with%20a%20technique,to%20investors%2C%E2%80%9D%20says%20Richardson.
Starting in 1928, the Fed launched a very public campaign to slow down runaway stock prices by cutting off easy credit to investors, Richardson says. It started with a technique called “moral suasion,” similar to Alan Greenspan’s warning in 1996 that “irrational exuberance” was artificially pushing up stock prices. Back in 1929, the message was “Stop loaning money to investors,” says Richardson. “This is creating a problem.”
Banks didn’t get the message, so the Fed resorted to “direct action,” which operated more like a direct threat. In a letter to every commercial U.S. bank under the Fed’s purview, the central bank said that if you continue to lend to brokers and investors, we’re going to cut off access to the Fed’s discount window. No more credit for you.
But that didn’t work either.
In a last ditch effort to undercut the spike in stock prices, the Fed decided to raise interest rates in August 1929. If investors missed the first two signs that the Fed wanted to slam the breaks on the stock market, this one should have been abundantly clear.
“The Fed made a string of public announcements: ‘We’re doing this to slow the growth of stock prices,’” says Richardson. “Investors are very aware that the Fed is trying to bring down stock prices using all the tools at its disposal.”
Interest Rate Hike’s Bad Timing
Unfortunately, the timing of the interest rate hike couldn’t have been worse. Little did the Fed know that the U.S. economy would reach its peak in August 1929. Tightening the credit market was supposed to shrink stock prices by maybe 10 percent, says Richardson, but definitely not 90 percent.
Today, even mainstream news outlets run stories on wonky financial terms like the inverted treasury yield curve, which is supposed to be a strong predictor of a coming recession. Back in 1929, there were fewer such indicators available to investors, but still enough to get a read on whether the economy was expanding or contracting. Monthly figures were published, for example, about leading indicators like new housing permits and manufacturing orders.
“In 1929, it was clear that there had been this big boom but that the economy was starting to cool down,” says Richardson. “Just like today, there was a lot of discussion in the press about whether the economy had reached a peak or not. That all got resolved very quickly with the crash and its aftermath.”
With all the stats and graphs, problems with supply for the demand (whatever one might blame it on), seems like we could use ways to lower the demand and prices would stabilize and even go down. More expense (saved) by looking at other forms of energy besides fossil fuels. The burning of which that's the main cause of climate change and heating up of this planet and is costing trillions of dollars in the past, present, and increasing in the future. That's not even discussing the human factors in it all.
A lot of reasons for the speed or lack of "ramp up" is supply problems and expense of labor shortage, piping, oil rig shortages, etc. The smaller independent companies (I don't really put them in the same category as the big dog billionaires, some of them have a real hard time) are worried about putting out the expense and difficulties of today and then in a year or two oil price falls back down to $70 or worse. It's definitely happened before.
I do have a problem with all the valid issues on increasing supply is blamed on Biden on a daily basis instead of truths and actually working on solutions, which would be best to decrease the demand.
Goldman raises Brent price outlook on unresolved supply deficit
Reuters
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/goldman-raises-brent-price-outlook-unresolved-supply-deficit-2022-06-07/
June 7 (Reuters) - Goldman Sachs increased its Brent oil price forecasts by $10 to $135 a barrel for the period between the second half of 2022 and the first half of next year, reasoning that a structural supply deficit was still unresolved.
Prices would need to rise to the forecast level for supply to normalize by late 2023, analysts at the bank said in a note dated June 6
more.........
An oil billionaire on Republican Faux news is blaming Biden for not opening the "spigots" continuing the lies of the oil billionaires and their paid for politicians and say they could (not that really want to) give over oil for half the price it is today. Yet it is shown that isn't even close to the truths.
www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2022/03/11/what-is-holding-back-us-oil-production
Biden has given 1000's of permits beyond what they already have and the oil companies are in the control to "turn on" or "turn up" spigots they already have drilled. Yes, permits take time, but still has to do with the oil industry using them, and they have had them for years. Weaponizing people's misery for pure power grab and control. The misery that they have more control over with the GOP help and their misinformation campaigns.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/billionaire-oil-refiner-biden-spigots
The oil control has been upping their oil production and is reaching before Covid. Seems like they could give over that half price sale now, but that would take out their extreme profits and wouldn't have the lie with Biden and the gas pump that's pushed out almost every day on Fox. Perfect example of "general lack of values and moral compass" and pretty close to Putin methods of control.
CURRENT WILDFIRES BURNING IN THE U.S.
https://www.fireweatheravalanche.org/fire/current-list-of-us-wildfires
New Mexico 62 fires, 819,262 acres
Texas 100 fires 442,876 acres
Oklahoma 26 fires 73,566 acres
Arizona 66 fires 50,609 acres
Nebraska 5 fires 46,193 acres
Alaska 33 fires 38,808 acres
Colorado 33 fires 28,546 acres
Kansas 8 fires 24,660 acres
Mississippi 12 fires 8,228 acres
Montana 8 fires 948 acres
California 260 fires 577 acres
Kentucky 1 fire 485 acres
Washington 12 fires 460 acres
Missouri 2 fires 253 acres
Utah 9 fires 19 acres
Oregon 18 fires 5 acres
South Dakota 3 fires 460 acres
Nevada 6 fires 19 acres
https://www.bankrate.com/insurance/homeowners-insurance/wildfire-statistics/
And the costs and expenses of fossil fuel burning continues to mount.
India: Heatwave warning issued for northwest, central, eastern parts | 10 points
The India Meteorological Department has issued a heat wave warning for several parts of India for the next 2 to 3 days. No significant changes in maximum temperature have been predicted.
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/weather-news-heatwave-warning-maximum-temperature-in-india-ten-points-1958798-2022-06-06
Kumar Kunal
New Delhi
June 6, 2022UPDATED: June 6, 2022 09:11 IST
Record-breaking heat wave scorches India’s wheat crop and hinders export plans
https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20220430-heat-wave-scorches-india-s-wheat-crop-shatters-records-and-snags-export-plans
Issued on: 30/04/2022 - 09:31
An unusually early, record-shattering heat wave in India has reduced wheat yields, raising questions about how the country will balance its domestic needs with ambitions to increase exports and make up for shortfalls due to Russia's war in Ukraine.
Gigantic landfills in India's capital New Delhi have caught fire in recent weeks. Schools in eastern Indian state Odisha have been shut for a week and in neighboring West Bengal, schools are stocking up on oral rehydration salts for kids. On Tuesday, Rajgarh, a city of over 1.5 million people in central India, was the country's hottest, with daytime temperatures peaking at 46.5 degrees Celsius (114.08 Fahrenheit). Temperatures breached the 45 C (113 F) mark in nine other cities.
But it was the heat in March — the hottest in India since records first started being kept in 1901 — that stunted crops. Wheat is very sensitive to heat, especially during the final stage when its kernels mature and ripen. Indian farmers time their planting so that this stage coincides with India's usually cooler spring.
Climate change has made India’s heat wave hotter, said Friederike Otto, a climate scientist at the Imperial College of London. She said that before human activities increased global temperatures, heat waves like this year's would have struck India once in about half a century.
“But now it is a much more common event — we can expect such high temperatures about once in every four years," she said.
India's vulnerability to extreme heat increased 15% from 1990 to 2019, according to a 2021 report by the medical journal The Lancet. It is among the top five countries where vulnerable people, like the old and the poor, have the highest exposure to heat. It and Brazil have the the highest heat-related mortality in the world, the report said.
Farm workers like Baldev Singh are among the most vulnerable. Singh, a farmer in Sangrur in northern India’s Punjab state, watched his crop shrivel before his eyes as an usually cool spring quickly shifted to unrelenting heat. He lost about a fifth of his yield. Others lost more.
“I am afraid the worst is yet to come,” Singh said.
Punjab is India's “grain bowl" and the government has encouraged cultivation of wheat and rice here since the 1960s. It is typically the biggest contributor to India's national reserves and the government had hoped to buy about a third of this year's stock from the region. But government assessments predict lower yields this year, and Devinder Sharma, an agriculture policy expert in northern Chandigarh city. said he expected to get 25% less.
