SHALE Magazine Volume 3 Issue 2

®

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

DONALD TRUMP’S ENERGY LEGACY: THE LEGACY OF PRAGMATIC MARKET DRIVEN ENERGY POLICY

THE ENERGY SURGE BEHIND THE AI BOOM

EU IMPORTS RECORD QUANTITIES OF U.S. LNG

TRUMP TURNS TARIFFS ON ANY COUNTRY BUYING VENEZUELAN OIL

U.S. GRID IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED IMMINENTLY

O I L & G A S P L AY E R S

|

BUSINESS

We have moved to a new bigger station in San Antonio!

|

TECHNOLOGY

|

POLICY

Nationally Syndicated

Sundays 2pm-3pm 930AM San Antonio

THE ONLY OIL AND GAS SYNDICATED NATIONAL RADIO SHOW

MOST

listened to show on Sunday nights! Thank you

HOUSTON!

Saturdays 7am KEYS 1440AM / 98.7FM Corpus Christi

Sundays 8pm-9pm KFXR 1190AM / simulcast on the iHeartRadio app Dallas / Fort Worth Worldwide

Saturdays 1pm-2pm KWEL 1070AM / 107.1FM

Midland Odessa Permian Basin

Sundays 2pm-3pm The Answer 930AM

San Antonio / New Braunfels / San Marcos / Austin

Sundays 8pm-9pm KTRH 740AM / Simulcast on the iHeartRadio app Houston / Worldwide

Saturdays 6am-7am, 11am-12 noon Sundays 6am-7am, 5pm-6pm AM 1440

To listen to the show: Visit shalemag.com or download iHeart mobile app to listen live!

2

HOUSTON | MIDLAND | ODESSA | AUSTIN | DALLAS | SAN ANTONIO CORPUS CHRISTI | HOBBS, NM | LOUISIANA | MEXICO VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

YOUR PIPELINE TO PREMIUM DISCOUNTS AND INDUSTRY EXPERTISE

WORKERS’ COMP FOR OIL AND GAS DONE RIGHT

Oil and gas expertise. It’s just one of the many advantages of membership in our Texas Oil & Gas Association Safety Group. As a member, you’ll have access to information and resources specific to the oil and gas industry, save about 12% on your workers’ comp premium and you can even earn double dividends. To see if your company qualifies, ask your agent or contact Group Administrator Neal Carlton at ncarlton@txogainsurance.com.

TEXASMUTUAL.COM/TXOGA

Dividends are based on performance and are not guaranteed.

Vision for the Future CPS Energy is committed to a future of innovative power generation solutions, and we are focused on engaging in conversations with our customers and community partners. Listening to feedback from our diverse community ensures decisions are made with a clear understanding of our customers’ views on resiliency, climate, innovation, and equity.

CONNECTING • LISTENING • ENGAGING • SERVING

cpsenergy.com

CONNECT. SHARE IDEAS. DISCUSS. 2

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

9%

50% LOWER FAILURE RATE

21%

HIGHER GROWTH RATE

24-33%

SAVINGS ON

HR ADMINISTRATION

LOWER TURNOVER RATE

2X

MORE PARTICIPATION IN RETIREMENT PLANS

Source: NAPEO publications: Professional Employer Organizations: Fueling Small Business Growth, September 2013, and Professional Employer Organizations: Keeping Turnover Low and Survival High, September 2014, by Laurie Bassi and Dan McMurrer

The numbers don’t lie. Tapping into Insperity’s depth, breadth and level of care can help your company run better, grow faster and make more money.

Now, how can we help you improve your bottom line? insperity.com/PEO-inc | 800-465-3800 michaels.murphy@insperity.com

HR and Business Performance Solutions from Insperity: Workforce Optimization Human Capital Management | Payroll Services | Time and Attendance | Performance Management Organizational Planning | Recruiting Services | Employment Screening | Financial Services Expense Management | Retirement Services | Insurance Services 82-1180 | SAL-P0415-629 SHALEMAG.COM

3

4

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

SHALEMAG.COM

5

6

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

SHALEMAG.COM

7

8

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

table of contents VOL UME 3 // ISSUE 2

cover story

14

Donald Trump’s Energy Legacy: The legacy of pragmatic market driven energy policy

industry

22 Energy Sector Shines as Markets

Post First Quarterly Decline Since 2023

24 Is the U.S. Finally

Moving Away from Coal?

26 The Energy Surge Behind the AI Boom

28 U.S. Biofuels Growth Potential Under Threat

30 Breaking Records: How Natural

Gas is Shaping the Global Energy Mix

32 Will Alaska Expand Its Fossil Fuel Operations?

34 U.S. Solar and Battery Storage Boom in 2025

36 EU Imports Record Quantities of U.S. LNG

policy

40 Federal Judge Rules that Biden Administration Wrongfully Cancelled Oil and Gas Leases in Alaska

46 Trump Turns Tariffs on Any

54 U.S. Grid Improvements

48 Hon. James E. Campos:

56 Risks and Uncertainties

Country Buying Venezuelan Oil

Unlocking Virginia’s Energy Potential – The Strategic Importance of Its Southern and Southwest Regions

42 Who Is U.S. Secretary

business

44 Could the EU Overtake the U.S.

Prices Now Signal Trouble for America’s Trade Balance

of Energy Chris Wright?

as a Renewable Energy Power?

