Oil, Gas, And Fracking News Reads: 22December 2019 – Part 2

Written by rjs, MarketWatch 666

Here are some more selected news articles about the oil and gas industry from the week ended 21 December 2019. Go here for Part 1.

This is a feature at Global Economic Intersection every Monday evening.

Please share this article – Go to very top of page, right hand side, for social media buttons.

State, tribe to develop Dakota Access pipeline spill plan (AP) – North Dakota will work with the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe to help develop a response plan for a potential spill of the Dakota Access pipeline, a state official said Monday. State Emergency Services Director Cody Schulz said tribal leaders recently requested a response plan and resources to prepare for a spill near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in the south-central part of the state. Schulz told a committee of state and tribal leaders headed by Gov. Doug Burgum that his agency would be happy to either “participate or facilitate” a training exercise. The state also would work with the tribe to obtain federal grant money for planning and equipment. Standing Rock Chairman Mike Faith, who sits on the panel, said oil spill response training would be “awesome” and that he appreciates the state’s effort to work collaboratively with the tribe. The cooperation comes as Texas-based Energy Transfer wants to double the capacity of the line to as much as 1.1 million barrels daily to meet growing demand for oil shipments from North Dakota. The $3.8 billion pipeline was subject to prolonged protests and hundreds of arrests during its construction in North Dakota in late 2016 and early 2017 because it crosses beneath the Missouri River, just north of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. The tribe draws its water from the river and fears pollution. Energy Transfer insists the pipeline and its expansion are safe. The pipeline has been moving North Dakota oil through South Dakota and Iowa to Illinois for about three years. Schulz said in an interview that the state has limited resources and personnel to deal with a major spill of the pipeline at present. Schulz, who also serves on the Morton County Commission, said the prolonged protests cost the county about $38 million for law enforcement, infrastructure repair, cleanup and legal costs. The state reimbursed the county for most of the cost. Schulz said his agency participated with railroad officials and others during a exercise to coordinate a plan if a train derailed and spilled oil in the Missouri River near Bismarck.

Truck crash spills 840 gallons of produced water; creek impacted – Bismarck Tribune staff Dec 13, 2019 A truck transporting produced water crashed in McKenzie and spilled about 840 gallons of the liquid. Produced water is a mixture of saltwater and oil that can contain drilling chemicals. The crash happened on an icy road about 9 miles southeast of Watford City on Thursday, according to the state Department of Environmental Quality. Truck operator Blackshirt LLC reported it the same day and estimated about 20 barrels of produced water were released, impacting a small unnamed creek on U.S. Forest Service property. The unnamed creek discharges into Elkhorn Creek about 4 1/2 miles downstream of the incident. State officials are inspecting the site and will continue to monitor the investigation and remediation.

Fine pending for TC Energy’s oil spill that contaminated 4.8 acres of land outside Edinburg – – TC Energy has not yet been fined for the Keystone Pipeline oil spill outside Edinburg in October, but it will be, a North Dakota Department of Environmental Quality official said. The Oct. 29 Keystone Pipeline spill released about 383,000 gallons of crude oil and is estimated to have contaminated about 4.8 acres of land. The cause of the spill remains under investigation. DEQ Director Dave Glatt said that, because the spill came into contact with a wetlands area, it resulted in an automatic notice of violation. Penalties for oil spills are determined on a case-by-case basis and Glatt said he expects the process to take a couple months. DEQ Spill Investigations program manager Bill Seuss said a number of factors are taken into account before the amount of a fine is determined, including how much oil was spilled, how much damage it caused, how quickly the company reported the spill and responded to the scene and how fast the spill was contained. Glatt said past spills in North Dakota have resulted in fines ranging from a couple thousand dollars to several hundred thousand dollars, but Suess said, at this point in the process, it’s difficult to know where in that range the Edinburg spill might fall. “Every spill is unique,” Suess said. “Everything has its own set of conditions and that, to compare it to anything, it’s hard to say that anything was similar.” Now that DEQ has notified Canada-based TC Energy of the violation, Glatt said the company has about a month to respond to the allegations. From there, DEQ officials will sit down with TC Energy officials to discuss enforcement until a penalty is agreed upon. Glatt underscored that, while not every oil spill results in a fine, spills that come into contact with water are automatically fined. He added that the chance of contamination to the groundwater in the Edinburg spill is very low, however. “I don’t see that as being a concern, because they got to it quickly, or quickly enough, and they dug out the contaminated soil,” he said.

Rising Bakken gas production displacing western Canadian gas on pipes. -The run-up in crude oil production in western North Dakota brought with it huge increases in the production of associated gas – that is, the gassy brew of natural gas and mixed NGLs that emerge from Bakken wells with the crude. Oil & Gas Division stats show that, in October 2019, Bakken gas production (green area in right graph in Figure 1) averaged more than 3 Bcf/d for the first time ever (3.03 Bcf/d, to be exact); it’s up a whopping 106% from December 2016, in part because many of the most prolific wells for producing crude oil have high gas-to-oil ratios (GORs). But of that 3.03 Bcf/d of gas produced, nearly 530 MMcf/d (yellow line in right graph), or 17%, was burned off or flared, mostly due to a lack of sufficient gas processing capacity. We’ve written about gas flaring in the Bakken many times, most recently in Hard to Handle, when we said that bringing it under control has been akin to breaking in a wild horse: just when you start to think you’ve accomplished the task at hand, the bronco’s bucking again and you’re holding on for dear life. The way to rein in gas flaring, of course, is to put in place the infrastructure – gathering systems, gas processing plants, and gas and NGL takeaway pipelines – needed to handle all the associated gas that’s emerging from wells. The problem has been that while Bakken producers and their midstream-company partners may have been trying their best to anticipate what their upcoming gas-related infrastructure requirements will be, they’ve generally been behind the curve in adding gas processing capacity during the 2010-14 and 2017-19 boom periods. Now, they finally appear to be catching up.As shown in Figure 2, gas processing capacity in the Bakken has been increasing by fits and starts through the first two-thirds of this decade, from less than 500 MMcf/d at the end of 2010 to more than 2.0 Bcf/d at the end of 2016. But with the big slow-down in crude oil and gas production in 2015-16, plans for a number of additional processing plants were scrapped or delayed, and when production growth took off again in 2017, midstreamers once more were forced to play catch-up. Only 107 MMcf/d of new gas processing capacity was added in 2017, and another 215 MMcf/d came online in 2018. 2019 turned out to be the biggest year yet for new processing capacity in the Bakken: a record 710 MMcf/d has started up in the past 11 and a half months (yellow bar segment within dashed orange oval), giving the region a total of nearly 3.2 Bcf/d – seemingly enough to handle all the gas that the play produces.

Federal decision on fracking review reopens 1.2 million acres in California to oil leasing – After years of studying the environmental impacts of fracking, a decision this week by Bakersfield’s office of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management allows federal officials to resume leasing 1.2 million acres of public land in Kern and other parts of California for the purposes of oil and gas production. The move, which was immediately criticized by climate-change activists, followed the release earlier this fall of an environmental review concluding the controversial well-completion technique also known as hydraulic fracturing poses no impacts that cannot be blunted by mitigation efforts. The review fulfilled the BLM’s pledge in 2017 to take another look at the consequences of fracking. Environmentalists say the practice endangers air and groundwater quality. The oil industry says there is no evidence of that happening in California. No new public lands were opened to oil production or fracking as a result of the BLM’s decision. BLM has not conducted a lease auction on the subject properties since at least 2016. The agency noted that such leases sustain about 3,500 jobs and generate $200 million per year in economic benefits. California gets half of the 12.5-percent royalty the BLM collects on oil and gas royalties in the state, while the other half goes to the U.S. Treasury.

Fuel-guzzling California threatens Trump administration over fracking plan | Fox News – California leads the nation in the consumption of gasoline and jet fuel. The oil and gas industry provides more than 360,000 jobs and fracking helps the sector to pump annually into the state economy more than $55 billion in tax revenues. Yet, today, state officials are threatening legal action after the Trump administration opened 1.2 million acres of federal land to drilling after a six-year moratorium. “The Trump Administration’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) wants to expose more than a million acres of public land in Central California to drilling and fracking using a patently deficient environment impact study,” said Attorney General Xavier Becerra. “That’s not how we do things in California. We’re prepared to do whatever we must to protect the health and safety of our people. We intend to be good stewards of our public lands.” Unlike drilling on private or state lands, the federal government collects a 12.5-percent royalty on every barrel of oil and gas produced on federal lands, providing billions to programs Congress approves. The BLM says drilling on the newly approved lands could generate $200 million annually and create 3,500 jobs in the Central Valley. “This is a good thing, it gives California an opportunity to produce more of its own oil,” said Bob Poole, of the Western State Petroleum Association.”Currently, California uses 2 million barrels a day. Of those two million, we import over a million every day. This gives us the most opportunities available for us to produce our own energy under the most stringent environmental regulations.”