The story is the same in other major wheat-producing states like Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh.
Overall, India purchased over 43 million metric tons (47.3 million U.S. tons) of wheat in 2021. Sharma estimates it will instead get 20% to nearly 50% less.
Even though it is the world's second-largest producer of wheat, India exports only a small fraction of its harvest. It had been looking to capitalize on the global disruption to wheat supplies from Russia's war in Ukraine and find new markets for its wheat in Europe, Africa, and Asia.
That looks uncertain given the tricky balance the government must maintain between demand and supply. It needs about 25 million tons (27.5 million U.S. tons) of wheat for the vast food welfare program that usually feeds more than 80 million people.
Before the pandemic, India had vast stocks that far exceeded its domestic needs — a buffer against the risk of famine.
Those reserves have been strained, Sharma said, by distribution of free grain during the pandemic to about 800 million people — vulnerable groups like migrant workers. The program was extended until September but it's unclear if it will continue beyond then.
“We are no longer with that kind of a surplus... with exports now picking up, there would be a lot of pressure on the domestic availability of wheat,” Sharma said.
India's federal agriculture and commerce ministries didn't respond to questions sent to them via email.
Beyond India, other countries are also grappling with poor harvests that hinder their ability to help offset the potential shortfall of supplies from Russia and Ukraine, normally the world's largest and fifth-largest exporters of wheat.
China's agriculture minister, Tang Renjian, said last month that the winter wheat harvest was likely to be poor, hindered by flooding and by delays in planting.
Natural Gas Futures Hit 13-Year High As Traders Expect "Blistering Hot Summer"
By Tom Kool - Jun 06, 2022, 4:09 PM CDT
https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Natural-Gas-Futures-Hit-13-Year-High-As-Traders-Expect-Blistering-Hot-Summer.html
Natural gas futures have hit an 13-year high on higher temperatures to come in the next week combined with lower production levels.
On Monday, Henry Hub natural gas futures were up nearly 10% at a 13-year high.
At 5:00pm EST, Henry Hub prices for July contracts sat at $9.368, up 9.91%. August contracts were at $9.350, up 9.87%.
A key reason for the sudden surge is heat, with temperatures expected to rise significantly in the middle part of this month, with production declining and demand threatening to exceed supply.
Natural Gas Intelligence (NGI) quoted EBW analyst Eli Rubin as saying in a note to clients that a “blistering hot summer” is first and foremost among fears. Rubin said the increasing demand for natural gas for cooling in the coming weeks “could ignite another substantial rally in Nymex futures into mid-summer”.
Texas, in particular, is expected to see demand for natural gas soar to a historical record this week–even before the hottest part of summer sets in.
Also driving natural gas futures upward is rising demand, declining production, and soaring exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the U.S. Gulf coast, diverting domestic supplies.
In its 2022 outlook released in late May, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) projected that U.S. demand for natural gas would outpace supply this summer. As reported by NGI, FERC sees U.S. dry natural gas production increase by 3.4% over the summer months, compared to a projected 4.8% increase in consumption during that same period.
Over the winter period from November 2021 through March 2022, 2,264 billion cubic feet of natural gas was withdrawn from U.S. storage, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). That withdrawal is 10% higher than the previous five-year average. Already this winter, U.S. demand for natural gas exceeded supply by 14.9 billion cubic feet per day.
By Tom Kool for Oilprice.com
Three factors are roiling summer electric power supply outlooks
By David Wagman -
5.16.2022
https://www.power-eng.com/coal/three-factors-are-roiling-summer-electric-power-supply-outlooks/
A decade ago, many analysts warned that building liquefied natural gas export capacity in the U.S. would link domestic natural gas markets to global energy markets, resulting in negative impacts both on domestic supplies and prices.
Now, those 10-year-old warnings seem to be prescient. A handful of factors is keeping natural gas prices high just as the season for peak air conditioning load gets underway.
This year, however, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine complicates utility decision making as the U.S. joins with other nations to backstop world markets with natural gas that otherwise would be supplied by Russia.
What’s more, transportation constraints in the U.S. are impacting coal deliveries to power plants.
All this comes as power industry watchers await the North American Electric Reliability Corp.’s annual summer reliability assessment.
Early hints raise worries. For example, the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) offered a blunt assessment of what it is expecting this summer. It said in late April that firm resources “will be insufficient to cover peak load of summer months.” It warned that emergency resources and non-firm energy imports “will be needed to maintain system reliability.” And it said that the need for emergency procedures will be impacted by the availability of non-firm resources.
What’s going on? A closer look at the Energy information Administration’s (EIA’s) latest Sort-Term Energy Outlook highlights three critical factors.
First, natural gas spot prices measured at the Henry Hub averaged $6.59 per million British thermal units (MMBtu) in April. That was up from the March average of $4.90/MMBtu. And the benchmark price was more than double the April 2021 average of $2.66/MMBtu.
No relief is in sight: EIA said it expects Henry Hub to average $7.83/MMBtu during the second quarter and climb to an average $8.59/MMBtu in the second half.
By contrast, prices for coal produced from the Powder River Basin—the nation’s largest producing region—averaged $0.88/MMBtu as of May 13. That was for fuel with a heat rate of 8,800 Btu and a sulfur dioxide content of 0.8. Central Appalachian coal—with a heat rate of 12,500 Btu and a sulfur dioxide content of 1.2–averaged $5.03 as of mid-May. That average price was up $0.25 from a week earlier.
Keep in mind that since around 2011, economics have largely driven the decision to dispatch either natural gas-fired generation and coal-fired resources. The rise of hydraulic fracturing meant that plentiful supplies of low-cost natural gas could produce electricity more cheaply than coal. So today, with Henry Hub prices at levels not seen in decades, the safe bet would seem to be that coal-fired generation would benefit.
But that bet could be misplaced. Coal-fired power plants are having supply issues of their own, the second key factor that is complicating things for power plant operators.
During a late-April presentation to MISO, economic consultant Timothy Crowley of L.E. Peabody & Associates said that although coal traffic by America’s Class I railroads was up due to higher natural gas prices, any rebound for coal was likely to be short-lived.
He said that given coal-fired generation’s generally bleak outlook as retirements continue to whittle away the fleet, railroads are unlikely to spend much either to expand or improve coal-hauling capacity. At the same time, however, higher electricity demand in 2021 depleted utility coal stockpiles. But, the current focus is on rebuilding stockpiles so rail transport constraints are unlikely to allow much upside for coal generators.
Crowley also pointed to a recent statement from Surface Transportation Board chair Martin Oberman, who blamed rail delivery problems on the railroads themselves, which cut employee headcount by 29%–or around 45,000 people—over the past six years.
“On too many parts of their networks, the railroads simply do not have a sufficient number of employees,” Oberman said in April.
A third complicating factor is the uptick of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports as the U.S.—along with other global suppliers—work to offset Russian natural gas deliveries to Europe, a result of the Ukraine invasion that began in February.
According to EIA, liquefied natural gas exports during April averaged 11.6 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d). That was just below an all-time peak of almost 12.0 Bcf/d set in March. And while LNG export price data since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has yet to be reported, EIA said that in February LNG exports from U.S. terminals averaged $10.17/MMBtu, up from $8.56/MMBtu in January.
Looking ahead, the government’s chief energy forecast agency said it expected LNG exports to average 12.1 Bcf/d from May through August, and average 12.0 Bcf/d through the end of the year. That would mark a 23% increase from 2021.
All of the LNG export capacity that has come online over the past decade means that domestic U.S. natural gas production is coupled like never before with global supply and demand. That means the war in Ukraine has an outsized impact on U.S. electricity production in just the sort of cause-and-effect way that analysts warned it would a decade ago.