Needed Imminently

Facing New LNG Projects on the U.S. Gulf and East Coasts

58 Trump Doubles Down on Most U.S. Energy Sanctions

52 Why Falling Crude

SHALEMAG.COM

9

17-0663 SHALE ad-3Q_FINAL.pdf

1

6/13/17

1:29 PM

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

KYM BOLADO/CEO EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Robert Rapier

Providing energy for the world

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER Suzel Diego

while staying committed to our values.

PUBLICATION EDITOR Tyler Reed

Finding and producing the oil and natural gas the world needs is what we do. And our commitment to our SPIRIT Values—Safety, People, Integrity, Responsibility, Innovation and Teamwork— is how we do it. That includes caring about the environment and the communities where we live and work – now and into the future.

ASSOCIATE EDITOR David Porter

© ConocoPhillips Company. 2017. All rights reserved.

www.conocophillips.com

VIDEO CONTENT EDITOR Barry Basse STAFF WRITERS Felicity Bradstock, Tyler Reed DESIGN DIRECTOR Elisa Giordano VICE PRESIDENT OF SALES & MARKETING James Moreno / james@shalemag.com ACCOUNT EXECUTIVES John Collins, Ashley Grimes, Doug Humphreys, Matt Reed SOCIAL MEDIA DIRECTOR Courtney Boedeker SOCIAL MEDIA MANAGER Gargi Bhowal

TOP FIRM 2018-2022

DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER Amanda Villarreal

WE SELL, LEASE & MANAGE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

CONTRIBUTING WRITERS Felicity Bradstock, Jess Henley Robert Rapier, Tyler Reed STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER Malcolm Perez EDITORIAL INTERN LeAnna Castro

www.shalemag.com For advertising information, please call 210.240.7188 or email james@shalemag.com.

For editorial comments and suggestions, please email editor@shalemag.com.

YOUR SOUTH TEXAS COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE CONNECTION SINCE 1975

(361)289-5168 | CraveyRealEstate.com 10

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

SHALE MAGAZINE OFFICES: 9787 Katy Freeway, Houston, Texas 77024 5150 Broadway St., Suite 493, San Antonio, Texas 78209 For general inquiries, call 210.240.7188.

Copyright © 2025 Shale Magazine. All rights reserved.

Reproduction without the expressed written permission of the publisher is prohibited.

FACILITATING TRADE ACROSS THE GLOBAL MARKETPLACE The Port of Corpus Christi’s Foreign Trade Zone 122 program helps increase global competitiveness of U.S.-based companies.

Foreign Trade Zone 122 can defer or reduce duty payments, streamline supply chain costs and help companies thrive in competitive domestic and foreign markets.

LEARN MORE

SHALEMAG.COM

11

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

AS WE SETTLE INTO THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2025, IT’S CLEAR THAT ENERGY POLICY— BOTH AT HOME AND ABROAD—IS SHIFTING QUICKLY AND DECISIVELY. IN THIS ISSUE OF SHALE MAGAZINE, WE TAKE STOCK OF WHAT THOSE CHANGES MEAN, PARTICULARLY IN LIGHT OF THE RETURN OF PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP TO THE WHITE HOUSE AND THE ENERGY LEGACY HE’S REVIVING. Our cover story takes a close look at the Trump administration’s early moves in his second term, including deregulation efforts, expanded fossil fuel development in Alaska, and new strategies that are already reshaping the global energy conversation. Whether you’re watching from the boardroom, the field, or the policy arena, these developments are worth paying attention to.

Internationally, we examine the surge in U.S. LNG exports to Europe and how those volumes are changing the competitive balance between U.S. and EU renewables. We also explore a fascinating turn in the administration’s approach to Venezuela—a pragmatic pivot that underscores just how much energy security is back in the spotlight. And with new trade policies taking shape, we explore what this could mean for global energy flows and cross-border investment.

Here at home, we dig into several key themes.

Falling crude prices are raising fresh concerns about our trade balance. Natural gas continues to evolve into a cornerstone of global energy, and we highlight what that means for producers and investors alike. Meanwhile, U.S. grid infrastructure is straining under increased demand and shifting policy priorities—our coverage outlines where the pressure points are and what’s being done to modernize.

One feature I’d particularly encourage you to read is our profile of Energy Secretary Chris Wright. His unconventional background and clear-eyed perspective give us a better understanding of where this administration may be headed on energy.

We’re also keeping a close watch on legal battles surrounding oil and gas development,

12

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

especially federal court rulings on leases in Alaska. These decisions will have ripple effects across the industry and across state lines.

Of course, no energy conversation in 2025 would be complete without talking about the rest of the sector. This issue explores solar power and battery storage, as well as what the EIA sees ahead for our increasingly diverse energy portfolio. We also take a hard look at the challenges and risks facing new LNG projects along the Gulf and East Coasts, especially as export infrastructure continues to expand.

Despite all the policy changes, market volatility, and legal back-and-forth, the industry has shown incredible resilience. Energy markets rebounded in the first quarter—driven by a mix of policy signals and investor confidence. Our coverage of biofuels and other emerging technologies highlights how these sectors will fare as political winds shift.

At Shale Magazine, we remain committed to clear, fact-based analysis of the trends that matter.

Whether you’re managing assets, developing projects, or drafting policy, we hope this issue helps you stay ahead of the curve.

Thank you for your continued readership. Your feedback and support are what keep us focused on delivering quality insights, quarter after quarter.

Here’s to a productive and insightful second quarter.