BP to pay penalty to EPA for inadequate insurance – The Environmental Protection Agency announced Monday that BP Exploration Alaska has agreed to pay a $125,100 penalty related to violations of its federal hazardous waste permit for activities on Alaska’s North Slope.BP, a major Alaska oil producer that’s asking regulators to approve the $5.6 billion sale of its Alaska assets to Hilcorp Alaska, in part did not “maintain adequate insurance for bodily injury and/or property damage to third parties” from the company’s storage and handling of hazardous waste, the EPA alleged in a statement to media Monday. Megan Baldino, a spokeswoman with BP in Alaska, said the company “worked closely with EPA to resolve its concerns with the insurance it had obtained for this facility.” She said BP is in compliance with the order. The penalty stems from a 14-page consent agreement between the federal agency and the oil company.It comes at a time when many Alaskans are asking regulators to pay close attention to whether BP and Hilcorp have provided adequate financial assurances that they can pay for future cleanup costs once the oil fields are abandoned and infrastructure must be dismantled. They also want financial guarantees that Hilcorp, a smaller, private company, can pay for an unexpected disaster, such as an oil spill. The EPA found that BP’s third-party liability coverage was inadequate over five years beginning in 2014, the consent agreement shows. The penalty followed an EPA inspection in June 2018 of a hazardous waste storage facility at Prudhoe Bay.The EPA said in its statement that it allows BP to store more than 200,000 pounds of hazardous waste, such as flammable and toxic byproducts from oil exploration, on leased state lands. BP must maintain a dedicated pool of funds so third parties can receive compensation for losses related to the storage or handling of the company’s hazardous waste. EPA describes the amount BP must maintain as “$1 million per occurrence with an annual aggregate of at least $2 million,” through insurance policies or other means. The EPA said federal law requires this pool of funds to be kept separate from coverage for legal defense and cleanup costs. The protection is required so third parties can receive “compensation for losses related to the storage or handling of BPXA’s hazardous waste,” the EPA said.

Alaska turns focus to oil, gas infrastructure after spill – Alaska officials say they are going to take a look at Cook Inlet‘s aging infrastructure to get a better handle on oil and gas operations there following the recent discovery of an oil leak. The spill between two production platforms owned by Hilcorp Alaska LLC was spotted Saturday. The company removed all oil from the 8-inch (20.3-centimeter) diameter pipeline by Sunday. The state has yet to determine how much oil was dumped into the ocean, but Hilcorp has said it was less than three gallons. The leak is the second in Cook Inlet this year for Hilcorp Alaska. Processed natural gas continues to spew into the inlet from an underwater pipeline that supplies four other production platforms after the leak was discovered in February. Company officials estimate it has been leaking since mid-December. Kristin Ryan with the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation said the state will compile a report on the inlet‘s oil and gas activity over the next year. The state may then decide to make regulation changes, Alaska‘s Energy Desk reported (http://bit.ly/2oAWTmk). State regulators will conduct the review to “try to have a better record of what pipes are where, who owns them, how old are they, what‘s their inspection frequency,” said Ryan, director of the department‘s Division of Spill Prevention and Response. Much of the oil and gas infrastructure in Cook Inlet was first installed in the 1960s, although various pieces of equipment have been updated over the years. Hilcorp Alaska, a subsidiary of Houston-based Hilcorp, declined to comment on both the gas leak and the oil leak. Cook Inlet stretches 180 miles (290 kilometers) from the Gulf of Alaska to Anchorage and is home to an endangered population of beluga whales. It is also habitat for humpback whales, the western population of Steller sea lions and northern sea otters. Harbor seals, killer whales and porpoise use the inlet.

Goldman Sachs Is First U.S. Big Bank to Divest From Arctic Oil and Gas — Goldman Sachs, one of the world’s largest investment banks, gave a minor victory to the divestment movement by declaring that it will not fund an new arctic oil explorations, as CNN reported. Citing the importance of the Arctic’s fragile ecosystem and its importance to indigenous populations, the investing giant said it will decline investing in any oil exploration in the Arctic, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. “Oil development in the Arctic Circle is prone to harsh operating conditions, sea ice, permafrost coverage, and potential impacts to critical natural habitats for endangered species,” Goldman Sachs said in itsEnvironmental Policy Framework. “The unique and fragile ecosystems of the Arctic region also support the subsistence livelihoods of indigenous peoples groups that have populated certain areas in the region for centuries.”Goldman Sachs also said in its policy framework that it would not finance any new thermal coal mines or anymountaintop removal projects. It added that where it has already invested, it would work with companies to diversify their strategies and reduce their carbon emissions.”Companies’ diversification strategy and carbon emissions reduction initiatives will be a key consideration in our evaluation of future financings with the goal of helping their transition strategy,” the Environmental Policy Framework says. “We will phase out our financing of thermal coal mining companies that do not have a diversification strategy within a reasonable timeframe.”Goldman Sachs follows a dozen global banks, based largely in Europe and Australia, that pledged not to finance Arctic oil and gas development in the arctic. Several of the policies mention Arctic National Wildlife Refuge specifically, as NPR reported. Goldman is the first U.S. headquartered bank to make the same promise, as CNN reported.

Shell share price dips after warning Q4 income will be hit by impairment charges – Shares of Royal Dutch Shell dipped 0.7% in trade Friday after the firm announced that it will book additional charges against its income in the fourth quarter. The Anglo-Dutch energy giant said it expects to log a fourth-quarter impairment charge ranging between $1.7 billion and $2.3 billion after tax. Details on the impairment were not provided. Swiss bank UBS described the range as “relatively small,” although noted other charges which, when added on, would depress fourth-quarter earnings by around $3 billion in total. Capital expenditure expectations is also being trimmed and is now expected to sit close to around $24 billion from October to the end of December. Production of oil and gas is expected to rise from the third quarter. Upstream oil production is forecast to sit between 2,775 and 2,825 thousand barrels of oil per day. Royal Dutch Shell has two classes of share listed in both London and Amsterdam. On Friday, its ‘B’ share listing on the Amsterdam exchange had slid almost 1% from its Thursday closing price. Over 2019, the same class of share is higher by about 1.37%. Shell highlighted “materially lower” margins in its chemicals division and also warned on returns from liquified natural gas. The firm is due to publish fourth-quarter results on January 30.

Exxon and Chevron Targeted by Follow This— The Dutch activist fund that has filed shareholder resolutions pressuring major oil companies in Europe to take action on climate change has set its sights on the U.S. Investor advocacy group Follow This has filed requests for shareholder votes at Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp.’s annual meetings for the first time, asking the companies to align their plans with the Paris climate accord. It has also filed resolutions for Royal Dutch Shell Plc, BP Plc and Equinor ASA. Big Oil has come under increasing pressure from investors and environmental groups to invest in cleaner fuels as part of a wider energy transition. While Follow This resolutions have so far been defeated, the group has gained public support from investors such as Dutch insurer Aegon and M&G Investments. “We believe change comes from a small number of progressive investors, not the majority,” Follow This head Mark Van Baal said in a phone interview. Chevron said it was too early to comment and that its board would review all proposals. “We have established greenhouse gas emission intensity reduction goals for upstream oil and natural gas, methane and flaring,” spokesman Sean Comey said. “All shareholder proposals will go through the proper process in advance of the annual meeting,” said Exxon spokesman Casey Norton. Earlier this year, Exxon shareholders were denied a vote on publishing targets to align its business with the Paris climate agreement after the Securities and Exchange Commission ruled against a resolution brought forward by the Church of England and New York State. The SEC said that Exxon’s public disclosures “compare favorably” with its guidelines. Follow This’s Van Baal said that by substituting the word “targets” for “strategies” the resolution is less likely to be blocked on the grounds of micromanaging. Follow This buys shares in oil companies in order to press them over emissions. Its resolutions ask companies to align their investments with the 2016 Paris accord, which seeks to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial levels. The group also says scope 3 emissions — those produced by consumers of oil companies’ products — should be included in targets. In May, BP investors voted in favor of the company reporting in greater detail how its investments are compatible with the Paris agreement. A second, more stringent filing proposed by Follow This was not successful.

How Much Oil Does The $1.5 Trillion Fashion Industry Use? – Chances are, Greta Thunberg is getting ready to push her ‘flight-shaming’ campaign into the realm of fashion, because this $1.5-trillion global fashion industry is said by some to be producing more CO2 than international flights and shipping. That’s because the fashion industry has turned its catwalk into a wildly fast and overproducing monster that emits some 1.7-billion tons of CO2 per year, or 10% of all man-made carbon emissions. It also ranks as the second-largest consumer of the global water supply. Hydraulic fracturing–which gets so much heat from environmentalists, for instance–ranks far lower in water supply use. If that isn’t enough, it’s polluting the oceans with microplastics. So for anyone fashionable who decries the fossil fuels industry pollution, there is some very selective thinking going on here. There is a ton of overlap between the two industries. A whopping two-thirds of our clothing is made from fossil fuel synthetics, and 85% of this material is sent to landfills, unable to decay or decompose.In other words, we’re wearing fossil fuels, and the use of synthetic fibers has doubled since 2000. This year, we’re walking around in 60% synthetic. Polyester, a material composed of greenhouse-gas-emitting fossil fuels and microfibers, costs about $10 per yard once manufacturers turn it into fabric. Also, the chemicals used to process leather, which costs about $15 per yard, send out textile waste into the environment. The fashion industry’s environmental footprint is growing commensurate with digital communications and an insatiable appetite. We want instant gratification, and that includes seasonal fashion. This has given rise to “fast fashion”, which ensures that the latest runway styles go from catwalk to retailer at the speed of light with cheap, mass, rapid production methods. It leads to phenomenally more waste. When it comes to fast fashion, low prices and cheap, synthetic materials, many consumers discard items of clothing after only one use. In other words, fast fashion is becoming disposable fashion. In the UK alone, consumers throw away over 300,000 tons of clothing every year.And part of the problem is over-production of clothing that is never sold. A power plant in Sweden has partly switched to H&M clothing instead of coal to generate energy. In 2017, the power plant incinerated 15 tons of H&M product, according to Bloomberg. High-end Burberry, on the other hand, was called out last year for burning some $37 million in clothing just to avoid selling it at a discount. The negative publicity forced them to shift their policy on that.