Beyond this summer, another factor will help determine the trajectory of natural gas-fired generation and electricity prices in 2023. Natural gas storage inventories ended April at 1.6 trillion cubic feet (Tcf), some 17% below the five-year average.
EIA went on to say that natural gas inventories are likely to rise by 418 Bcf in May, ending at 2.0 Tcf. Even so, that mark would be 14% below the five-year average for this time of year.
Looking forward, EIA is forecasting that natural gas inventories will end the 2022 injection season (end of October) at almost 3.4 Tcf, some 9% below the five-year average. And it warned that summer temperatures will be key, as is often the case. A hotter-than-normal summer that results in high electricity demand could cause natural gas inventories to shrink and prices to rise higher than forecast.
Oh yes, there’s one more wildcard: utility-scale solar development projects are being upended as the Commerce Department sorts through a complaint lodged in February by a domestic manufacturer that Chinese companies are dumping solar modules. Postponed and even scrapped projects may not have an impact this year, but may well affect supply adequacy in 2023.
Well we still have the second half, never know
The Lone Bear Calling For $65 Oil
By Irina Slav - Feb 09, 2022, 6:00 PM CST
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Lone-Bear-Calling-For-65-Oil.html
The head of commodity analysis at Citigroup believes that there has been a ‘colossal failure’ when it comes to analyzing the fundamentals of today's oil markets.
While plenty of analysts are calling for $100 oil, Citigroup sees oil prices falling to an average of $65 this year.
Ed Morse believes the current undersupply is a seasonal phenomenon and sees the global oil balance moving back to a surplus in the second quarter.
Join Our Community
Bullishness across commodity markets is overwhelming. Goldman’s Jeffrey Currie summed it up earlier this week by saying “This is a molecule crisis. We’re out of everything, I don’t care if it’s oil, gas, coal, copper, aluminum, you name it we’re out of it.”
Yet there is the occasional bear - and in oil, one bear is arguing that oil will fall in just a few months.
Citi’s head of commodity analysis Ed Morse is a rare contrarian voice in a sea of commodity analysts predicting oil at $100. For a while now, Morse has argued that instead of rising much further, oil will actually fall this year, potentially averaging $65 per barrel by the end of the year.
“I think there’s been a colossal failure of the analytical community to look at what’s happening on the ground, to look at projects that have been reaching final investment decisions, to look at where the efficiency of capital is, to be blindsided by a prejudice, which says not enough capital is being spent, and decline rates are going up,” Morse told Barron’s in a recent interview.
According to Morse’s team’s projections for this year, global oil supply should increase by 5.5 million bpd, and this is excluding Iran, which seems to be nearing a chance to return to global oil markets if the ongoing talks about its nuclear program with the United States end with an agreement. As Bloomberg’s Xavier Blas noted in a recent column, Iran may already be exporting oil illicitly, and the lifting of U.S. sanctions may not change the amounts much, but the very news will be bearish for oil prices.
Citi’s Morse is placing a specific focus on non-OPEC supply and specifically U.S. supply. Despite drillers’ continued financial discipline, Morse expects that U.S. crude oil production this year will rise by at least 800,000 bpd and further by more than a million barrels daily in 2023. That would bring it to a record of 13.9 million bpd, Barron’s notes in the interview with the Citi commodity expert.
On this, Morse agrees with the Energy Information Administration. The agency wrote in its latest Short-Term Energy Outlook that it expected U.S. oil production to reach an average of 12 million bpd this year and 12.6 million bpd in 2023, a record high on an annual-average basis, the EIA noted. At the same time, however, the EIA revised up its oil price predictions for this year, suggesting demand will match increased supply if not continue exceeding it.
For now, most analysts seem to think that there is a big threat of global undersupply of crude oil. Spare production capacity is the biggest problem fundamentally: it is frequently cited as a major reason for bullish oil price predictions.
The global head of market analysis at Vitol, for example, recently said the commodity trader expected OPEC’s spare capacity to thin further this year until the only untapped spare capacity in the cartel remains in Saudi Arabia while global demand continues rising.
“Demand is 100 million barrels a day with a spare capacity of 2.5 million,” Gunvor chief executive Torbjorn Tornqvist told Bloomberg recently. “That doesn’t sound like an oversupplied market, does it?”
To Citi’s Morse, however, the undersupply is a temporary affair brought about by seasonal factors. “We see the near-term tightness as a winter phenomenon, and see global oil balances moving back to surplus in the second quarter,” he said as quoted by Bloomberg earlier this month.
To say that Morse is a rare voice among analysts would be correct. But he is not exactly alone. ConocoPhillips’ Ryan Lance said he was worried about the rate of production growth in the Permian. Per a Bloomberg report, Lance told investors that “I’m absolutely concerned about it. If you’re not worried about it, you should be.”
Lance expects the Permian to add some 900,000 bpd this year, which, according to him, is cause for worry. Yet, according to other industry executives, such an increase would be unsustainable: the shale patch is running out of sweet spots.
“You just can’t keep growing 15% to 20% a year,” Pioneer Natural Resources Scott Sheffield told the Wall Street Journal. “You’ll drill up your inventories. Even the good companies.”
Predicting oil prices for any future moment is a tough undertaking because of the multiple factors constantly at play. Bloomberg’s Blas reviewed these recently in the context of Morse’s contrarian stance and noted that some of the Citi expert’s arguments that lower prices were coming instead of higher prices sound kind of far-fetched at this point.
But, Blas also wrote, “when everyone is bullish, I get twitchy. I imagine someone, somewhere, quietly selling — and that contrarian strategy proving to be prescient in some dramatic way. Call it the oil version of ‘The Big Short,’ the book and the movie about the 2008 financial crisis.”
By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com
The Global Natural Gas Crisis is coming to North America
04/ 21/ 2022
https://blog.gorozen.com/blog/the-global-natural-gas-crisis-is-coming-to-north-america
Topics: Natural Gas Markets, Commodities, Energy, Natural Resources, Contrarian, Oil
A sudden and unexpected event is about to take place: the global natural gas crisis, now gripping large swaths of the world, is about to engulf North America as well.
Asian and European natural gas prices today stand at $30 per mcf versus $7.50 per mcf here in the United States. Given the underlying fundamentals that have now developed in US gas markets, we believe prices are about to surge and converge with international prices within the next 6 months. The convergence of US and international gas prices will come out of nowhere and take all investors by surprise.
Global natural gas markets have been in a full blown crisis since summer 2021. Gas prices reached a record breaking $35 per mmbtu last October, and by December they had surged again, this time surpassing $50 per mcf -- approximately $300 per barrel in oil terms. Evidence of the global natural gas crisis appeared first in Europe early last spring as a colder than normal late winter left natural gas inventories in both Europe and Russia near record low levels. Once additional Russian supplies failed to emerge, European utilities and industrial gas consumers by mid-summer had aggressively entered global LNG markets seeking additional supplies. Consensus opinion believed that Russia withheld contracted gas over the spring and summer; however our analysis tell us that Russia honored all its previous agreed-upon supply agreements. Additional gas above contracted levels were withheld as Russia attempted to first refill its own depleted inventories.
Surging global LNG demand –a subject we have extensively discussed in our quarterly letters—meant that little excess spot LNG supply was available to European buyers last summer. As European buyers aggressively entered spot markets and then panicked, natural gas prices began its 5-fold surge.
Gas prices have already severely impacted the European economy. Fertilizer and smelter facilities have been forced to close, governments are offering cash subsidies to soften the blow of surging natural gas and electricity prices, and coal demand has hit all-times, undoing a decade of effort to reduce to CO2 emissions. All this occurred before Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine.
The upheavals now rocking global gas markets have largely by-passed North America over the last 12 months. US natural gas prices had a big rally last year. Gas prices surpassed briefly the $6 per mmbtu level back in September, but by mid-December, with European gas prices surging past $50, US gas price had fallen back to $4.00—a discount of almost 90% to the global price. Today the natural gas crisis gripping huge swaths of the natural gas world shows little inclination of moving across either Pacific or Atlantic oceans. The crisis seems very far away and is of little investment interest. “Gas-crisis… what gas crisis?” might be something North American investors ask themselves today.