ROBERT RAPIER Editor-in-Chief SHALE Magazine

SHALEMAG.COM

13

cover story

DONALD TRUMP’S ENERGY LEGACY:

THE LEGACY OF PRAGMATIC MARKET DRIVEN ENERGY POLICY By: Robert Rapier

14

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

SHALEMAG.COM

15

INTRODUCTION Energy policy has always been central to Donald Trump’s political platform, serving as both a domestic economic engine and a tool of international diplomacy. From his first day in office in 2017 through his ongoing second term, Trump has championed fossil fuels, deregulation, and an "America First" strategy that seeks to leverage energy abundance for economic growth and global influence. His policies have dramatically shaped the U.S. energy landscape, eliciting praise from fossil fuel industries and pushback from environmental advocates.

As James E. Campos, who served as an assistant secretary and director at the Department of Energy during Trump's first term put it, “The administration was laserfocused on ensuring that energy producers had the freedom to operate without excessive regulatory burdens. That philosophy defined President Trump’s approach from day one.”

This expanded article delves into the key elements of Trump’s energy agenda across his two terms, contrasts them with the Biden administration’s clean energy focus, and examines the broader implications for industry, markets, states, and U.S. global energy leadership. With the Trump administration now several months into its second term, this is a critical moment to evaluate where the country’s energy policy is headed—and how it impacts the energy sector, particularly shale producers.

TRUMP’S FIRST TERM: FOSSIL FUEL REVIVAL Donald Trump’s first term as president ushered in a major shift in U.S. energy policy, one defined by the administration’s pursuit of “energy dominance.” This goal centered on increasing domestic production of fossil fuels, scaling back environmental regulations, and prioritizing American energy independence.

“There was an undeniable push to open up federal lands for energy development”

16

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

explains Campos. “The belief was that America’s natural resources should be fully utilized to strengthen the economy and secure energy independence.”

From the outset, Trump signaled a clear departure from the climate-focused agenda of the Obama era, most notably through his 2017 withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. This move, widely interpreted as a rebuke of international climate commitments, reinforced the administration’s broader aim of removing perceived barriers to energy development at home.

A series of regulatory rollbacks soon followed. The Trump administration repealed the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, replacing it with the more lenient Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, which gave states more flexibility in regulating power plant emissions. It also moved to ease restrictions on methane emissions from oil and gas operations and significantly scaled back the scope of environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). These efforts were designed to streamline the permitting process and reduce costs for energy producers, particularly in the oil, gas, and coal sectors.

Trump also prioritized the expansion of energy infrastructure. His administration approved major pipeline projects— including the Dakota Access Pipeline and Keystone XL (later canceled by the Biden administration)—that were seen as essential to transporting oil and gas from production hubs to market. The administration reopened leasing in areas previously off-limits, including parts of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), and held lease sales on federal lands and offshore areas. This approach was particularly favorable to shale producers, who benefited from faster permitting and expanded access to drilling locations.

The policy environment created by the Trump administration helped extend the historic surge in U.S. energy production that began with the shale boom. Between January 2017 and early 2020—before the COVID-19 pandemic caused a sharp drop in production—U.S. crude oil output jumped from 8.9 million barrels per day (bpd) to a record 13.1 million bpd—a 47% increase. Natural gas production also climbed by over 25% during the same period. These gains were supported not just by favorable policy, but also by ongoing technological improvements in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing that helped

THE POLICY ENVIRONMENT CREATED BY THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HELPED EXTEND THE HISTORIC SURGE IN U.S. ENERGY PRODUCTION THAT BEGAN WITH THE SHALE BOOM.

unlock resources in plays like the Permian Basin and the Marcellus Shale.

This rapid growth transformed the United States into the world’s largest producer of both crude oil and natural gas. It also enabled a sharp increase in liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, helping to position the U.S. as a global energy supplier. Several new LNG export terminals came online during Trump’s term, boosting capacity and providing key allies—particularly in Europe and Asia—with alternatives to Russian gas.

"I think it was very successful," notes Campos in discussing Trump’s energy agenda. "For the first time since 1957, we were a net exporter of natural gas. And that was significant, both for the markets and for our national security purposes. For the first time in a very long time we're energy independent. That was something of a huge accomplishment by the first Trump administration."

Yet the administration’s approach was not without controversy. Environmental organizations, public health advocates, and many international observers criticized the aggressive rollback of regulations and the de-prioritization of climate policy. Critics argued that while the emphasis on fossil fuel development generated economic benefits in the short term, it came at the expense of longer-term environmental and sustainability goals.

The coal industry, which Trump vocally supported, saw some relief from regulatory pressure, but it did not experience the revival many had hoped for. Market forces— including the growing competitiveness of natural gas and renewables—continued to erode coal’s share of the U.S. power mix.

Nonetheless, Trump’s actions to delay coal plant retirements and weaken emissions limits were consistent with his broader strategy to maintain a diversified domestic energy base.

The deregulatory agenda, while popular with many in the oil and gas industry, also raised questions about regulatory certainty and long-term investment planning. By loosening oversight, the administration sought to reduce costs for producers, but it also created the potential for future legal and policy reversals—a dynamic that would come to bear under the Biden administration. This cycle of shifting priorities introduced a new kind of volatility to the energy sector, where investment horizons often span decades.

Ultimately, Trump’s first term left a lasting imprint on the U.S. energy landscape.

His policies helped extend a record-setting boom in oil and gas production, expanded export capacity, and repositioned the U.S. as a dominant player in global energy markets. At the same time, they highlighted the enduring tension between economic development and environmental protection—a debate that continues to shape U.S. energy policy to this day.