US greenlights sanctions on mega Russia-EU gas pipeline, but it’s probably too late -The U.S. Senate has approved a defense bill that will see sanctions imposed on companies working on Russia’s massive flagship gas pipeline project to Germany – but the sanctions might not have much effect given that the Nord Stream 2 pipeline is almost complete. The Senate voted overwhelmingly to pass the multi-billion dollar billion defense policy bill, formally known as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), on Tuesday. The NDAA covers a broad range of defense policy and military spending. The annually-set NDAA is also significant for Europe’s energy scene, however, as the 2020 bill also contains provisions to impose sanctions on companies installing deep sea pipelines for Russia’s $10.5 billion Nord Stream 2 (NS2) gas pipeline linking Russia and Germany (via the Baltic Sea). The pipeline is Russia-led, under the aegis of the country’s state-owned energy giant Gazprom, but has been part-financed by several European energy companies, including Shell, OMV and Engie. The TurkStream project which stretches from Russia to Turkey, and estimated to cost around $12 billion, was also mentioned in the defense bill but the pipeline is set to launch early January so sanctions would be ineffectual. Sanctions The defense bill says that no later than 60 days after it’s enacted, a report should be filed to congressional committees identifying vessels that are “engaged in pipe-laying” for Nord Stream 2. Individuals who are identified as being involved in the projects could also have U.S. visas revoked and see transactions related to U.S. property blocked, although the bill allows a 30-day period for individuals to “wind-down” their operations in the project. The NDAA, which also greenlights the creation of a U.S. Space Force and paid parental leave for federal employees, was approved by the House of Representatives last week. It will now be sent to President Donald Trump to be signed into law; he signalled last week he would do so without delay.

U.S. Concedes Defeat on Nord Stream 2 Project, Officials Say – The U.S. has little leverage to prevent the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project between Russia and Germany from being completed, two administration officials said, acknowledging the failure of a years-long effort to head off what officials believe is a threat to European security. The massive $11-billion project is just weeks away from completion and has led President Donald Trump to call Germany “a captive to Russia.” He has criticized the European Union for not doing more to diversify imports away from the nation that supplies more than a third of its gas. Senior U.S. administration officials, who asked not to be identified discussing the administration’s take on the project, said sanctions that passed Congress on Tuesday as part of a defense bill are too late to have any effect. The U.S. instead will try to impose costs on other Russian energy projects, one of the officials added. relates to U.S. Concedes Defeat on Nord Stream 2 Project, Officials Say Nord Stream 2 is being laid on the bottom of the Baltic Sea to feed gas from Russia into Germany.Source: Gazprom The admission is a rare concession on what had been a top foreign-policy priority for the Trump administration and highlights how European allies such as Germany have been impervious to American pressure to abandon the pipeline. It also shows how the U.S. has struggled to deter Russia from flexing its muscles on issues ranging from energy to Ukraine to election interference. “It has been a commercial project, but with a huge geopolitical dimension attached to that,” Peter Beyer, who is German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s trans-Atlantic policy coordinator, told Bloomberg. “I’m expecting that the sanctions, if Donald Trump is going to sign that bill, will not have a big effect on that project.”

Exclusive: Illegally traded chemical halted Russian oil pipeline, tests show – (Reuters) – The substance that brought one of Russia’s longest oil pipelines to a halt in April was carbon tetrachloride, a lethal chemical meant to be tightly controlled by an international agreement, according to the results of three separate, undisclosed tests seen by Reuters. A summary of the results of a test carried out for Russia’s Ministry of Energy and for Transneft, the operator of the pipeline, by a Moscow-based state chemical laboratory seen by Reuters in May, which has not previously been reported, shows that the contaminant was 85 percent carbon tetrachloride. The presence of carbon tetrachloride suggests Russia has not stamped out illegal trade in the chemical, five oil industry sources said. Carbon tetrachloride is supposed to be strictly regulated by Russian law, these sources said. Russia’s energy ministry has blamed the stoppage in the Druzhba pipeline on a legally traded solvent called ethylene dichloride, an organic chloride compound used to clean oil wells, which can corrode equipment if it enters a refinery, according to industry experts. Two separate tests performed by two different companies, a European Union refiner and an international oil trading firm – which both told Reuters they unwittingly bought tainted crude from the pipeline – yielded almost identical results to the tests conducted by the Moscow state laboratory, two sources familiar with the findings told Reuters. Transneft said in June that 200 to 300 tonnes of an unnamed contaminant had entered the pipeline, but has not since made public any further details on the matter. Russia, the world’s second-biggest oil exporter, lost more than $1 billion in revenue due to the more than month-long stoppage of the pipeline, which carries about 1% of the global supply of crude oil from Russia to refineries in eastern and central Europe. The pipeline fully restarted normal operations on July 1.

Fracking leaves heavy footprint in Argentina’s Patagonia – Pumpjack oil wells peck like giant birds at the ground, plumes of yellow flames flare from gas pipelines, lakes accumulate contaminated waste – Patagonia and its indigenous people are paying a heavy price for Argentina’s economic progress. Vaca Muerta, a huge sweep of western Patagonian wilderness, sits on the world’s second largest reserve of shale gas and its fourth largest oil reserves. A push to develop extraction amid Argentina’s crippling economic crisis has made the area a magnet for international oil companies. Crucially, Vaca Muerta is also home to indigenous Mapuche communities who say their rights are being denied. “They came in as a state enterprise and just blew up the land. Without measuring the consequences or seeing that there were people living here – a Mapuche community living on the land,” says Lorena Bravo, spokeswoman for the Mapuche community in Campo Maripe. “And from then on they denied our existence.” The Mapuche claim that the burgeoning oil and shale gas industry, in particular the controversial fracking technique used to extract it, has irreversibly damaged their ancestral homelands, and with it their traditional way of life. “One day all this activity will cease, because the oil is going to run out, the gas is going to run out. We are going to be left only with polluted land,” says Bravo. The Mapuche indigenous communities nearby claim an ancestral right to the land and say they have to daily cope with the pollution caused by fracking. “Fracking is an illegal activity in Mapuche territory. It doesn’t comply with our rights to be consulted,” said Jorge Nahuel, a leader of Neuquen’s Mapuche Confederation. “Our territories are located over a lake of fuel. The result is pollution and death,” said Nahuel, adding that farm animals were being “born with malformations.” Other nearby communities like Allen and Fernandez Oro have seen their fruit crops diminish in the face of the oil companies’ relentless advance across the land as exploration concessions increase.

Argentina Wants a Fracking Boom. The US Offers a Cautionary Tale — Argentina’s President Alberto Fernandez takes office in the midst of an economic crisis. Like his predecessor, he has made fracking a centerpiece of the country’s economic revival.Argentina has some of the largest natural gas and oil reserves in the world and “possibly the most prospective outside of North America,” according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. If some other country is going to successfully replicate the U.S. shale revolution, most experts put Argentina pretty high on that list. While the U.S.shale industry is showing its age, Argentina’s Vaca Muerta shale is in its early stages, with only 4 percent of the acreage developed thus far.The country feels a sense of urgency. Declining conventional production from older oil and gas fields has meant that Argentina has become a net importer of fuels over the past decade. Meanwhile, Argentina’s economy has deteriorated badly due to a toxic cocktail of debt, austerity, inflation, and an unstable currency.For these reasons – a growing energy deficit, a worsening economic situation, and large oil and gas reserves trapped underground – there is enormous political support for kick-starting an American-style fracking boom in Argentina.It has taken on a level of political significance that outstrips its immediate economic potential. In Argentina, Vaca Muerta is treated as the country’s chance at salvation, with fracking seen as doing everything at once – creating jobs, reducing the debt burden, plugging the energy deficit and turning Argentina into a major player on the global oil and gas stage.Astute followers of the American fracking experience will already recognize some similarities. Debt-financed drilling rapidly increased production in the U.S.but also crashed prices. Time and again, the financial losses mounted and companies returned to Wall Street for more capital, peddling stories to investors about how they just needed a little more time to figure things out. But the profits never arrived. Over the past decade, the 40 largest independent oil and gas companies burned through $200 billion more than they earned. Roughly 200 oil and gas companies in North America have declared bankruptcy since 2015. There has even been a rise in “Chapter 22s,” a reference to companies going through Chapter 11 bankruptcy more than once.The worst may yet lie ahead: an estimated $137 billion in debt held by North American oil and gas companies comes due between 2020 and 2022, the result of a wave of financing that was taken out during the 2014-2016 market downturn.“The business case for fracking has not been proven. It produces a lot of natural gas and oil. It doesn’t produce cash,” said Kathy Hipple, a Financial Analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA). “What we know is that it sucks in cash and produces a lot of bankruptcies.”More recently, operational problems have become harder to ignore. Companies are running out of the choicest spots to drill. The promise of densely drilling wells together has disappointed. Thousands of wells are not producing as much oil as the industry promised. “I personally think that we are going to discover massive amounts of fraud in the shale industry,” Hipple said. “That there have been probably a lot of overly robust assumptions that everyone has known were overly robust.”