The unique structure of the gas market here in North America has long protected it from foreign influences. Since its development, evolvement, and massive expansion in the post WW2 period, the US natural gas market has been structured like an island. Natural gas could be produced in the United States, imported from Canada, and LNG could be imported from any of its 5 import terminals. However, once that gas arrived it was trapped. Small amounts could be exported via pipeline to Mexico, but that was it. No lower-48 facilities to export LNG existed. Because of its island-like structure, international gas fundamentals could produce only small impacts on US natural gas prices. Global natural gas prices could go as high was they wanted, but with no export capability, US gas often traded at huge discounts -- today’s huge price discounts being an extreme example.
Prior to 2016, the US was only a tiny player in global LNG export markets—a small amount was exported form the Kenai Peninsula in Alaska. However, in just six short years, the US today has become the world’s largest LNG exporter. Six export facilities are currently in operation, and a seventh, Calcasieu Pass, will add an additional 1.7 bcf per day of capacity, bringing total US LNG export capacity to almost 13 bcf /day, surpassing both Qatar and Australia, the world’s two largest LNG exporters.
Even though US natural gas markets are now fully integrated in the global gas market, the surge in export capacity has had little impact on US natural gas prices. The reason: the US natural gas remains in structural oversupply as production has continued to grow faster than demand driven the shale gas revolution.
The impact of the shale gas revolution here in the United States cannot be overstated. Although it is hard to believe, prior to the unlocking of the Barnett Field in east Texas in the early 2000’s, the US was running out of natural gas. In 2000, US conventional natural gas production was approximately 50 bcf per day. By 2005 this had fallen to 45 bcf per day, and by 2010 US conventional production had fallen to just 40 bcf per day. Even with the big shale gas ramp up from the Barnett, total us gas production in the US fell from 52.6 bcf per day in 2000 to 49.5 bcf per day by 2005.
Again, although it’s hard to believe, the US by the late 1990’s had become a significant importer of LNG. In 2000, the US imported approximately 600 mmcf/day; by 2005, this had grown significantly reaching almost 1.8 bcf/day; and by 2007 LNG imports peaked at 2.1 bcf /day.
The contrast between the two periods -- 2000-2007, and 2016-2021 -- are amazing. Between 2000 and 2007 natural gas production was falling and LNG imports were surging. Today, US natural gas production has surged over the last 7 years, and the US has become the world’s biggest LNG exporter. Talk about a difference.
The Barnett Shale began its big production ramp-up in 2002, and this was followed by unlocking of the Fayetteville shale in 2005. The Marcellus and Haynesville began their big production ramps in the late 2000’s, and these were joint by the associated natural gas production from the Bakken, Eagle Ford, DJ, Permian, and Anadarko oil shales. Finally, the Utica shale in Ohio began its big production ramp up in the mid 2010’s.
In 2000, US dry gas production was 52.6 bcf per day, and the shales represented little. Today US dry gas production has reached 94 bcf per day, and the shales represent almost 80%, or an incredible 73 bcf per day of production.
The table below ranks the largest US producers of shale gas.
Ranking of the largest US producers of shale gas
Between 2016 and today, US natural gas production has grown by over 20 bcf/day (the US gas shales grew by incredible 27 bcf/day) which has far outstripped the 10 bcf in LNG demand growth. Reflecting the huge surplus of supply over demand the ratio of natural gas prices to oil prices averaged 20 for those six years -- the BTU equivalent ratio should be 6.
Between 1998 and 2006 the ratio of oil prices to gas prices traded with an average ratio of 7.9--not too far from its BTU equivalent. Since 2013 however, the ratio has “blown-out” and has averaged 20—a ratio that still exists today. Now compare that to international natural gas prices, which trade at a ratio of three. A BTU contained in a barrel of oil today costs you approximately $18. That same BTU contained in a US mcf of gas now costs you $5.50 (and 70% discount to the BTU’s contained in a barrel of oil), compared with Europe and Asia who are now paying almost $35 for that same BTU—a 100% premium to the BTU’s contained in an oil barrel. In our 35 years of investing in global energy markets, we have never seen such a wide dispersion on how BTU’s are priced between various energy sources.
Over the last 15 years, driven by the shale gas revolution, US production has grown by an incredible 85%. In the last six years alone, gas supply has surged 60%. Today, almost everyone believes US gas supply can continue to grow strongly as we progress through this decade. Little analysis is being done by anyone on supply issues, or how long the shale gas revolution has left to run. Also something else has happened that receives no comment: never has before has natural gas production been concentrated in so few fields. Over 50% of US gas supply comes from just three fields. The Marcellus and Hayneville shale gas fields today produce almost 40% US gas supply. Adding the associated gas from the Permian oil shale takes this to 52%.
As we will discuss extensively in our upcoming quarterly letter, we believe that the tremendous growth in US natural gas supply, all shale driven, is about to slow dramatically. Both the Marcellus and the Hayneville shale gas play are in the process of plateauing and will begin to exhibit declines in the next several years according to our analysis. These two fields alone represent almost 40% of US supply, and the production growth from these two fields are critical for fulfilling future increase in US natural gas demand.
Given their importance to US gas market and given that the Biden Administration has pledged Europe another 5 bcf per day in US LNG supply by 2030, you would think that serious analysis would be paid to figuring out the future production profiles of these two fields, and how their future production profiles will impact both future US natural gas supply and prices.
Given that the US natural gas market is now world largest LNG exporter, and now fully integrated in the global gas markets, we believe it’s imperative to understand the what their future production profiles of these who fields might look like.
Many analysts believe that production growth from these two fields are almost unlimited. Our analysis tell us something quite different. We believe both fields will begin to exhibit the first signs of field exhaustion -- very similar to what happened with the Barnett and Fayetteville.
By understanding the forces that caused production from the Barnett and Fayetteville fields to peak, plateau, and then decline, we can try and understand when the Marcellus and Haynesville might roll over. Although the shales are an “unconventional” source gas, our analysis tells us they exhibit characteristics similar to conventional oil and gas reservoirs: they ramp up, plateau, and begin to decline after half the recoverable resources are produced. The Barnett and Fayetteville shale gas fields plateaued and began their sharp declines just after half their recoverable reserves were produced, and our analysis tells us this is about to occur in both the Marcellus and Haynesville fields very soon.
Unanticipated slower US natural gas supply growth will swing the US natural gas market from “structural surplus”, a condition that has now existed for well over 15 years, to “structural deficit”. Almost immediately following the shift, US natural gas prices will surge and converge with global gas prices. Given today’s $35 per mcf international gas price, US natural gas could surge by almost 5 fold.
The global natural gas crisis has largely by-passed the United States over the last 12 months, however, our analysis tells us that this is about to change. The next phase of the global energy crisis is about to emerge in the US natural gas market. Given the huge amount of natural gas consumed in the US economy –14 mmb/d (in oil equivalent terms ) versus 20 mm b/d in oil—the impact from surging natural gas prices will be monumental.
In our upcoming letter (Q1 2022), we will present the research that strongly suggests that the convergence of US natural gas markets with global gas markets will occur at some point in 2022. The surge in US natural gas prices will come out of nowhere and take everyone by surprise. If you haven't already signed up to be notified when we release our letters, please subscribe below.
What Is Holding Back U.S. Oil Production?
Robert RapierSenior Contributor
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2022/03/11/what-is-holding-back-us-oil-production/?sh=4da5c4876b6f
Mar 11, 2022,11:11am EST
In the months leading up to the Covid-19 pandemic, U.S. oil production hit an all-time high of just below 13 million barrels per day (BPD). As the pandemic unfolded, demand collapsed, and production followed. By May 2020, oil production had dropped by more than 3 million BPD to 9.7 million BPD.