BIDEN’S REVERSALS AND THE INFLATION REDUCTION ACT Joe Biden’s presidency marked a sharp shift from his predecessor’s energy policies, with climate change and clean energy taking center stage. Early in his term, Biden rejoined the Paris Agreement, signaling a renewed U.S. commitment to tackling global warming. This move set the tone for a series of initiatives aimed at reshaping how America produces and consumes energy.

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), signed in August 2022, became the cornerstone of Biden’s energy strategy. As the largest climate legislation in U.S. history, it allocated $369 billion to clean energy programs, aiming to cut emissions, boost domestic manufacturing, and create jobs. The law expanded tax credits for renewable projects like solar, wind, and hydrogen, while incentivizing U.S.-based production to reduce reliance on foreign supply chains.

Within two years, utility-scale solar and wind capacity grew by over 25%, and investments poured into energy storage, grid modernization, and clean hydrogen.

Domestic manufacturing of solar panels and batteries ramped up, driven by IRA incentives. Yet, challenges persisted.

Permitting delays for transmission lines slowed progress, and supply chain disruptions hampered the delivery of key materials. Concerns about grid reliability also emerged as intermittent sources like wind and solar became more prominent.

Critics argued that the rapid shift to renewables contributed to energy price volatility, pointing to high gasoline and electricity costs in 2022. Fossil fuelproducing regions voiced concerns over

THE COAL INDUSTRY, WHICH TRUMP VOCALLY SUPPORTED, SAW SOME RELIEF FROM REGULATORY PRESSURE, BUT IT DID NOT EXPERIENCE THE REVIVAL MANY HAD HOPED FOR. MARKET FORCES—INCLUDING THE GROWING COMPETITIVENESS OF NATURAL GAS AND RENEWABLES— CONTINUED TO ERODE COAL’S SHARE OF THE U.S. POWER MIX.

SHALEMAG.COM

17

Biden’s pause on new oil and gas leases and the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline, citing job losses and economic impacts. Legal battles over leasing policies and regulations became a recurring theme.

Despite these hurdles, Biden’s policies marked a significant recalibration of federal priorities, emphasizing sustainability over fossil fuel expansion. His administration spurred private investment in renewables, electric vehicles, and clean tech startups, laying the groundwork for a long-term energy transition. However, the durability of these efforts remained uncertain, with Trump promising to overturn many of Biden’s initiatives when he returned to office for a second term.

TRUMP’S SECOND TERM: REGULATORY RETRENCHMENT AND ENERGY ABUNDANCE Donald Trump’s return to the White House in 2025 has brought with it a sharp pivot back to fossil fuel-centered energy policies and a rapid unraveling of many clean energy initiatives introduced during the Biden administration. Citing high energy prices and growing reliance on foreign imports, Trump declared an energy crisis shortly after taking office. Framing energy production as both an economic imperative and a national security issue, his administration has prioritized deregulation and fossil fuel expansion as cornerstones of its agenda.

One of the first acts of his second term was to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement for the second time.

This move underscored his administration’s rejection of international climate commitments in favor of ramping up domestic production of oil, gas, and coal. To that end, Trump issued executive orders aimed at sunsetting existing environmental and energy regulations, weakening the authority of federal agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and limiting the ability of states to implement their own climate-related policies.

"I believe that President Trump understands as a businessman and an executive how to effectuate the changes that

18

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

are needed", Campos explains about the president's second-term approach. “It's getting us to a position that we're not just energy dominant, but we're energy stable, we're energy fluid, we're energy net exporter, we have a lot of natural gas, we have a lot of natural energy resources. And I think it's exercising our ability as a great nation to push those things forward.”

The rollback of regulations has been swift and extensive, and the administration has been fast-tracking permitting for energy and critical minerals projects on federal lands. Offshore leasing has also expanded, with new blocks opened in the Gulf of Mexico and off the coast of Alaska. Methane emissions reporting requirements, introduced under the previous administration, have been suspended pending further review. In parallel, references to climate change have been removed from multiple federal agency websites, a move reminiscent of similar actions during Trump’s first term.

Another early target was the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), a signature piece of legislation from Biden’s presidency. Through executive action, Trump nullified the IRA’s climate reporting rules and suspended key clean energy incentive programs. While some tax credits and provisions remain in place due to their statutory nature, the regulatory scaffolding around them has been weakened, making it more difficult for developers and investors to navigate the approval process for new renewable energy projects.

Trump’s approach also extends beyond domestic energy production. His administration has sought to expand the global reach of American fossil fuels by promoting the construction of natural gas infrastructure in developing countries.

Working closely with the U.S. Trade and Development Agency, the administration has aligned foreign assistance programs with energy export objectives, positioning U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a cleaner alternative to coal in countries like India, Vietnam, and parts of Africa. The strategy reflects a broader push for global energy dominance, aimed at strengthening U.S. geopolitical leverage and creating new markets for domestic producers.

Back home, Trump has taken aim at state-level environmental regulations. His administration has invoked preemption doctrines and threatened to withhold federal funding from states pursuing indepen-

DONALD TRUMP’S ENERGY POLICIES HAVE LEFT A LASTING IMPRINT ON THE ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND GEOPOLITICAL FABRIC OF THE UNITED STATES.

dent climate goals. One high-profile example is the Justice Department’s lawsuit against California, challenging its vehicle emissions standards on the grounds that they interfere with the federal government’s national energy strategy. The legal battle is likely to shape the balance of power between federal and state governments on environmental policy in the years to come.