Should The West Be Worried About The Power Of Siberia Pipeline? – A massive work of infrastructure has just been brought online, and its geopolitical implications are explosive. Last week, the presidents of Russia and China jointly inaugurated one of the biggest pieces of gas infrastructure in the world. The “Power of Siberia” pipeline is sending gas from eastern Siberia over 3,000 kilometers of tundra to northern China; and when it reaches its full capacity of 38 billion cubic meters a year, it will account for about one-sixth of China’s imported gas demand.To some, this is a minor amount and not a reason to worry. Yet a sixth of imports is a pretty solid portion for the world’s largest gas import market. What’s more, there is already talk about Power of Siberia 2, which will bring the Russian share in China’s imported gas market higher, if it comes to be.As is invariably the case with large-scale Russian projects, there are people who want to know: should the West be worried? To answer this question, we need to first clarify “the West”. In the past, the West was a unified concept including Western Europe and the United States. Now, the former is often at odds with the latter on topics spanning trade balance and free market practices. That’s what globalization has accomplished. There is no longer a unified West, at least in the area of trade and energy security, a fact made obvious by Germany’s unwavering support for another Russian project, the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, in the face of vocal U.S. opposition that at one point escalated to threats of sanctioning all companies involved in the project. So, to rephrase the original question, who should worry about Power of Siberia, and should anyone worry at all?The most immediate, knee-jerk answer would be: all other exporters of gas to China. It’s a no-brainer on the face of it: the Power of Siberia will bring into China 38 billion cubic meters of gas every year, which will unavoidably displace supply from other sources. Yet it pays to look beyond the face of things. In this case, Russian gas will first and foremost displace coal, not gas from other sources. The Power of Siberia will ship gas to northeastern China, which has so far been overwhelmingly dependent on coal for its energy needs, as Reuters’ Clyde Russell noted in a recent column. This part of China does not import LNG, Russell pointed out, so there will be no displacement of LNG imports. For now. A lot of LNG export capacity is being built with the future Chinese market in mind. There seems to be unanimity among energy forecasters that this market will only continue growing in the observable future, even if this growth moderates in pace. So everyone is betting on China specifically – and Asia more broadly. In this context, any other source of supply is a challenge, and if this source is a country on a strategic path of forging closer ties with its neighbor in the southeast, the challenge becomes more serious.

OPEC Deal Isn’t Worth the Paper It’s Written On – Bloomberg – There was an elephant in the room during the recent OPEC+ meeting: The record-breaking initial public offering of Saudi Arabia’s mammoth oil company Saudi Aramco occurring at exactly the same time. The coincidence meant that the output cuts agreed by OPEC and its allies were designed as much to bolster the share price of Saudi Arabian Oil Co., as they were to balance the oil market going into 2020. This will greatly complicate matters for Saudi Arabia when it finds itself having to impose discipline on fellow producers looking for ways to adhere to their targets without actually cutting production. The deal is much weaker than it looks. The headlines out of Vienna took markets by surprise. The group cut their collective output target by a further 500,000 barrels a day for the first quarter of 2020, taking the reduction from 2018 baselines to 1.7 million barrels a day. Saudi Arabia, the kingmaker in all oil matters, said it would reduce its own target by a further 400,000 barrels a day on top of that – as long as all the other participants adhered to their pledges. That appeared to indicate that OPEC+ output would be slashed by a very substantial 900,000 barrels a day, with 770,000 of them coming from OPEC and the rest from its partners. But in reality, the difference the agreement will make to physical production is really quite small, even if everyone sticks to their new goals. Saudi Arabia’s new voluntary target of 9.744 million barrels a day is just 5,000 barrels a day below what it pumped on average over the past nine months, according to the production numbers it supplies to OPEC. That’s no cut at all. In fact, by tying the 400,000 barrels a day to full compliance by everybody else, its offer was actually a thinly-disguised threat that the kingdom would increase output if any of the other countries fail to meet their commitment. Angola’s production will also go up rather than down in the coming months. The West African country has no new projects to offset steep decline rates at its deep-water fields after the 2014 price crash killed off foreign investment in its oil sector. In November, it pumped about 200,000 barrels a day below its target. So even if everybody else does what they have promised, the real cut in output from November levels will be closer to 385,000 barrels a day. And even that is optimistic.

Oil Steady as Trade Optimism Balanced by Caution – Oil was steady near a three-month high as optimism the U.S.-China trade deal will spur demand for crude was tempered by caution due to the agreement’s limited nature and lack of detail. Futures edged lower in New York after closing up 1.5% at the highest since Sept. 16 on Friday. The deal involves China buying more American farm products and making new commitments on intellectual property, while the U.S. will suspend new levies and halve existing tariffs on $120 billion of Chinese imports. It’s expected to be signed and released publicly in early January. While the partial trade deal leaves most of the tariffs built up over the 20-month conflict in place, it’s adding to a more positive outlook for oil prices as it followed deeper-than-expected output cuts by OPEC+ and signs American production growth may be slowing. Hedge funds increased net-bullish wagers on West Texas Intermediate crude by the most in three years in the week through Dec. 10. The lack of details on the trade deal could put oil under pressure this week, said Howie Lee, an economist at Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp. in Singapore. However, the upward trend in prices since early October will likely remain intact given the improved sentiment in the market, he said. WTI for January delivery fell 0.1% to $59.99 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange as of 7:32 a.m. in London. It rose 89 cents to $60.07 on Friday, taking its weekly gain to 1.5%. Brent for February settlement declined 0.1% to $65.15 a barrel on the London-based ICE Futures Europe Exchange after rising 1.6% Friday and 1.3% last week. The global benchmark was at a $5.23 premium to WTI for the same month. President Donald Trump said he expects China’s buying of American agricultural goods to reach $50 billion a year “pretty soon.” While the U.S. halved 15% duties on $120 billion of Chinese imports, it will maintain 25% levies on another $250 billion of goods. Meanwhile, the International Energy Agency last week cut its forecast for U.S. oil supply growth to 1.1 million barrels a day for 2020, compared with 1.6 million this year.

Oil tops $60, settles near 3-month high – Oil prices rose slightly Monday on hopes energy demand will benefit from the trade deal between the United States and China announced last week, but prices remained below the previous session’s three-month highs. Brent crude oil futures rose 16 cents to $65.37 a barrel, while West Texas Intermediate crude rose 14 cents to settle near a three-month high of $60.21 a barrel. On Friday, Washington and Beijing announced a “phase one” agreement. U.S. officials said some tariffs would be reduced in exchange for a big jump in Chinese purchases of American farm products and other goods. Progress on trade could boost oil demand, but the market is still weighing the merits of the deal, said Phil Flynn, an analyst at Price Futures Group in Chicago. “The market is pausing to digest the U.S.-China trade deal,” Flynn said. “We’re trying to consolidate to see if we can hold above $60 before we get higher.” The agreement averted $160 billion in additional U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods that were to kick in over the weekend. “What the market needs now… is clarity around exactly what the deal entails,” analysts from ING Economics said. “The longer we have to wait for this detail, the more likely market participants will start to question how good a deal it actually is.” On Sunday, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said the deal would nearly double U.S. exports to China over two years and was “totally done” despite the need for translation and textual revisions. China’s State Council’s customs tariff commission said it had suspended additional tariffs on some U.S. goods.

Oil prices rise on optimism about economy in 2020 (Reuters) – Crude oil traders have become progressively more bullish about the outlook for prices since the beginning of October as the trade war between the United States and China has eased, lifting concerns about a global recession. Deeper production cuts by Saudi Arabia and its allies in the expanded OPEC+ group of oil exporters, announced at the start of this month, have probably accelerated the bullish shift. But production cuts are a second-order effect. The rise in oil prices has been primarily driven by greater optimism about the outlook for global trade and the economy next year (https://tmsnrt.rs/2PSMGgW). Manufacturing surveys and data on industrial production in the United States, China, India and Germany have all started to show tentative signs that the recent slowdown in global growth and trade may be bottoming out. In the United States, the Federal Reserve has cut interest rates three times by a total of 75 basis points since the middle of the year in a bid to extend the current expansion. In China and India, governments have announced stimulus packages and encouraged increased bank lending to revive their economies. Even Germany has started to discuss using fiscal policy to stimulate more growth. As it enters a re-election year, the Trump administration’s focus is shifting from trade war to stimulating the economy, accelerating growth and boosting jobs and wages. With so much fiscal and monetary stimulus around the world, and the electoral cycle entering a strongly pro-growth phase, crude traders are betting oil consumption will grow faster next year.

Oil Prices Head Higher Despite OPEC+ Skepticism – Oil has edged up to three-month highs and is holding firm. “The conditions for a rising oil price appear favorable at present,” Commerzbank said in Tuesday. “Economic optimism coupled with a weaker US dollar and growing investor demand have allowed Brent and WTI to climb to over $65 and to over $60 per barrel respectively.” However, the bank noted that the shine on the OPEC+ deal will wear off, which creates downside risk. Oil prices have hit three-month highs on the back of the OPEC+ cuts and the thaw in the trade war, but the rally has already slowed. Some analysts are skeptical that the lagging members of the OPEC+ cohort, including Iraq and Nigeria, will live up to their commitments. “Why would they change next year just because they made a pledge?” said Giovanni Staunovo, commodities analyst at UBS Global Wealth Management, according to the Wall Street Journal. Who are some of the best-performers and worst-performers of 2019? The “worst” list is riddled with energy names, while the “best” list contains bad performers from 2018 who managed to stage a rebound. A study from Carnegie Mellon University found that Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia enjoyed economic benefits from the rise of shale gas, but the region also suffered premature deaths due to pollution. The economic boost between 2004 and 2016 totaled $21 billion, but the costs reached $23 billion. The EIA’s Drilling Productivity Report forecasts growth of 48,000 bpd in the Permian in January, compared to December. However, output falls by 15,000 bpd in the Anadarko and by 9,000 bpd in the Eagle Ford. On the gas side, output grows in the Permian, but contracts in the Anadarko, Appalachia and Eagle Ford. The contraction in Appalachia is notable since it is the largest source of gas in the country. But the basin has been plagued by poor finances amid low prices. Goldman Sachs revised its policy to exclude financing for projects based on coal or oil drilling in the Arctic. The Wall Street giant also said that it would mobilize $750 billion in financing for “climate transition and inclusive growth finance” over the next decade. The new policy is “now the strongest among the big six U.S. banks,” according to the Sierra Club and the Rainforest Action Network. Using satellites, scientists found that a shale gas blowout at an XTO gas well, a subsidiary of ExxonMobil emitted more methane into the atmosphere than some countries do in an entire year.