Since then, demand has recovered to pre-pandemic levels. Oil production, however, has only partially recovered. The most recent data available from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) shows current U.S. oil production at ~11.6 million BPD — still 1.4 million BPD short of pre-pandemic production. This shortfall is a major factor that led to the run-up of oil and gasoline prices over the past year.
When the pandemic crushed oil demand in 2020, some oil companies went out of business. Some small stripper wells — which accounts for a respectable amount of U.S. oil production — were permanently capped given the bleak outlook. Some workers left the oil industry.
Now, with oil prices over $100/bbl, many are questioning why production hasn’t bounced all the way back. The Biden Administration has pointed fingers at the oil industry, stating they have stockpiled 9,000 permits they aren’t using. The oil industry says that the problem — in part — is hostile policies of the Biden Administration.
Setting politics aside, here is what we know. The part about the oil industry stockpiling permits — mostly ahead of President Biden taken office — is true. I have reported on this before. However, that doesn’t mean they are sitting on them.
Obtaining a permit is just one step in the chain that ultimately results in oil production. There are many other links in that chain, some of which are still problematic today. Further, they can’t just sit on the permits. There is generally a “use it or lose it” provision that requires them to give up a permit if they don’t develop the lease over a specified period.
Thus, we have oil production that can’t bounce back quickly because some has been shut in, and new production that can’t proceed as quickly due to manpower and material shortages (e.g., fracking sand). It’s not simply that oil companies are sitting on permits. They are working through them. The number of rigs drilling for oil and gas has risen by 60% over the past year. But it can take years for a permit to translate into oil production (if the location even yields oil).
But why did they stockpile so many permits? Stacey Morris, who is Director of Research for midstream index and data provider Alerian elaborated on these issues when I reached out to her for comment:
“The President mentioned thousands of permits on federal lands. The permit number is inflated from stockpiling. Companies stockpiled permits on federal lands leading up to the President’s inauguration, because several Democratic candidates, including the president, supported banning new drilling permits on federal lands. Permits do not equate to production. There are a number of steps between securing a permit and actually bringing a well to production, and issues like labor constraints and fracking sand shortages are added obstacles.”
That leads me to another issue with the oil companies themselves, where Ms. Morris added:
“Investors have demanded that producers maintain capital discipline and grow volumes modestly. Returns have taken priority over growth. Up until recently, a producer planning to significantly grow production volumes would likely have been punished by investors. However, that sentiment may be changing with oil prices where they are and the potential need to replace Russian barrels on the global market.
The geopolitical situation and oil price level may give US producers a license to grow volumes more meaningfully. It takes time for producers to respond to prices, though, and the price signal was not strong enough for E&Ps to potentially veer from their plans for moderate growth until recently. Private producers have been able to ramp upstream activity more meaningfully given that they do not have to answer to a public investor base.”
Oil companies regularly lose money. In four of the past ten years, the oil industry lost money. Big oil lost $76 billion just two years ago. Therefore, they are proceeding with caution. They are maintaining more capital discipline. They aren’t rushing to do projects with the assumption that oil prices will remain above $100/bbl. They are doing projects with the assumption that in a year or more when the projects might pay off, oil prices will have retreated to well below $100/bbl.
On this issue, the Biden Administration is correct. The oil industry is going slow. But this belies a misunderstanding of how long it takes to execute a project. Oil companies don’t have crystal balls. They have to make decisions now based on where they think prices are headed. Because of multiple collapses in oil prices over the past decade, they are proceeding with more caution and capital discipline.
These are issues in which there seems to be a great deal of misunderstanding — which leads to finger-pointing — between the Biden Administration and the oil industry. Given the circumstances, as I wrote previously I believe the Biden Administration should convene a summit with the heads of the major oil companies. There should be frank dialogue, and the outcome should be clearly communicated to the world.
Natural Gas Futures Hit 13-Year High As Traders Expect "Blistering Hot Summer"
By Tom Kool - Jun 06, 2022, 4:09 PM CDT
https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Natural-Gas-Futures-Hit-13-Year-High-As-Traders-Expect-Blistering-Hot-Summer.html
Natural gas futures have hit an 13-year high on higher temperatures to come in the next week combined with lower production levels.
On Monday, Henry Hub natural gas futures were up nearly 10% at a 13-year high.
At 5:00pm EST, Henry Hub prices for July contracts sat at $9.368, up 9.91%. August contracts were at $9.350, up 9.87%.
A key reason for the sudden surge is heat, with temperatures expected to rise significantly in the middle part of this month, with production declining and demand threatening to exceed supply.
Natural Gas Intelligence (NGI) quoted EBW analyst Eli Rubin as saying in a note to clients that a “blistering hot summer” is first and foremost among fears. Rubin said the increasing demand for natural gas for cooling in the coming weeks “could ignite another substantial rally in Nymex futures into mid-summer”.
Texas, in particular, is expected to see demand for natural gas soar to a historical record this week–even before the hottest part of summer sets in.
Also driving natural gas futures upward is rising demand, declining production, and soaring exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the U.S. Gulf coast, diverting domestic supplies.
In its 2022 outlook released in late May, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) projected that U.S. demand for natural gas would outpace supply this summer. As reported by NGI, FERC sees U.S. dry natural gas production increase by 3.4% over the summer months, compared to a projected 4.8% increase in consumption during that same period.
Over the winter period from November 2021 through March 2022, 2,264 billion cubic feet of natural gas was withdrawn from U.S. storage, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). That withdrawal is 10% higher than the previous five-year average. Already this winter, U.S. demand for natural gas exceeded supply by 14.9 billion cubic feet per day.
By Tom Kool for Oilprice.com
It's unrealistic for the human race to even survive if we continue using and wasting fossil fuels the way we do. The real costs aren't even discussed, or discussed very little what fossil fuels have done and continue to do. The pollution and expense caused by fossil fuel is exponentially more than renewables and it goes way beyond just the comparison of ice vs ev or natural gas and coal vs wind and solar. No matter what we do, nothing is "green" and "clean", and our demand on our resources must be better managed. But anything we can do to go "greener" and away from fossil fuels would be an improvement and less expense in the long run.
The "lie" as you state is the billions $ the fossil fuel world industry has spent covering that up, buying political power, judges, and even countries and putting out their story line, hiding the real science and truths, eliminating options for better ways.
Going "green" isn't going to stop using oil and it's not the cause of O&G supply and demand issues right now. Nor is Biden the cause of price at the pump. It's just all political bs. The world energy market and our connection to it, along with the power and control oil has in the world, determines pricing and supply. Remember the US is starting to export more O&G than we are importing. Exporting is expanding and pricing in the US will converge more in line with world prices. The US has been an island for cheap O&G. That's going to change.
Over fifty years ago, the environmentalist and scientist were screaming this stuff and projecting what is happening today. They were right, only the expense and damage is worse than what they projected. The ignorance and attacks on the science for decades have created an expense in wars, health, environment, and climate that are now pushing out of the rug. Now we're going to pay more and have to use less. Voting R or D not going to change that. The R's historically are bought and paid more with fossil fuel monies, and we know that the industry top dogs will not want to give up their profit and power (or their stories), so there's that. Sure the GOP will reduce or eliminate quality and environmental controls and continue to degrade the science, but that will just create and has created more expense to the consumer and tax payer. Plus quicken our demise.
Yes there are some who mistakenly think that just switching over to "renewables" going to solve the problems. Conservation and management isn't even discussed. The waste for profit and irresponsible behaviors is beyond sustainability. Research now has shown that the wear rate on tires and what it puts out into the air and soil and then to the water, made from oil, has surpassed the exhaust pollution from the same cars. EV's aren't going to change that. A tire with a 100 times wear rate lasting a lifetime can be made, but that would mess with over a 100 billion a year industry going to over 120 billion in a few years. Charging 50k for a tire's not going to happen, but pricing will have to go up.