These sweeping changes have, unsurprisingly, sparked strong reactions. Fossil fuel producers have largely welcomed the policy shift. Share prices for major oil and gas companies rallied in the first quarter of 2025, and industry groups have praised the administration for reducing permitting delays and regulatory burdens. But environmental organizations, public health advocates, and many state and local officials have raised alarms about the long-term consequences of abandoning climate action. They argue that Trump’s deregulatory push jeopardizes public health through increased emissions, and erodes progress made in building a cleaner energy system.

Whether one views these changes as a necessary correction or a dangerous reversal, what’s clear is that Trump’s second term represents a decisive reassertion of fossil fuels at the center of American energy policy.

The administration’s message is unambiguous: the path to economic strength and global influence, in its view, lies in abundant oil, gas, and coal production—regardless of the environmental trade-offs. For the energy sector, this pivot has created both opportunities and uncertainties. While some industries stand to benefit in the short term, the policy volatility has also raised questions about the longterm stability of U.S. energy strategy and the nation’s commitment to climate leadership on the world stage.

INDUSTRY RESPONSE AND MARKET IMPACTS Donald Trump’s energy policies have left a lasting imprint on the economic, environmental, and geopolitical fabric of the United States. His second term, like his first, has been defined by a decisive tilt toward fossil fuels and a deep rollback of climate-related regulations. Supporters point to the economic upside: increased domestic oil and gas pro-

duction, lower energy prices, and a stronger position for the U.S. in global energy markets.

For the oil and gas sector, especially, Trump’s return has been met with enthusiasm. Share prices for major players like Devon Energy, Occidental Petroleum, and Halliburton rose sharply in early 2025, buoyed by expectations of looser regulations and stronger support for fossil fuel development.

Indeed, upstream investment is rising.

Exploration and production (E&P) firms are expanding their drilling budgets, particularly in prolific shale plays like the Permian Basin and Haynesville. Natural gas producers are riding a wave of optimism as liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports surge. New infrastructure projects—like the Golden Pass and Plaquemines LNG Phase 2 terminals—are moving forward, promising to further solidify the U.S. position as a top global LNG supplier. At home, natural gas continues to play a central role as utilities turn to it as a reliable baseload replacement for retiring coal plants, echoing the administration’s emphasis on energy reliability and national security.

This renewed momentum in fossil fuels stands in stark contrast to the situation in the renewable energy sector. Clean energy companies that thrived under the Biden administration are now facing headwinds. Projects that relied heavily on tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) are encountering financing delays, and several large-scale solar installations in the Southwest have been paused. The uncertainty surrounding federal support has taken a toll on investor confidence. Battery storage and offshore wind projects, both of which saw strong growth under Biden, are also slowing as policy incentives are scaled back or challenged.

Employment trends reflect this shift. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, fossil fuel jobs—especially in oil and gas extraction—rebounded in early 2025, adding 28,000 positions in the first quarter alone. This marked the strongest quarterly gain for the sector in five years. Meanwhile, solar employment dropped by 8%, largely due to stalled developments and uncertainty around federal tax incentives. Private capital is following the same pattern: EnCap Investments, a prominent private equity firm, recently launched a $1.5 billion fund focused exclusively on unconventional oil plays, signaling renewed investor interest in shale at the expense of emerging clean technologies.

At the state level, the response to Trump’s policies has largely broken along partisan lines. In energy-rich Republican states like

Texas and North Dakota, leaders are embracing deregulation, fast-tracking drilling permits, and expanding well sites. These states view Trump’s policies as a green light to double down on fossil fuels. In contrast, blue states such as California and New York remain committed to ambitious climate goals. Both states have filed legal challenges against federal regulatory rollbacks and continue to pursue aggressive targets for clean energy deployment, electric vehicle adoption, and building decarbonization.

Pennsylvania presents a more nuanced case. As a major natural gas producer with a Democratic governor, the state is walking a tightrope. Governor Josh Shapiro has supported initiatives like carbon pricing but also defended natural gas as critical to the state’s economy and energy reliability. This balancing act underscores the regional complexities of energy policy in a politically divided nation.

The resulting patchwork of federal and state policies is fueling a wave of legal disputes. At least six lawsuits are currently underway involving state attorneys general challenging Trump administration actions at agencies like the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency. These legal battles reflect broader tensions over federalism and the role states should play in shaping climate and energy strategies.

On the global stage, Trump’s energy diplomacy has emphasized the use of U.S. LNG exports as a strategic tool. During his first term, American LNG exports to Europe and Asia quadrupled, helping position the U.S. as the world’s top LNG exporter by 2023. That trend continues in his second term, with the administration actively pursuing energy trade agreements with countries like Poland and India. These deals are designed to support allied nations’ energy security while expanding markets for U.S. gas producers.

But the policy whiplash between the Biden and Trump administrations has created unease among international partners. European allies have expressed concern about the reliability of U.S. commitments on climate and energy cooperation. At COP29, several European Union ministers openly criticized the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, citing it as a setback for global climate coordination. Some countries argue that American energy policy is subject to abrupt reversals with each election cycle, and that has undermined confidence in the U.S. as a stable energy partner.

Meanwhile, Trump has revived talks with major oil-producing nations such as Saudi

SHALEMAG.COM

19

IN SUM, TRUMP’S ENERGY POLICIES HAVE PROVIDED A BOOST TO TRADITIONAL FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRIES, CATALYZED PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN OIL AND GAS, AND RESHAPED THE GLOBAL ENERGY DIALOGUE.

20

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

THE CONTRAST BETWEEN TRUMP’S ENERGY PHILOSOPHY AND THAT OF THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION UNDERSCORES THE BROADER STRUGGLE OVER THE NATION’S ENERGY DIRECTION.