Oil poised near three-month highs on US-China trade hopes, supply cuts – Oil prices trickled a fraction lower on Tuesday but remained near a three-month high as investors kept the faith with hopes that a fully fledged U.S.-China trade deal is in the pipeline, set to stoke oil demand in the world’s biggest economies. Brent crude oil futures had slipped by two cents to $65.32 a barrel by 0422 GMT, while West Texas Intermediate crude was down four cents to $60.17 a barrel. Under a partial trade agreement announced last week, Washington will reduce some tariffs on Chinese imports in exchange for Chinese purchases of agricultural, manufactured and energy products increasing by about $200 billion over the next two years. “Oil prices are struggling to extend their gains as investors await further details regarding the U.S.-China ‘Phase One’ trade deal,” said Edward Moya, senior market analyst at OANDA. “Oil should be much higher, but the U.S.-China trade war is far from over.” The so-called ‘Phase One’ trade deal between both countries has been “absolutely completed”, Larry Kudlow, a top White House adviser said on Monday, adding that U.S. exports to China will double under the agreement. The agreement is yet to be signed and several Chinese officials told Reuters the wording of the agreement remained a delicate issue, with care was needed to ensure expressions used in text did not re-escalate tensions and deepen differences. JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs have revised their oil price forecasts for the next year upwards, with an OPEC-led agreement to curb output further dovetailing with the improving trade outlook between the U.S. and China. Lower supply next year due to a planned cut by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and associated producers like Russia – a grouping known as ‘OPEC+’ – and stronger economic growth expected because of the improved trade outlook between United States and China will combine to tighten the oil supply-demand balance next year, analysts from JP Morgan said. Oil demand could see further improvements as U.S. President Donald Trump “tries to … ensure the U.S. growth remains robust before voters turn to the polls in November,”

Crude Slides On Surprise Build As Oil Volatility Plunges To 8-Month Lows – Oil prices jumped notably intraday (near three-month highs at $61 for WTI) as US manufacturing data printed better than expected, building on post-trade-deal optimism.“The conditions for a rising oil price appear favorable at present,” said Eugen Weinberg, head of commodities research at Commerzbank AG in Frankfurt.But that could all change after inventory data. API:

• Crude +4.7mm (-1.5mm exp)
• Cushing -0.3mm
• Gasoline +5.6mm
• Distillates +3.7mm

Crude inventories rose unexpectedly in the prior week but were expected to draw again this week. However a 4.7mm build was a big surprise relative to the 1.5mm draw expected… WTI hovered just below $61 ahead of the data, but dropped on the surprise build… And all of this is occurring as Oil ‘VIX’ drops to its lowest in 8 months…

EIA: US crude inventories down 1.1 million bbl – US crude oil inventories for the week ended Dec. 13, excluding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, decreased by 1.1 million bbl from the previous week, according to data from the US Energy Information Administration. Separately, the American Petroleum Institute on Dec. 17 reported a build in US crude supplies of 4.7 million bbl for the week. At 446.8 million bbl, US crude oil inventories are 4% above the 5-year average for this time of year, the EIA report indicated. EIA said total motor gasoline inventories increased by 2.5 million bbl and are 5% above the 5-year range for this time of year. Finished gasoline inventories decreased while blending component inventories increased last week. Distillate fuel inventories increased by 1.5 million bbl and are about 7% below the 5-year average for this time of year. Propane-propylene inventories decreased by 2.5 million bbl last week and are about 10% above the 5-year average for this time of year, EIA said. US refinery inputs averaged 16.6 million b/d for the week ended Dec. 13, about 35,000 b/d less than the previous week’s average. Refineries operated at 90.6% of capacity. Gasoline production increased, averaging 9.8 million b/d. Distillate fuel production decreased, averaging 5.1 million b/d. US crude oil imports averaged 6.6 million b/d, down 308,000 b/d from the previous week. Over the last 4 weeks, crude oil imports averaged 6.4 million b/d, 15.1% less than the same period last year. Total motor gasoline imports averaged 519,000 b/d. Distillate fuel imports averaged 178,000 b/d.

WTI Surges Above $61 On Crude Draw, Demand Rebounds From 3-Year Lows – Oil prices remain lower following last night’s surprise crude inventory build reported by API but analysts continue to expect a draw in the official data this morning.“As much as the API has taken the wind out of bulls’ sails, the lull in upside is expected to be short-lived,” .“After all, recent positive developments have given oil fundamentals for next year a supportive shot in the arm.” DOE:

• Crude -1.085mm (-1.75mm exp)
• Cushing -265k
• Gasoline +2.529mm (+2mm exp)
• Distillates +1.509mm

Unlike API’s data, DOE reported a crude inventory draw in the last week (though smaller than analysts expected) and gasoline inventories rose for the 6th week in a row… Cushing stocks have fallen for the past six weeks and the market will be looking for signs of improvement in refinery runs, particularly in the Gulf Coast, which have been low compared with previous years, says Bob Yawger, futures director at Mizuho Securities.Additionally, Gasoline stockpiles are the highest they’ve been this time of year in data going back to 1990. US oil production held near record highs…

Oil settles slightly lower after smaller-than-expected US inventory decline Oil prices steadied on Wednesday after U.S. government data showed a decline in crude inventories and on expectations for an uptick in demand next year on the back of progress in resolving the U.S.-China trade fight. Brent futures gained 12 cents to trade at $66.22 a barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate lost 1 cent to settle at $60.93. U.S. crude fell by 1.1 million barrels in the week to Dec. 13 to 446.8 million barrels, compared with analysts’ expectations in a Reuters poll for a 1.3 million-barrel drop, the Energy Information Administration said. Gasoline and distillate inventories grew last week by 2.5 million barrels to 237.3 million barrels, and 1.5 million barrels to 125.1 million barrels, respectively, EIA said. Oil pared losses after the data, which contradicted Tuesday’s report of a build in U.S. crude stockpiles from industry group American Petroleum Institute (API). API figures released showed U.S. crude inventories swelling by 4.7 million barrels last week to 452 million barrels, sparking a post-settlement sell-off in oil futures. “The market reaction was abruptly stronger due to the fact that we were so far away from industry estimations in the way of a net build,” said Tony Headrick, an energy markets analyst at CHS Hedging. “The upward trend from optimistic demand expectations such as from recent developments like U.S.-China trade deal has the ability to stay in tact after these figures,” Headrick said.

Oil prices surf US-China trade thaw to three-month highs – Oil prices remained atop three-month peaks on Thursday, extending a robust streak that began a week ago, as thawing trade relations between the United States and China supported global markets. Brent crude futures edged up 8 cents to $66.25 a barrel by 0645 GMT, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude gained 4 cents to $60.97. Trading volume was thin, with not even news of President Donald Trump’s impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives stirring the oil market. “We’re near the top of trading ranges for both Brent and WTI so it’s interesting to see them holding here,” While there is a clear uptrend in place on the daily technical price chart for WTI to potentially move towards $61.50 a barrel, there are also near-term risks – touching that price level may encourage traders to sell, ″(Trading) volumes are terrible. A lot of people have given up for the year with no scheduled events to push oil markets around,” he said. The trend leaves oil prices set to rise for a third consecutive week, surfing momentum from announcements this month about deeper output cuts by major producers as well as the ‘Phase One’ deal between the United States and China to resolve their long-running trade war. The deal between the world’s two largest economies has improved the global economic outlook, lifted the prospect for higher energy demand next year and underpinned oil prices. In a further sign of thawing relations, China’s finance ministry on Thursday published a new list of six U.S. products that will be exempt from tariffs starting Dec. 26.

Oil Prices Hold Steady Near Three-month Highs – Oil prices held steady near three-month highs in thin trade on Thursday ahead of the holiday season. Benchmark Brent crude edged up by 3 cents to $66.20 a barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude futures were virtually unchanged at $60.85. A potential thawing in U.S.-China trade relations has improved the global economic outlook, raising the prospect for higher energy demand next year. China has announced a list of United States (US) chemicals that will be exempted from import tariffs starting Dec. 26. This comes under a week after Beijing and Washington agreed a ‘phase one’ trade deal. Meanwhile, traders seemed to have shrugged off the vote in the U.S. House to impeach President Donald Trump. The United States House of Representatives voted largely along party lines to impeach Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The move to impeach Trump relates to his alleged efforts to coerce Ukraine into investigating former Vice President Joe Biden as well as his alleged attempts to obstruct the Congressional investigation. Republicans currently hold a 53 to 45 majority in the Senate, with two Democratic-leaning independents, and removing Trump from office would require a two-thirds vote in favor. Several Senate Republicans have already indicated they will not vote to remove Trump from office even before the Senate holds its trial on the House charges.

U.S. oil prices settle at a 3-month high; Brent gains a 6th straight session – Oil futures ended higher Thursday and logged their highest settlement since mid-September, with global benchmark prices stretching their gains to a sixth consecutive session. Oil’s climb came a day after data showed a weekly decline in U.S. crude inventories. On the New York Mercantile Exchange, West Texas Intermediate crude for January delivery rose 29 cents, or 0.5%, to finish at $61.22 a barrel. The contract expired at the end of the session. February WTI crude, the new front-month contract, rose by 33 cents, or 0.5%, to settle at $61.18. February Brent crude added 37 cents, or 0.6%, to settle at $66.54 a barrel on ICE Futures Europe. That stretched its streak of gains to a sixth consecutive session, the longest winning streak since Jan. 10 when the market rose for 10 straight sessions, according to Dow Jones Market Data. Oil on Wednesday bounced back from early losses after the Energy Information Administration on reported that U.S. crude supplies fell by 1.1 million barrels for the week ended Dec. 13. That was less than the 2.5 million-barrel average decline expected by analysts polled by S&P Global Platts, but came as a relief after the American Petroleum Institute on Tuesday had reported a 4.7 million-barrel climb. The market should see further supply declines “into the end of the year due to year-end tax consequences of destocking,” Prices for oil may move lower in the first quarter of 2020 “due to slow demand,” Zahir said. “Of course, any problems with the China phase one deal we could see an accelerated move to the downside” as worries about energy demand resurface. On Thursday, however, China revealed a list of import tariff exemptions for six chemical and oil products from the U.S., according to a report from CNBC. Chinese tariff concessions on six U.S. petroleum products are “boosting trade confidence, although the concessions actually announced are insubstantial,” In other energy trade, January gasoline RBF20, -0.29% rose 1.4% to $1.7068 a gallon, while January heating oil rose 0.5% to $2.0295 a gallon. January natural gas declined by 1.3 cents, or 0.6%, to settle at $2.273 per million British thermal units, giving up earlier gains seen in the wake of the latest U.S. supply figures. The EIA on Thursday reported that domestic supplies of natural gas fell by 107 billion cubic feet for the week ended Dec. 13. Analysts expected a fall of 93 billion cubic feet, on average, according to a survey conducted by S&P Global Platts.