10-20% of ng goes out into our air from leaking wells, piping and processes. Improperly maintained and abandoned oil wells destroy water tables and agricultural land (pretty much forever). Expense to maintain and contain goes over returns desired. So the cost of O&G has to go up in order to control the environmental impact of obtaining the resource. The only way that the consumer conserves is if the price goes up. The only way for consumer reduction and continued profits if the price goes up. The only way to stop dealing with oil "thugs" (bone saw Saudi Arabia; Iran, going to look the other way for some without a deal; Venezuela, allowing shipments to Europe by Italian oil company Eni SpA and Spain's Repsol SA; war criminal Russia, etc, etc) is cutting the dependencies and irresponsible usage.
Pricing is staying up with a bit of down and up along the way. Going to take time and acceptance to get these affairs in order. The expense for keeping our head in the sand will be billed way before it can be done and beyond, due now.
Three factors are roiling summer electric power supply outlooks
By David Wagman -
5.16.2022
https://www.power-eng.com/coal/three-factors-are-roiling-summer-electric-power-supply-outlooks/
A decade ago, many analysts warned that building liquefied natural gas export capacity in the U.S. would link domestic natural gas markets to global energy markets, resulting in negative impacts both on domestic supplies and prices.
Now, those 10-year-old warnings seem to be prescient. A handful of factors is keeping natural gas prices high just as the season for peak air conditioning load gets underway.
This year, however, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine complicates utility decision making as the U.S. joins with other nations to backstop world markets with natural gas that otherwise would be supplied by Russia.
What’s more, transportation constraints in the U.S. are impacting coal deliveries to power plants.
All this comes as power industry watchers await the North American Electric Reliability Corp.’s annual summer reliability assessment.
Early hints raise worries. For example, the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) offered a blunt assessment of what it is expecting this summer. It said in late April that firm resources “will be insufficient to cover peak load of summer months.” It warned that emergency resources and non-firm energy imports “will be needed to maintain system reliability.” And it said that the need for emergency procedures will be impacted by the availability of non-firm resources.
What’s going on? A closer look at the Energy information Administration’s (EIA’s) latest Sort-Term Energy Outlook highlights three critical factors.
First, natural gas spot prices measured at the Henry Hub averaged $6.59 per million British thermal units (MMBtu) in April. That was up from the March average of $4.90/MMBtu. And the benchmark price was more than double the April 2021 average of $2.66/MMBtu.
No relief is in sight: EIA said it expects Henry Hub to average $7.83/MMBtu during the second quarter and climb to an average $8.59/MMBtu in the second half.
By contrast, prices for coal produced from the Powder River Basin—the nation’s largest producing region—averaged $0.88/MMBtu as of May 13. That was for fuel with a heat rate of 8,800 Btu and a sulfur dioxide content of 0.8. Central Appalachian coal—with a heat rate of 12,500 Btu and a sulfur dioxide content of 1.2–averaged $5.03 as of mid-May. That average price was up $0.25 from a week earlier.
Keep in mind that since around 2011, economics have largely driven the decision to dispatch either natural gas-fired generation and coal-fired resources. The rise of hydraulic fracturing meant that plentiful supplies of low-cost natural gas could produce electricity more cheaply than coal. So today, with Henry Hub prices at levels not seen in decades, the safe bet would seem to be that coal-fired generation would benefit.
But that bet could be misplaced. Coal-fired power plants are having supply issues of their own, the second key factor that is complicating things for power plant operators.
During a late-April presentation to MISO, economic consultant Timothy Crowley of L.E. Peabody & Associates said that although coal traffic by America’s Class I railroads was up due to higher natural gas prices, any rebound for coal was likely to be short-lived.
He said that given coal-fired generation’s generally bleak outlook as retirements continue to whittle away the fleet, railroads are unlikely to spend much either to expand or improve coal-hauling capacity. At the same time, however, higher electricity demand in 2021 depleted utility coal stockpiles. But, the current focus is on rebuilding stockpiles so rail transport constraints are unlikely to allow much upside for coal generators.
Crowley also pointed to a recent statement from Surface Transportation Board chair Martin Oberman, who blamed rail delivery problems on the railroads themselves, which cut employee headcount by 29%–or around 45,000 people—over the past six years.
“On too many parts of their networks, the railroads simply do not have a sufficient number of employees,” Oberman said in April.
A third complicating factor is the uptick of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports as the U.S.—along with other global suppliers—work to offset Russian natural gas deliveries to Europe, a result of the Ukraine invasion that began in February.
According to EIA, liquefied natural gas exports during April averaged 11.6 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d). That was just below an all-time peak of almost 12.0 Bcf/d set in March. And while LNG export price data since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has yet to be reported, EIA said that in February LNG exports from U.S. terminals averaged $10.17/MMBtu, up from $8.56/MMBtu in January.
Looking ahead, the government’s chief energy forecast agency said it expected LNG exports to average 12.1 Bcf/d from May through August, and average 12.0 Bcf/d through the end of the year. That would mark a 23% increase from 2021.
All of the LNG export capacity that has come online over the past decade means that domestic U.S. natural gas production is coupled like never before with global supply and demand.That means the war in Ukraine has an outsized impact on U.S. electricity production in just the sort of cause-and-effect way that analysts warned it would a decade ago.
Beyond this summer, another factor will help determine the trajectory of natural gas-fired generation and electricity prices in 2023. Natural gas storage inventories ended April at 1.6 trillion cubic feet (Tcf), some 17% below the five-year average.
EIA went on to say that natural gas inventories are likely to rise by 418 Bcf in May, ending at 2.0 Tcf. Even so, that mark would be 14% below the five-year average for this time of year.
Looking forward, EIA is forecasting that natural gas inventories will end the 2022 injection season (end of October) at almost 3.4 Tcf, some 9% below the five-year average. And it warned that summer temperatures will be key, as is often the case. A hotter-than-normal summer that results in high electricity demand could cause natural gas inventories to shrink and prices to rise higher than forecast.
Oh yes, there’s one more wildcard: utility-scale solar development projects are being upended as the Commerce Department sorts through a complaint lodged in February by a domestic manufacturer that Chinese companies are dumping solar modules. Postponed and even scrapped projects may not have an impact this year, but may well affect supply adequacy in 2023.
Demand vs supply is hitting the whole fossil fuel gas family. Increased exporting for the world demand will be increasing pricing. Demand destruction? Don't think so, not even close yet anyway. The world market pricing, with the demand here in the states, climate change, reduction in power supplies, etc give the odds against it for a while anyway.
(For the week ending Wednesday, June 1, 2022)
https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/weekly/#:~:text=Weekly%20average%20ethane%20prices%20rose,relative%20increase%20in%20ethane%20price.
EIA Product Highlight: Natural Gas Storage Dashboard
https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/storage/dashboard/
Our Natural Gas Storage Dashboard provides daily and weekly contextual information to the Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report (WNGSR), which contains our latest weekly natural gas storage estimates. The dashboard shows storage activity in several regions of the Lower 48 states and key market fundamentals that affect underground natural gas storage activity.
We update the dashboard in the mid-afternoon on the same day we release the WNGSR, which is usually on Thursday. The dashboard follows the WNGSR holiday reporting schedule.
The dashboard includes natural gas storage inventories, net inventory changes, and utilization indicators for the Lower 48 states and different U.S. regions. Other metrics include temperature visualizations, estimated natural gas consumption by sector, net exports, the relationship between near-month natural gas futures prices, and the difference between current Lower 48 inventories and the most recent five-year average.
Information sources reflect a combination of our data and third-party data. Key sources of non-EIA data include temperatures from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), natural gas demand and import/export data from IHS Markit, and 12-month natural gas futures strips from CME Group and Bloomberg.
A commentary section of the dashboard provides analysis of recent natural gas storage-related market conditions. These entries focus on many aspects of the natural gas storage market, such as potential drivers of changes in storage inventories, occasional details on EIA-derived storage statistics, and trends in natural gas storage infrastructure.