Arabia and Russia, aiming to coordinate production levels to stabilize global oil prices.

These efforts echo the controversial 2020 OPEC+ deal that helped rescue U.S. shale producers during a market collapse. While such agreements may provide short-term price stability, they also raise questions about long-term energy independence and geopolitical alignment.

In sum, Trump’s energy policies have provided a boost to traditional fossil fuel industries, catalyzed private investment in oil and gas, and reshaped the global energy dialogue. The lasting impact of these shifts will depend not just on short-term production metrics or stock prices, but on how the nation balances economic priorities with environmental responsibility and international credibility in the years to come.

CONCLUSION: A DIVIDED PATH FORWARD Donald Trump’s energy legacy is defined by an unflinching embrace of fossil fuels, a deregulatory agenda, and a strong preference for energy independence framed through the lens of economic nationalism.

Across two non-consecutive terms, Trump has consistently prioritized oil, gas, and coal production, framing these industries as the backbone of American prosperity and security. His administrations have actively dismantled regulations that were seen as obstacles to fossil fuel development, fast-tracked permits for infrastructure projects, and withdrawn from international climate agreements to avoid what he viewed as constraints on U.S. competitiveness.

These policies delivered tangible benefits for traditional energy producers, especially those in the shale sector, which operates on tight margins and values regulatory certainty.

In the near term, Trump’s approach contributed to lower energy prices, job creation in fos-

sil fuel regions, and a surge in energy exports that bolstered U.S. leverage in global markets.

"The policies and the directions that we got came from a very caring standpoint," Campos reflects. "It was caring about America. It was wanting America to be in the best position possible. Sometimes people think America first sounds self-serving or selfish. It's not, it's about making sure that we can take care of ourselves before we can effectively take care of others."

However, this strategy has come at a cost. The rollback of clean energy incentives and environmental protections has sparked concern among climate advocates, international allies, and even within segments of the energy industry itself. While traditional oil and gas producers have welcomed the return to deregulation, emerging clean technology firms face renewed uncertainty.

Delays in renewable project approvals, the pause or reversal of tax credits, and diminished support for electrification initiatives have led to a noticeable cooling in the momentum of the U.S. energy transition.

The contrast between Trump’s energy philosophy and that of the Biden administration underscores the broader struggle over the nation’s energy direction. Biden’s push for renewables, climate commitments, and decarbonization initiatives represented a stark pivot from Trump’s fossil fuel-centric playbook. With Trump now back in office, many of Biden’s policies are being reversed, reigniting a fierce debate about the balance between economic growth, energy security, and environmental responsibility.

Trump’s current push for energy abundance reflects a belief that the U.S. should fully exploit its natural resources to remain globally competitive and domestically self-reliant. This vision resonates with many in the traditional energy sector, particularly in regions that depend on fossil fuel jobs and revenues. Yet critics argue that it risks leaving the U.S. behind as other nations push aggressively toward decarbonization and renewable innovation.

As the global energy landscape evolves— driven by shifting consumer demand, technological advancements, and increasing climate

pressures—the future of Trump’s energy agenda remains uncertain. Will it usher in a lasting resurgence of fossil fuel dominance, or will it prove to be a temporary high-water mark before market forces and environmental imperatives shift the tide once again?

Ultimately, Trump’s energy legacy will be debated for years to come. Supporters will point to economic revitalization and energy security. Detractors will highlight missed opportunities in climate leadership and clean technology. The long-term implications will depend on how U.S. policy adapts to changing global dynamics, how investors respond to regulatory signals, and how voters weigh economic pragmatism against environmental priorities. In that sense, Trump’s energy agenda is not just a chapter in political history—it’s a live question about the kind of energy future America will pursue.

About the author: Robert Rapier is a chemical engineer in the energy industry and Editor-inChief of Shale Magazine.

Robert has 25 years of international engineering experience in the chemicals, oil and gas, and renewable energy industries and holds several patents related to his work. He has worked in the areas of oil refining, oil production, synthetic fuels, biomass to energy, and alcohol production. He is author of multiple newsletters for Investing Daily and of the book Power Plays. Robert has appeared on 60 Minutes, The History Channel, CNBC, Business News Network, CBC, and PBS. His energy-themed articles have appeared in numerous media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, and The Economist.

SHALEMAG.COM

21

INDUSTRY

Energy Sector Shines as Markets Post First Quarterly Decline Since 2023 By: Robert Rapier

Concerns over a slowing U.S. economy defined the quarter, with GDP growth showing signs of deceleration despite remaining in positive territory. Tepid consumer spending—especially in discretionary categories—highlighted increasing caution among households as they grappled with higher borrowing costs, persistent inflation, and diminishing pandemic-era savings. Businesses also encountered challenges from an uncertain global trade landscape, as prolonged tariff disputes with major trading partners in Asia and Europe threatened to disrupt supply chains and dampened international demand.

22

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

The volatility in commodity markets added another layer of complexity.

Fluctuating oil prices, driven by supply constraints and geopolitical developments, kept inflationary pressures alive. However, these same dynamics played favorably for energy companies, which benefited from strong earnings tied to elevated commodity prices. Investors flocked to energy stocks as they looked for stability, recognizing the sector’s ability to thrive under inflationary conditions.

Central banks maintained their hawkish stance throughout the quarter, with elevated interest rates placing additional pressure on equity valuations. Growth-oriented sectors like technology were hit hardest, as interest rates reduced the attractiveness of their long-term cash flows. High-profile tech players involved in AI, cloud computing, and semiconductors saw notable declines, signaling a significant shift away from speculative investments.