Oil posts 5th positive session in 6, fueled by US inventories and trade progress – Oil prices hovered near the highest in three months in thin pre-Christmas trading on Thursday, buoyed by the previous day’s news that U.S. crude inventories declined and as U.S.-China trade tensions continued to ease. Brent crude gained 37 cents to settle at $66.54 per barrel, for its sixth straight day of gains. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude gained 29 cents, or 0.48%, to settle at $61.22 per barrel. Trading volume was thin, with oil headed for a third consecutive weekly rise. Prices were buoyed by China’s Dec. 13 decision to cancel a plan to impose additional tariffs on U.S. imports on Dec. 15 and the Phase 1 deal between Washington and China, which has eased trade tensions. The deal between the world’s two largest economies has improved the global economic outlook, lifting prospects for higher energy demand next year and underpinning oil prices. “The market’s happy with (Dec. 15) tariffs out of the way and the trade truce, for now,” said Bill Baruch, president at Blue Line Futures in Chicago. In a further sign of thawing relations, China’s finance ministry on Thursday published a new list of six U.S. products that will be exempt from tariffs starting Dec. 26. Oil has also gained momentum from announcements about deeper output cuts by major crude producers. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and non-OPEC producers such as Russia agreed earlier this month to deepen production cuts by a further 500,000 barrels per day (bpd) from Jan. 1 on top of previous reductions of 1.2 million bpd.

Oil Settles Notably Lower On Jump In Rig Count, Profit Taking – Crude oil prices declined sharply on Friday as data from Baker Hughes showed a sharp increase in rig count in the U.S., and traders looked to trim down positions ahead of upcoming holidays. West Texas Intermediate crude oil futures for February ended down $0.74, or about 1.2%, at $60.44 a barrel. Brent Crude oil futures declined $0.48, or about 0.7%, to 66.06 a barrel. On Thursday, WTI crude oil futures settled at a three-month high. WTI Crude oil futures gained about 0.5% in the week. According to a report released by Baker Hughes, rigs count in the U.S. increased for a second straight week, rising by as much as 18 to 685 this week. The report also said total rigs count have now risen to 813. Despite optimism on the trade front and the ongoing OPEC output cuts, oil prices drifted lower in the session as traders looked keen on taking some profits ahead of the year-end holiday period. After the U.S. and China agreed on a phase one trade deal, China announced a list of United States chemicals that will be exempted from import tariffs. U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Thursday a trade deal with China was finished and is ready for signing after the holidays.

U.S. oil prices end 1.2% lower as rig-count data show weekly increase – Oil futures finished sharply lower Friday, with declines accelerating after a weekly report on drilling rigs showed a big increase. Baker Hughes reported that the number of active U.S. rigs drilling for oil rose by 18 to 685 this week, marking a second straight weekly rise in rigs. The total active U.S. rig count also climbed by 14 to 813, according to Baker Hughes. West Texas Intermediate crude for February delivery, the U.S. benchmark grade, fell 74 cents, or 1.2%, to settle at $60.44 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Still, the most-active contract gained 0.8% for the week, according to Dow Jones Market Data. February Brent crude BRNG20, -0.06% shed 40 cents, or 0.6%, to end at $66.14 a barrel on ICE Futures Europe, snapping a sixth straight session of gains, its longest win streak since Jan. 10. Still, the international benchmark gained 1.4% for the week and has been up six of the past seven weeks. Both contracts logged a third weekly climb in a row. “I think the overall picture is that we’re down today mainly due to profit taking as traders go into the holiday nervous about remaining [long] oil,” Phil Flynn, senior market analyst at Price Futures Group told MarketWatch. “The losses accelerated a bit after the increase in rig counts,” he said. The analyst said crude futures have enjoyed a healthy weekly run-up, with a period of seasonally light volume expected to possibly yield outsize moves in either direction. “It’s Christmas next week,” Flynn said. “A lot of traders aren’t going to be here,” he said. “Along with the growth of stock indices, the growth of oil prices also attracts attention,” said Alex Kuptsikevich, senior market analyst at FxPro. “Avoiding sharp movements, it shows a strengthening for the last seven trading sessions, moving closer towards the heights since July.” Oil prices have been mostly bolstered by more optimistic expectations for the global economy and Sino-American trade developments, as well as the decision earlier this month by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies, a group known as OPEC+, to deepen production cuts.

Exclusive: Saudi Arabia, UAE swayed Russia for OPEC+ cuts at Abu Dhabi F1 race – (Reuters) – Saudi Arabia turned to its Gulf ally the United Arab Emirates when it needed help convincing Russia to sign on to deeper oil supply cuts at this month’s OPEC meeting. The UAE’s de-facto ruler, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed, hosted crucial talks between Saudi Arabia and Russia in Abu Dhabi, where the three nations ironed out what would become one of the deepest supply cuts in a decade, four sources familiar with the negotiations told Reuters. The UAE’s role in the talks marks a change from years past and highlights Russia’s rising clout in the region. Since Russia started cooperating with OPEC on supply agreements in 2016, Riyadh and Moscow have led oil supply decisions in advance of OPEC meetings without much involvement from other producers. This time, Riyadh wanted Abu Dhabi to help add pressure on Moscow to agree to the cuts, two sources said. Russia saw the agreement as a way to strengthen key relationships in the region. “The message Russia wanted to send is that it is supporting Saudi Arabia at a crucial moment and that the alliance is solid,” one of the sources said. “The UAE’s role shouldn’t come as a surprise. Russia has very strong ties with the UAE.” Russia and Saudi Arabia are the world’s top exporters, together accounting for 20 percent of global production. The involvement of the UAE, which produces 3 percent of global oil supply, came after Moscow signaled opposition to extending new supply cuts in advance of the OPEC meetings in Vienna on Dec. 5 and 6, three of the sources said. Saudi Arabia’s Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman orchestrated the deeper oil cuts and had been discussing them with Russian officials since October, when Russian President Vladimir Putin visited Riyadh, according to three of the sources. Since then, Saudi and Russian officials have shuttled between Riyadh, Moscow and Abu Dhabi to negotiate the oil-supply deal, the sources said.

Exclusive: U.S. probe of Saudi oil attack shows it came from north – report – (Reuters) – The United States said new evidence and analysis of weapons debris recovered from an attack on Saudi oil facilities on Sept. 14 indicates the strike likely came from the north, reinforcing its earlier assessment that Iran was behind the offensive. A comparison of engines (L) involved in the September 14, 2019 attack on an Aramco oil facility in Saudi Arabia and from the Shahed-123, displayed in the Iranian Materiel Display, are shown in this handout image provided by a U.S. government source. U.S. government/Handout via REUTERS In an interim report of its investigation – seen by Reuters ahead of a presentation on Thursday to the United Nations Security Council – Washington assessed that before hitting its targets, one of the drones traversed a location approximately 200 km (124 miles) to the northwest of the attack site. “This, in combination with the assessed 900 kilometer maximum range of the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), indicates with high likelihood that the attack originated north of Abqaiq,” the interim report said, referring to the location of one of the Saudi oil facilities that were hit. It added the United States had identified several similarities between the drones used in the raid and an Iranian designed and produced unmanned aircraft known as the IRN-05 UAV. However, the report noted that the analysis of the weapons debris did not definitely reveal the origin of the strike that initially knocked out half of Saudi Arabia’s oil production.“At this time, the U.S. Intelligence Community has not identified any information from the recovered weapon systems used in the 14 September attacks on Saudi Arabia that definitively reveals an attack origin,” it said. The new findings include freshly declassified information, a State Department official told Reuters. The United States, European powers and Saudi Arabia blamed the Sept. 14 attack on Iran. Yemen’s Houthi group claimed responsibility for the attacks, and Iran, which supports the Houthis, denied any involvement. Yemen is south of Saudi Arabia.

Officials fear stranded oil tanker off Yemen’s coast – Yemen’s officials on Tuesday reiterated their fears that a stranded oil tanker could explode and cause serious pollution off the country’s Red Sea coast. Loaded with nearly 1.1 million barrels of oil, the tanker Safer has been stranded some 7 km off Yemen’s Ras Isa port, north of the city of Hodeidah. In August, the United Nations attempted to assess the Safer. But the Houthis rebels blocked the access to the derelict tanker that was being used as a floating storage for oil transfers. The Houthis placed submitting the revenues from the sale of the oil aboard the tanker to their bank in Sanaa as a precondition to allowing the UN inspection team to reach the Safer. Officials of the Saudi-backed Yemeni government, based in the southern port city of Aden, expressed their concern that the Houthis are still refusing to grant the international inspectors access to the decaying oil tanker. They said the tanker is at the risk of exploding as it has remained without maintenance since it fell under the control of the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in 2015. “The tanker is in a pressing need for urgent maintenance,” as four years’ accumulation of flammable gases and the formation of hydrocarbon gases may lead to a blast, an official told Xinhua on condition of anonymity. He said, “For several times, the Yemeni government called for international assistance in preventing the potentially serious oil pollution threatening the Red Sea’s ecology but received no active response.” The international community should exert more efforts in pressuring and forcing the Houthi rebels to allow the UN’s technical team to carry out necessary maintenance of the tanker and aborting any environmental disaster, the official said.