Principal contributor: EIA Staff
Tags: storage, natural gas
U.S. Regulator Sees Summer Natural Gas Demand Outpacing Supply, Driving Prices Higher
https://www.naturalgasintel.com/u-s-regulator-sees-summer-natural-gas-demand-outpacing-supply-driving-prices-higher/
BY JEREMIAH SHELOR
May 23, 2022
Driven in part by liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, U.S. demand for natural gas will grow faster than supply this summer, leading to higher prices year/year, the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) said in its 2022 outlook on summer energy markets.
ferc
Compared with summer 2021 levels, total domestic dry natural gas production is expected to increase 3.4% this summer, while total consumption is projected to rise 4.8%, according to a summer assessment prepared by FERC staff.
Due to Mexico’s dependence on pipeline imports from the United States, natural gas transactions in Mexico are typically indexed to U.S. locations such as Henry Hub, Waha or Houston Ship Channel.
The higher natural gas prices, alongside projected hotter temperatures and a slight increase in electricity demand, point to higher wholesale electricity prices this summer, according to the agency. FERC pointed to futures at electricity trading hubs showing gains from 77% to 233% versus year-earlier periods.
FERC cited Energy Information Administration (EIA) forecasts for U.S. dry natural gas production to reach 96.9 Bcf/d this summer. This comes as exports are expected to drive increases in demand for the fuel in the months ahead, the agency’s assessment found.
“The largest increase in natural gas demand is expected to come from an increase in natural gas exports,” FERC staff said in their report to the Commission.
Sharply Higher Exports
Net natural gas exports are on track to rise 29.4% over “relatively elevated summer 2021 levels,” according to the report.
FERC staff pointed to increased LNG liquefaction capacity as the primary driver of higher exports, citing EIA projections for LNG exports to average 11.8 Bcf/d from June through September, versus 9.5 Bcf/d in the summer of 2021.
Meanwhile, FERC expects electric markets to have enough capacity to cope with higher demand and maintain reliability this summer.
“However, extreme operating conditions such as major heat waves, wildfires, hurricanes and other severe weather events may stress operations,” the agency warned. “These risks are particularly acute in the West, Texas and parts of the Midwest.”
In addition to the sharp uptick in LNG exports, FERC expects gross pipeline exports of natural gas to grow by 0.3 Bcf/d this summer versus 2021. Gross pipeline exports averaged 6.3 Bcf/d to Mexico and 2.3 Bcf/d to Canada last summer.
“Mexico has expanded its natural gas pipeline infrastructure over the past few years to
allow it to increasingly rely on imported natural gas from U.S. pipelines,” FERC researchers said.
‘Urgent Need’ To Meet Challenges
FERC Chairman Rich Glick pointed to the latest summer assessment as evidence of the need to advance efforts to bolster reliability in the electric grid.
The assessment “forecasts an additional 30 GW of capacity this summer compared to last summer,” Glick said. “But the challenges outlined in the summer assessment also demonstrate the urgent need for the Commission to meaningfully advance initiatives that will better ensure electricity markets are ready to meet reliability challenges head on.
“The Commission’s work to facilitate transmission infrastructure, modernize electricity markets, and safeguard our nation’s electric infrastructure from reliability threats has never been more important.”
Meanwhile, the Industrial Energy Consumers of America trade group, following Thursday’s FERC meeting, called out U.S. LNG export growth as a key factor behind elevated domestic natural gas prices.
“Chairman Glick is fundamentally correct that the cause of higher natural gas and electricity prices are increased LNG exports,” CEO Paul Cicio said. “…But for LNG exports, U.S. prices would be about $3.50/MMBtu. Henry Hub natural gas prices at $8.00 equate to a $122 billion cost increase to consumers, greatly contributing to inflation.”
Andrew Baker contributed to this story.
© 2022 Natural Gas Intelligence. All rights reserved.
Didn't watch that closely, but did notice making new high in the extended. Just letting this one ride, one of the very few right now. Mostly working ass off short term and daily trading, some shorting. Don't have a lot of faith in the overall market right now and have bulk in cash or eqiv. Looking at a lot of caca to be hitting the fan in the next yr, just barely starting to hit now. Rising prices of ng and lng will be part of that. Good for SD, but not so good for the users.
I do look in on it several times daily and check and continue research on the industry daily, and my alerts go off at different times. Like when 52wk and all time high goes off.
The Global Natural Gas Crisis is coming to North America
04/ 21/ 2022
https://blog.gorozen.com/blog/the-global-natural-gas-crisis-is-coming-to-north-america
Topics: Natural Gas Markets, Commodities, Energy, Natural Resources, Contrarian, Oil
A sudden and unexpected event is about to take place: the global natural gas crisis, now gripping large swaths of the world, is about to engulf North America as well.
Asian and European natural gas prices today stand at $30 per mcf versus $7.50 per mcf here in the United States. Given the underlying fundamentals that have now developed in US gas markets, we believe prices are about to surge and converge with international prices within the next 6 months. The convergence of US and international gas prices will come out of nowhere and take all investors by surprise.
Global natural gas markets have been in a full blown crisis since summer 2021. Gas prices reached a record breaking $35 per mmbtu last October, and by December they had surged again, this time surpassing $50 per mcf -- approximately $300 per barrel in oil terms. Evidence of the global natural gas crisis appeared first in Europe early last spring as a colder than normal late winter left natural gas inventories in both Europe and Russia near record low levels. Once additional Russian supplies failed to emerge, European utilities and industrial gas consumers by mid-summer had aggressively entered global LNG markets seeking additional supplies. Consensus opinion believed that Russia withheld contracted gas over the spring and summer; however our analysis tell us that Russia honored all its previous agreed-upon supply agreements. Additional gas above contracted levels were withheld as Russia attempted to first refill its own depleted inventories.
Surging global LNG demand –a subject we have extensively discussed in our quarterly letters—meant that little excess spot LNG supply was available to European buyers last summer. As European buyers aggressively entered spot markets and then panicked, natural gas prices began its 5-fold surge.
Gas prices have already severely impacted the European economy. Fertilizer and smelter facilities have been forced to close, governments are offering cash subsidies to soften the blow of surging natural gas and electricity prices, and coal demand has hit all-times, undoing a decade of effort to reduce to CO2 emissions. All this occurred before Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine.
The upheavals now rocking global gas markets have largely by-passed North America over the last 12 months. US natural gas prices had a big rally last year. Gas prices surpassed briefly the $6 per mmbtu level back in September, but by mid-December, with European gas prices surging past $50, US gas price had fallen back to $4.00—a discount of almost 90% to the global price. Today the natural gas crisis gripping huge swaths of the natural gas world shows little inclination of moving across either Pacific or Atlantic oceans. The crisis seems very far away and is of little investment interest. “Gas-crisis… what gas crisis?” might be something North American investors ask themselves today.
The unique structure of the gas market here in North America has long protected it from foreign influences. Since its development, evolvement, and massive expansion in the post WW2 period, the US natural gas market has been structured like an island. Natural gas could be produced in the United States, imported from Canada, and LNG could be imported from any of its 5 import terminals. However, once that gas arrived it was trapped. Small amounts could be exported via pipeline to Mexico, but that was it. No lower-48 facilities to export LNG existed. Because of its island-like structure, international gas fundamentals could produce only small impacts on US natural gas prices. Global natural gas prices could go as high was they wanted, but with no export capability, US gas often traded at huge discounts -- today’s huge price discounts being an extreme example.
Prior to 2016, the US was only a tiny player in global LNG export markets—a small amount was exported form the Kenai Peninsula in Alaska. However, in just six short years, the US today has become the world’s largest LNG exporter. Six export facilities are currently in operation, and a seventh, Calcasieu Pass, will add an additional 1.7 bcf per day of capacity, bringing total US LNG export capacity to almost 13 bcf /day, surpassing both Qatar and Australia, the world’s two largest LNG exporters.
Even though US natural gas markets are now fully integrated in the global gas market, the surge in export capacity has had little impact on US natural gas prices. The reason: the US natural gas remains in structural oversupply as production has continued to grow faster than demand driven the shale gas revolution.