Energy Sector: Swimming Against the Tide The energy sector was the standout performer in Q1, delivering a total return of 9.9%. The sector’s ability to leverage strong pricing power and operational efficiency helped mitigate broader economic risks.

Note that all returns discussed below are total returns, which include the impact of dividend payments.

According to data provider FactSet, integrated supermajors were by far the best-performing segment of the energy sector in Q1, gaining an average of 16.5%.

Every integrated supermajor gained double digits in Q1, led by TotalEnergies SE, which rose 20.0%. Shell wasn’t far behind with a

PHOTOAVENTURE/DEPOSIT PHOTOS

T

he first quarter of 2025 ended on a challenging note for the financial markets, as the S&P 500 posted a 4.6% decline—its first quarterly loss since Q3 2023. The Dow and Nasdaq also declined in Q1. Macroeconomic and geopolitical factors weighed heavily on investor sentiment, leading to widespread equity sell-offs and significant sector rotations.

While many sectors faced headwinds, energy stocks emerged as a rare bright spot, delivering resilient performance and reinforcing their reputation as a defensive play during market volatility.

Healthcare, utilities, and consumer staples also performed well, attracting defensive-minded investors seeking refuge amid uncertainty.

The energy sector was the standout performer in Q1, delivering a total return of 9.9%. The sector’s ability to leverage strong pricing power and operational efficiency helped mitigate broader economic risks. gain of 18.2%, with Chevron in 3rd place with a 16.8% quarterly gain.

Midstream companies had very uneven performance in Q1. Although the average midstream had a total return of 5.1% in Q1, performance ranged from a 57.6% return for Genesis Energy, L.P. to a 29.9% decline for Dynagas LNG Partners. However, of the 39 companies FactSet classifies as “midstream”, 26 reported positive returns for the quarter.

In contrast, upstream companies—pure oil and gas producers—recorded an average decline of 0.8%. Of the 46 companies classified as “upstream” by FactSet, 25 managed positive returns. Colombian producer Ecopetrol SA led all upstream companies in Q1 with a 31.8% gain. ConocoPhillips, the largest of the pure oil and gas producers, gained 6.8% for the quarter.

The refining segment had a good quarter, with the “Big Three” refiners—Marathon Petroleum, Valero, and Phillips 66—posting an average gain of 7.7%. Phillips 66 led with a quarterly gain of 9.4%, followed by Valer (+8.6%) and Marathon (+5.0%).

Looking Ahead Looking ahead, the remainder of 2025 will be defined by persistent economic and geopolitical challenges. While the slowdown in GDP growth and cautious consumer spending may weigh on investor sentiment, stabilization in commodity prices could provide relief for energy and related sectors.

The energy sector, in particular, is poised to maintain its momentum, supported by strong earnings, supply constraints, and ongoing inflationary pressures. However, sectors such as technology may continue to face headwinds if central banks sustain their hawkish policies, limiting capital flows and compressing valuations. Geopolitical developments and global trade policies will also remain pivotal factors, shaping market dynamics and driving sector rotations.

For investors, a focus on diversification, resilience, and an eye toward defensive plays could prove crucial as the year unfolds.

About the author: Robert Rapier is a chemical engineer in the energy industry and Editor-in-Chief of Shale Magazine. Robert has 25 years of international engineering experience in the chemicals, oil and gas, and renewable energy industries and holds several patents related to his work. He has worked in the areas of oil refining, oil production, synthetic fuels, biomass to energy, and alcohol production. He is author of multiple newsletters for Investing Daily and of the book Power Plays. Robert has appeared on 60 Minutes, The History Channel, CNBC, Business News Network, CBC, and PBS. His energy-themed articles have appeared in numerous media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, and The Economist.

SHALEMAG.COM

23

INDUSTRY

Is the U.S. Finally Moving Away from Coal?

By: Felicity Bradstock

Coal Plant Retirements Hundreds of U.S. coal plants have been retired in recent decades, as the country expands its gas and renewable energy sectors. More than half of the

24

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

remaining coal facilities in the U.S. are slated for retirement.

In February, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reported that the U.S. plans to retire 12.3 gigawatts (GW) of capacity in 2025, marking an increase in retirements of 65% compared to 2024.

Last year, just 7.5 GW was retired from the U.S. grid.

Coal-generating capacity will contribute around 66% of retirements, while natural gas will account for 21%. Electric generators plan to retire 8.1 GW of coal-fired capacity in 2025, or around 4.7% of the total operational U.S. coal fleet. This is a significant increase in coal retirements, from just 4 GW in 2024.

The largest U.S. coal plant scheduled for retirement is the 1,800-megawatt (MW) Intermountain Power Project in Utah. The 1,331 MW J H Campbell plant in Michigan and 1,273 MW Brandon Shores facility in Maryland are also expected to be retired.

The U.S. has long Depended on Coal While several plants are expected to be retired this year, as the U.S. shifts its dependence

While the U.K. and several European countries have grown much less reliant on coal, other countries, including several Asian states as well as the U.S., continue to depend heavily on coal. to oil, gas and renewable energy sources, the transition away from coal has not been easy.

Coal is generally viewed as the “dirtiest fossil fuel”. Burning coal continues to account for 41% of global carbon dioxide emissions. However, it is not just CO2 that we need to be concerned about, as coal mines are a major source of methane. During its first 20 years in the atmosphere, the warming impact of methane is

over 80 times that of CO2.