New WikiLeaks documents expose phony claims of 2018 Syria chemical weapons attack – Documents published by WikiLeaks on Saturday confirm that there is significant dissent within the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the global chemical weapons watchdog, over the doctoring of a public report on the alleged April 7, 2018 chemical weapons attack in Douma, Syria, which reportedly killed 49 people and wounded as many as 650. The latest round of revelations makes clear that the US-led regime-change operation in Syria which began in 2011 has been based on a pack of lies. And the role of WikiLeaks in exposing these lies demonstrates why the US government has been pursuing WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange so ferociously, along with Washington’s partners in crime like Britain and Australia. Relying on video which showed alleged victims of the attack in a hospital gasping for air and foaming at the mouth, the Trump administration and its European allies launched missile strikes against Syria just one week later. The US-led attack was an act of war which threatened to spark a wider conflict with Russia and Iran, which both have military forces deployed to the country to back the Assad government in the eight-year regime-change war fueled by the CIA. While the Trump administration made no effort to seek independent confirmation of the allegations against Assad before taking military action, the OPCW report and the organization’s supposedly objective stance were deployed to justify the assault months after the fact.However, a series of internal OPCW files published by WikiLeaks and reporting by columnist Peter Hitchens in the Daily Mail show that serious concerns have been raised by members of the OPCW Fact Finding Mission (FFM) to Douma about evidence that was excluded from the final report in order to implicate Assad. Relying on Islamist terrorist groups as “moderate rebel” proxies, including Al Qaeda and its affiliates, the US and its European allies have fueled a war which has resulted in the deaths of 570,000 people and displaced more than 12 million. The years of carnage have been aimed at overthrowing Assad and installing a pliant Western puppet regime in order to neutralize the influence of Iran and Russia in the oil-rich Middle East. Claims of chemical weapons attacks and the use of “barrel bombs” by Syria’s military have been repeatedly deployed throughout the war in an effort to justify Western military action and call for the removal of Assad.

Deluge Of New Leaks Further Shreds The Establishment Syria Narrative – Caitlin Johnstone – WikiLeaks has published multiple documents providing further details on the coverup within the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) of its own investigators’ findings which contradicted the official story we were all given about an alleged chlorine gas attack in Douma, Syria last year. The alleged chemical weapons incident was blamed on the Syrian government by the US and its allies, who launched airstrikes against Syria several days later. Subsequent evidence indicating that there was insufficient reason to conclude the chlorine gas attack ever happened was repressed by the OPCW, reportedly at the urging of US government officials. The new publications by WikiLeaks add new detail to this still-unfolding scandal, providing more evidence to further invalidate attempts by establishment Syria narrative managers to spin it all as an empty conspiracy theory. The OPCW has no business hiding any information from the public which casts doubt on the official narrative about an incident which was used to justify an act of war on a sovereign nation. The following are hyperlinks to the individual OPCW documents WikiLeaks published, with some highlights found therein: A first draft of the OPCW’s July 2018 Interim Report on the team’s findings in Douma. Contains crucial information that was not included in either the final draft of the July 2018 Interim Report or the March 2019 Final Report, including:

• 1. The symptoms of the alleged victims of the supposed chemical incident were inconsistent with chlorine gas poisoning.
• 2. OPCW inspectors couldn’t find any explanation for why the gas cylinders supposedly dropped from Syrian aircraft were so undamaged by the fall.
• 3. The team concluded that either the victims were poisoned with some unknown gas which wasn’t chlorine, or there was no chemical weapon at all.

Sabra and Chatila taught me all massacres become ‘alleged massacres’ if we don’t pay attention – Robert Fisk. -Not that long ago, I spotted a report in an American newspaper which referred to the “alleged Sabra and Chatila massacre”. Up to 1,700 civilians, most of them Palestinians, were slaughtered in the two refugee camps in Beirut in just three days in 1982. They were killed by Israel’s Lebanese Christian Phalangist allies. The Israelis watched – and did nothing. Even Israel’s own commission of enquiry admitted this. With two colleagues, I entered the camps before the murderers had finished committing their war crimes. I hid with an American reporter in the back yard of a hut beside a newly executed young woman. I climbed over heaps of corpses. That evening, I burned my clothes because they smelled of decomposition. Photographs and film of the dead were later broadcast around the world. Yet more than two decades later, this mass killing was merely “alleged”. And when I spoke to a younger colleague scarcely a year ago, he did not know the location of Sabra and Chatila, nor the number killed – almost 400 more than those who were murdered in the North Tower of the World Trade Center on 9/11. But no international or world leaders visit the mass grave at Sabra and Chatila on the anniversary of the massacre of the Palestinians. The greatest enemy of all journalists – and all politicians – is the failure of institutional, historical memory. It’s one thing to claim that a Middle East war is imminent because Iran threatens America or America threatens Iran or because Israel warns that Iran is making nuclear weapons. But if you count up all the previous threats of war between Iran and the US – not to mention Israel’s eight warnings over 15 years, each giving different dates for the ‘doomsday’ of Iran’s nuclear possession – you would do well to downgrade the threat of war. These warnings are issued for us to trumpet like clowns on radio, television, on social media and in newspapers – which we are usually obedient enough to do. They do not represent any kind of reality. They are issued because the supposed warmongers believe – quite rightly – that we either do not remember the identical and equally fraudulent figures they issued years ago. Or because they are convinced (again, I fear, correctly) that we don’t care very much to ‘keep them to the record’. This is one reason why I have spent – cumulatively – years of my time as a Middle East correspondent cataloguing the accounts of survivors of the Armenian genocide of 1917 (all, of course, now dead), the deliberate ethnic cleansing and mass murder of the one and a half million Christian Armenians by the Ottoman Turks. They were shot into mass graves, suffocated in caves in the Syrian desert, the women raped and forced into marriage, the children spitted on bayonets or stakes or hurled into rivers.

Why Syria’s small oil reserves have become the linchpin for political control in the region – Akram Hassan remembers when the modest oil fields in the arid eastern Syrian province of Deir al-Zor attracted companies from around the world. As an engineer in the industry and Kurd from the northern city of Qamishli, he watched the revenue disappear into the government’s coffers. “Syrian people did not have any benefit from this oil. … All the money the regime kept in their pocket,” said Hassan. Most higher-up workers in fields were from Latakia, the homeland of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s family. “Arab petroleum is for Arabs,” they would tell him. It was a joke, but a revealing one, Hassan said. Times have changed in his country. The oil has attracted another foreign power – the U.S. military – and Kurdish-led forces are the ones controlling the area and collecting revenue. Syria was never a large oil producer compared to its resource-rich neighbors. But somehow the small reserves, barely pumping now after more than eight years of war, have become a linchpin for political control. The Syrian economy has collapsed, and significant outside help is unlikely. The country’s GDP has declined by more than 70% since 2010, according to the CIA’s World Factbook, and the unemployment rate is around 50%. The government’s budget decreased to around $1.162 billion in 2017 compared to $16.4 billion in 2010. The oil could be just enough to prop up the Syrian government – or a competing power. And who controls oil-rich stretches of the Syrian desert could determine who controls large regions of the country. In 2010, before conflict erupted, Syrian wells produced around 385,000 barrels per day, according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy. That amounted to just 0.5% of global production – around what North Dakota produced that year.

Turkey says S-400 system ‘vital’, will retaliate any US sanctions – Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu has repeated a retaliation threat against any US sanctions over Ankara’s purchase of a Russian missile defence system. Speaking at a conference in Qatar’s capital, Doha, Cavusoglu said on Saturday that Turkey would not cancel its deal with Russia over the S-400 missile system “whatever the consequences”. “Sanctions and threatening language never work. But if sanctions are placed, Turkey will have to reciprocate,” Cavusoglu said at the Doha Forum, a two-day conference billed as a global platform for dialogue. NATO allies Turkey and the United States have been at odds over the purchase of the advanced Russian system, which Washington says is not compatible with NATO defences and poses a threat to its F-35 stealth fighter jets. This week, senators in the US-backed legislation to impose sanctions on Turkey over the S-400 deal earlier this year and its recent military operation in northern Syria. The vote, which was immediately condemned by Turkey, was seen as the latest move to push US President Donald Trump to take a harder line against Ankara. The Trump administration has so far not imposed sanctions despite the president in 2017 signing a sanctions law that mandates financial penalties for countries that do business with Russia’s military. Amid already strained bilateral ties, Washington has suspended Ankara from the US F-35 stealth fighter jet programme, in which it was a producer and buyer, to penalise it for buying the Russian system. Cavusoglu said the S-400 purchase – the first such move between a NATO member and Russia – was a necessity. “We are very desperate for an air defence system. We tried to procure it from the US and others, but it didn’t work. This is a defence system that is vital for us.”