The impact of the shale gas revolution here in the United States cannot be overstated. Although it is hard to believe, prior to the unlocking of the Barnett Field in east Texas in the early 2000’s, the US was running out of natural gas. In 2000, US conventional natural gas production was approximately 50 bcf per day. By 2005 this had fallen to 45 bcf per day, and by 2010 US conventional production had fallen to just 40 bcf per day. Even with the big shale gas ramp up from the Barnett, total us gas production in the US fell from 52.6 bcf per day in 2000 to 49.5 bcf per day by 2005.
Again, although it’s hard to believe, the US by the late 1990’s had become a significant importer of LNG. In 2000, the US imported approximately 600 mmcf/day; by 2005, this had grown significantly reaching almost 1.8 bcf/day; and by 2007 LNG imports peaked at 2.1 bcf /day.
The contrast between the two periods -- 2000-2007, and 2016-2021 -- are amazing. Between 2000 and 2007 natural gas production was falling and LNG imports were surging. Today, US natural gas production has surged over the last 7 years, and the US has become the world’s biggest LNG exporter. Talk about a difference.
The Barnett Shale began its big production ramp-up in 2002, and this was followed by unlocking of the Fayetteville shale in 2005. The Marcellus and Haynesville began their big production ramps in the late 2000’s, and these were joint by the associated natural gas production from the Bakken, Eagle Ford, DJ, Permian, and Anadarko oil shales. Finally, the Utica shale in Ohio began its big production ramp up in the mid 2010’s.
In 2000, US dry gas production was 52.6 bcf per day, and the shales represented little. Today US dry gas production has reached 94 bcf per day, and the shales represent almost 80%, or an incredible 73 bcf per day of production.
The table below ranks the largest US producers of shale gas.
Ranking of the largest US producers of shale gas
Between 2016 and today, US natural gas production has grown by over 20 bcf/day (the US gas shales grew by incredible 27 bcf/day) which has far outstripped the 10 bcf in LNG demand growth. Reflecting the huge surplus of supply over demand the ratio of natural gas prices to oil prices averaged 20 for those six years -- the BTU equivalent ratio should be 6.
Between 1998 and 2006 the ratio of oil prices to gas prices traded with an average ratio of 7.9--not too far from its BTU equivalent. Since 2013 however, the ratio has “blown-out” and has averaged 20—a ratio that still exists today. Now compare that to international natural gas prices, which trade at a ratio of three. A BTU contained in a barrel of oil today costs you approximately $18. That same BTU contained in a US mcf of gas now costs you $5.50 (and 70% discount to the BTU’s contained in a barrel of oil), compared with Europe and Asia who are now paying almost $35 for that same BTU—a 100% premium to the BTU’s contained in an oil barrel. In our 35 years of investing in global energy markets, we have never seen such a wide dispersion on how BTU’s are priced between various energy sources.
Over the last 15 years, driven by the shale gas revolution, US production has grown by an incredible 85%. In the last six years alone, gas supply has surged 60%. Today, almost everyone believes US gas supply can continue to grow strongly as we progress through this decade. Little analysis is being done by anyone on supply issues, or how long the shale gas revolution has left to run. Also something else has happened that receives no comment: never has before has natural gas production been concentrated in so few fields. Over 50% of US gas supply comes from just three fields. The Marcellus and Hayneville shale gas fields today produce almost 40% US gas supply. Adding the associated gas from the Permian oil shale takes this to 52%.
As we will discuss extensively in our upcoming quarterly letter, we believe that the tremendous growth in US natural gas supply, all shale driven, is about to slow dramatically. Both the Marcellus and the Hayneville shale gas play are in the process of plateauing and will begin to exhibit declines in the next several years according to our analysis. These two fields alone represent almost 40% of US supply, and the production growth from these two fields are critical for fulfilling future increase in US natural gas demand.
Given their importance to US gas market and given that the Biden Administration has pledged Europe another 5 bcf per day in US LNG supply by 2030, you would think that serious analysis would be paid to figuring out the future production profiles of these two fields, and how their future production profiles will impact both future US natural gas supply and prices.
Given that the US natural gas market is now world largest LNG exporter, and now fully integrated in the global gas markets, we believe it’s imperative to understand the what their future production profiles of these who fields might look like.
Many analysts believe that production growth from these two fields are almost unlimited. Our analysis tell us something quite different. We believe both fields will begin to exhibit the first signs of field exhaustion -- very similar to what happened with the Barnett and Fayetteville.
By understanding the forces that caused production from the Barnett and Fayetteville fields to peak, plateau, and then decline, we can try and understand when the Marcellus and Haynesville might roll over. Although the shales are an “unconventional” source gas, our analysis tells us they exhibit characteristics similar to conventional oil and gas reservoirs: they ramp up, plateau, and begin to decline after half the recoverable resources are produced. The Barnett and Fayetteville shale gas fields plateaued and began their sharp declines just after half their recoverable reserves were produced, and our analysis tells us this is about to occur in both the Marcellus and Haynesville fields very soon.
Unanticipated slower US natural gas supply growth will swing the US natural gas market from “structural surplus”, a condition that has now existed for well over 15 years, to “structural deficit”. Almost immediately following the shift, US natural gas prices will surge and converge with global gas prices. Given today’s $35 per mcf international gas price, US natural gas could surge by almost 5 fold.
The global natural gas crisis has largely by-passed the United States over the last 12 months, however, our analysis tells us that this is about to change. The next phase of the global energy crisis is about to emerge in the US natural gas market. Given the huge amount of natural gas consumed in the US economy –14 mmb/d (in oil equivalent terms ) versus 20 mm b/d in oil—the impact from surging natural gas prices will be monumental.
In our upcoming letter (Q1 2022), we will present the research that strongly suggests that the convergence of US natural gas markets with global gas markets will occur at some point in 2022. The surge in US natural gas prices will come out of nowhere and take everyone by surprise. If you haven't already signed up to be notified when we release our letters, please subscribe below.
Moody's Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi is ready to call it. He tells Fortune that we've officially moved from a housing boom into a "housing correction."
https://fortune.com/2022/05/27/housing-market-correction-peak-mark-zandi-moodys-home-prices-outlook/
The real estate data rolling in for April and May shows that the U.S. housing market is softening. New home sales fell 19% to their lowest level since April 2020. Redfin reports 19% of home listings cut their price over the past month. Inventory is rising fast, while mortgage applications and existing home sales are also falling.
This drop-off isn't a result of seasonality, or a soft month or two. Zandi says it's a trajectory flip: Demand is pulling back—fast—in the face of mortgage rates that have spiked dramatically.
"The housing market has peaked…everything points to a rolling over of the housing market," Zandi says. "In terms of home sales, they're falling sharply. Housing demand is coming down fast. Home price growth [will] go flat here pretty quickly; we will see [home] price declines in a significant number of markets."
A historically 'overvalued' housing market
Among the nation's largest 392 housing markets, 96% have home prices that are "overvalued" relative to what local incomes can support. That's the finding from Moody's proprietary analysis of U.S. housing markets. Among those 392 markets, 149 are overvalued by at least 25%. That includes Boise, where home prices are 73% above what Moody's says economic fundamentals support.
Zandi says the extremely "overvalued" housing markets like Boise and Phoenix are at the highest risk of falling home prices over the coming year. So are numerous markets throughout the Mountain West, Southwest, old South, Carolinas, Florida, and Texas..........
Lukashenko got to be doing some sweating about now. The rumor has it that Putin is in advance stage of cancer (obvious he's dying inside of something) and only has a few more yrs to live and I'm sure Lukashenko knows this. If the war goes badly enough for Putin, or as he gets too sickly to even rule (in which he will at some point), Lukashenko will be a precarious predicament to say the least.
Cracks can turn into gushers, and resistances can grow and be uncontainable. We will probably see the end of Lukashenko within a few years along with Putin. Sad for them to cause so much damage on the way out.