Turkey Gives NATO The Middle Finger, Threatens To Shutter Critical Military Bases Over Sanction Threats – Although Trump and Erdogan have tried to maintain at least the veneer of a personally amicable relationship, and though Trump has at times defied his own senior NatSec officials to offer a major sop to Erdogan (like when Trump pulled US troops out and stepped aside to allow the Turkish invasion, the the horror of Europe), Erdogan’s increasingly tight relationship with Russia – a relationship built on defense and energy ties – is becoming impossible for many western leaders to countenance. Congressional hawks like Lindsey Graham (for the Republicans) and Chris Van Hollen (on the Democratic side) have already successfully pushed Trump to “announce” more sanctions against Turkey via Twitter. And they might be able to finally push him to follow through, too.In response to this and myriad other slights both perceived and real, Erdogan made it clear on Monday that he’s had about enough of this harassment from his supposed “allies” in the West. Because when it comes to Trump cards, Erdogan still has one to play.According to Bloomberg, Erdogan warned that he could shutter two of the most important NATO bases in the world if more sanctions are imposed.In the minds of US NatSec officials, Erdogan’s threat is an extremely low blow. An early-warning radar at Turkey’s Kurecik air base is a critical component of NATO’s early-warning defense system against ballistic missile attacks. And the Incirlik air base in southern Turkey is critical to tactical air strikes and drone attacks throughout the region. “If it is necessary to shut it down, we would shut down Incirlik,” Erdogan told AHaber television on Sunday. “If it is necessary to shut it down, we would shut down Kurecik, too.”[…]“If they put measures such as sanctions in force, then we would respond based on reciprocity,” Erdogan said. “It is very important for both sides that the U.S. should not take irreparable steps in our relations.”

Turkish Military Gets Drones WIth Machine Guns – The Turkish military is about to take delivery of a fleet of 55-lb. drones equipped with a machine gun and 200-rounds of ammunition. Made by Ankara-based firm Asisguard, the ‘Songar’ drone can strike a 6″ target at roughly 650 feet and has a range of 6.2 miles, and can operate in groups. A newer version is expected to be able to hit targets from over 1,300 miles away. Accoridng to Ayhan Sungar of Asisguard, a swarm of three Songar drones can be operated from a single remote control – with all three firing simultaneously at a target. Held aloft by eight rotating blades, the drone uses a series of sensors, cameras and lasers to calculate distance, angle and wind speed – along with robotic arms that can help to deliver accurate fire on target with minimal recoil, according to New Scientist. It is hard for a drone to shoot accurately, partly because of the difficulty of judging range and angle, and partly because the recoil from each shot significantly moves the drone, affecting the aim for the next round. Songar has two systems to overcome these challenges. One uses sensors, including cameras and a laser rangefinder, to calculate distance, angle and wind speed, and work out where to aim. The second is a set of robot arms that move the machine gun to compensate for the effects of recoil. –New Scientist While critics such as Robert Bunker of the US Army’s Strategic Studies Institute say the drones could end up in the hands of armed insurgents (which they will regardless), Songar says the drones will allow for new tactics, such as laying down suppressive fire while humans or other drones carry out attacks on other targets such as infrastructure or vehicles.

Turkey To Establish Military Base In Libya As Egypt Threatens Its Own Intervention – Turkey’s involvement in the ongoing Libyan war between Benghazi-based General Khalifa Haftar and the UN-recognized Tripoli GNA government is set to grow. Following a recent military agreement between Turkey and Tripoli, and as Haftar’s forces threaten attack on any Turkish plane or ship, it’s expected the Turkish military will set up a base in the war-torn country. Middle East Monitor reports of the latest developments: Turkey is set to establish a military base in Libya, according to Turkish media reports earlier this week, as President Recep Tayyip weighs up the possibility of intervention in the country’s civil war. Yeni Shafak reported on Monday that the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Turkish parliament had approved a recent agreement between Turkey and Libya on military cooperation. It also includes provisions for launching a “quick reaction force” if requested by the Libyan government.The exact location for the proposed base has not been revealed, but it will likely be in the vicinity of Tripoli, given that’s where they key front line fighting has been as part of Haftar’s LNA forces offensive on the capital. The deal was initially touted by Ankara as primarily for oil and gas exploration off Libya’s coast and in the eastern Mediterranean, but was later revealed to include close military cooperation agreements.Addressing the controversial deal in statements made early this week President Erdogan told a pro-government news channel, “We will be defending the rights of Libya and Turkey in the Eastern Mediterranean.” Already there are unconfirmed reports in Arabic media that Turkish special forces have landed in Tripoli. But crucially, neighboring Egypt, which has long backed east Libyan strongman Haftar, has condemned the Turkey-Tripoli GNA deal as “illegitimate” and has even signaled its own military intervention could come. On Tuesday, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi warned in the wake of the Turkey-Libya agreement, “We will not allow anyone to control Libya… it is a matter of Egyptian national security.”

Greece To Help Tripoli ‘Block Turkish Ships’ As Libyan War Spills Into Mediterranean – The years-long war for post-Gaddafi Libya now threatens to spill over into the Mediterranean as Turkey and Greece line up on either side of the conflict. Each side is now threatening the others’ allied ships in southern waters after a controversial maritime deal expanded Turkish claims off Libya’s coast. On Thursday Benghazi-based General Kalifa Haftar declared his Libyan National Army has begun its “final decisive battle” to wrest control of the capital of Tripoli from the UN-backed Government of National Accord (GNA). “Zero hour has come for the broad and total assault expected by every free and honest Libyan,” Haftar said in a televised address, reports Al Jazeera. “Today, we announce the decisive battle and the advancement towards the heart of the capital to set it free… advance now our heroes.” Beginning eight months ago Haftar launched a siege of Tripoli, which has been stalled in recent months. Turkey has been the closest military supporter to Tripoli’s GNA, even recently signing a controversial maritime agreement, after providing heavy weaponry to repel Haftar’s assault. Last summer the LNA even attacked Turkish naval ships, in what’s an ongoing declared war with any Turkish vessel or aircraft. This “proxy war” element is now threatening to involve Greece. Days ago Erdogan confirmed his country signed a bilateral memorandum, finalized on Nov. 27, which would allow Turkish forces to enter Libyan territory or waters at the request of the GNA authorities. “With this new agreement between Turkey and Libya, we can hold joint exploration operations in these exclusive economic zones that we determined,” Erdogan said. The agreement established a continental shelf and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) boundary line of 18.6 nautical miles between the two countries.

Turkey Allows Hamas To Plot Attacks From Istanbul- Telegraph – Turkey is allegedly allowing Hamas operatives to plan attacks against Israel from the city of Istanbul, a new report from the Telegraph claimed on Wednesday. Citing transcripts from Israeli police interrogations with suspects, the Telegraph alleged that senior Hamas operatives were using the large city of Istanbul to direct operations in Jerusalem and the occupied West Bank. The report said that one such case was the assassination attempt against the mayor of Jerusalem. “Israel has repeatedly told Turkey that Hamas is using its territory to plan attacks, but last weekend Mr Erdogan met Ismail Haniyeh, the head of Hamas, and Turkish intelligence agents maintain close contact with the group’s operatives in Istanbul,” the Telegraph report said. Hamas has been hosted in mostly Arab countries since its rise to power in the Gaza Strip. Among these Arab nations that hosted Hamas are Syria and Qatar, the latter being the most recent. Turkey is Qatar’s closest ally in the Middle East and the two countries are often on the same page when it comes to regional politics (e.g. Syrian conflict). The issue has fueled hostility between the two states, even though they maintain diplomatic relations. “Israel is extremely concerned that Turkey is allowing Hamas terrorists to operate from its territory, in planning and engaging in terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians,” its foreign ministry said. …Turkey has proved such a welcoming environment for Hamas that the group’s deputy leader, who has a $5 million US government bounty on his head, travels freely to the country without fear of arrest. A dozen Hamas operatives have moved to Istanbul from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip in the past year, according to Israeli and Egyptian intelligence records. – The Telegraph Also taking part in this alliance is Iran, who provides training and weapons to both Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ).

Lebanon crisis: Dozens hurt as police and protesters clash in Beirut – Clashes between riot police and anti-government protesters in the Lebanese capital, Beirut, have left dozens of people wounded, witnesses say. The violence began as demonstrators, who had been attacked during a sit-in by masked counter-protesters, tried to move into a square near parliament. Police fired tear gas and rubber bullets, while protesters threw stones. At least 20 officers were also wounded. Protests over economic mismanagement by the ruling elite began in October. Saturday’s events are some of the worst violence since the largely peaceful protests started. They triggered the resignation of the Prime Minister, Saad al-Hariri, but talks to form a new government are deadlocked. “It was a very peaceful protest. Everyone was singing chants that we’re one people, that we’re all peaceful and then some of the young guys pushed one of the fences that separated us,” Mona Fawaz, who was at the protest, told the BBC. “We saw an enormous amount of police come out and really disperse us, push us and then they started [firing] tear gas on us. There was really no reason for all this demonstration of force.” Riot police and security forces had been deployed in large numbers in Beirut, chasing demonstrators, beating and detaining some of them, Reuters news agency reports. Some protesters tried to push through steel barriers blocking the way to the parliament and government buildings. Clashes continued late into Saturday night.

Algeria stands at a historic crossroads – Algeria is teetering on the edge of a serious crisis. It is at a crossroads and it is hard to say which way the country will go. On the one hand, disregarding tensions such as the country has not seen since its independence in the early 1960s, the authorities are insisting on ploughing ahead with presidential elections. On the other, huge demonstrations, which for the past ten months have protested against the ruling establishment and the idea of elections under its aegis, are still taking place every week. At the same time, the country is witnessing unprecedented legal trials of the most prominent faces of the ruling regime – including two prime ministers, ministers and business leaders – on serious charges, ranging from corruption and squandering of public funds to the abuse of power. Leading figures who until recently ruled Algeria, including the brother of ousted President Abdelaziz Bouteflika and two senior intelligence and military officers from that time, remain in prison after being convicted on serious charges of violating the authority of the army and conspiring against the government. Against this background, which would have been unimaginable in Algeria only a few months ago, more and more people are taking to the street, rebelling against and suspicious of everything, even of the legal proceedings against these former regime henchmen. After all, the establishment, or what is left of the old regime, is still in place, even if it has offered up its most prominent figures. The political impasse has been going on for weeks. Attempts to calm the public mood by sacrificing some of the Bouteflika faithful has only served to fuel demonstrators’ demands that all such remnants of the old guard be rooted out.

.