Fossil fuels contribute between 31 to 42% of methane emissions attributable to human activity, and coal mines account for nearly a third of this, according to the IEA. Estimates from the group Global Energy Monitor suggest that methane emissions from coal mines could total as much as 56 million metric tons a year.

As coal is generally regarded as far more harmful to human health and the environment than

FOTO-VDWDEPOSITPHOTOS

A

fter depending heavily on coal for power for decades, the United States may finally be leaving coal in the past, as more oil, natural gas and renewable energy capacity comes online. International organizations, such as the International Energy Agency (IEA) have long criticized the world’s addiction to coal, which is considered the dirtiest fossil fuel. Pressure has been mounting to shift from coal to other, less-polluting fossil fuels or renewable alternatives, but some countries have been more successful in this transition than others.

While the U.K. and several European countries have grown much less reliant on coal, other countries, including several Asian states as well as the U.S., continue to depend heavily on coal. However, as many governments support a global green transition, the movement away from coal may finally be happening.

production for their economies.

This has led several to look to incorporate carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology into operations, rather than shift to alternative energy sources.

In January, at the World Economic Forum’s annual gathering in Davos, Switzerland, President Trump said “good, clean coal” could be used to power data centers, as demand grows. This suggests that although the U.S. is undergoing a transition away from coal, the growing demand for power to support the rollout of complex technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), could lead utilities to delay or cancel scheduled coal plant retirements.

other energy sources, such as natural gas and renewable energy sources, many governments have sought to transition away from a reliance on coal in recent years.

Despite the mounting pressure to reduce dependence on coal, U.S. utilities have extended the life of almost one-third of coal units with scheduled retirement dates, either by delaying or cancelling their closure. While some states have been able to shift towards alternative energy

sources, others, such as Wyoming – the largest coal-producing state – continue to depend heavily on coal plants for their revenue.

Wyoming is now the country’s third-largest net energy supplier, after Texas (oil) and Pennsylvania (gas). It is no wonder, therefore, that Wyoming, North Dakota, Kentucky, and West Virginia have all signed legislation aimed at making it more difficult to close coal plants.

Even though coal production

is not generally considered economically competitive, considering the low costs of producing natural gas and other clean energy alternatives, several states depend heavily on coal

A Shift to Alternative Energy Sources Nevertheless, experts suggest that there is nowhere to go but down when it comes to coal power generation. The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) forecasts that operating coal capacity will continue to decline for the rest of the decade, reaching around 115,000 MW of remaining operational power in 2030. This would mean that 63.8% of the peak total – 203,000 MW of coalfired capacity – is expected to have been closed by this date.

The IEEFA expects most if not all the remaining 2030 capacity to be retired by 2040, as the existing plants become outdated and more alternative energy comes online. External pressure to transition away from coal to help meet climate pledges will likely play a role in this transition, as will the cost of keeping coal plants running compared to powering cleaner alternatives.

About the author: Felicity Bradstock is a freelance writer specializing in Energy and Industry. She has a Master’s in International Development from the University of Birmingham, UK, and is now based in Mexico City.

SHALEMAG.COM

25

INDUSTRY

The Energy Surge Behind the AI Boom By: Robert Rapier

The AI Boom’s Hidden Cost: Electricity The rise of AI-powered tools—especially those using large language models and machine learning—has created unprecedented demand for computing power. These complex models require massive amounts of electricity not just during training, but continuously during deployment (or inference) as well.

This isn’t just about a few extra servers. AI data centers are power-hungry operations, often requiring the energy equivalent of a small city. Some estimates suggest that U.S. data centers could consume more electricity by 2030 than entire countries such as Japan or Turkey.

AI isn’t the only driver. The ongoing electrification of vehicles, heating systems, and industrial processes is also pushing grid demand to levels not seen in a generation. Together, these trends are accelerating what many experts are calling a new era for American energy.

The Utilities Are Feeling the Strain From Texas to Northern Virginia, electric utilities are scrambling to adapt. Regions that already host dense clusters of data centers—like Virginia’s so-called “Data Center Alley”—are hitting capacity limits.

In Texas and the Midwest, utility CEOs are sounding alarms over the pace and scale of new AI-related load requests.

26

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

The challenges are both technical and political. Meeting these new demands often requires massive upgrades to transmission infrastructure—projects that can take five to ten years to permit and build. Meanwhile, delays frustrate developers and risk driving AI firms to seek power from independent suppliers or alternative locations.

Utilities are being forced to rethink everything: where and how they build generation, how they plan grid expansions, and how to regulate and forecast demand. The traditional demand modeling tools that rely on historical trends are no longer sufficient in this brave new world.

Not All Power Is Created Equal While renewables like wind and solar will play an important role in the energy future, they alone cannot power a 24/7 AI infrastructure. These sources are intermittent and cannot always match real-time demand, especially when splitsecond latency and uptime are critical.

That’s why natural gas and nuclear are regaining prominence in grid planning.

Several utilities have fast-tracked proposals for new natural gas peaker plants. Others are evaluating small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) as potential solutions for delivering steady, low-carbon baseload power.

AI’s power requirements could also increase support for energy storage solutions and grid-balancing technologies. However, these systems remain expensive and are still in the early stages of widespread deployment.

What This Means for Investors For investors, this is a seismic shift. For decades, electric utilities were considered slow-growth, defensive investments. Now, the sector is experiencing a renaissance.

Grid operators, gas suppliers, and infrastructure developers stand to benefit as capital spending surges. Elec-

tricity producers—particularly those operating in competitive markets where prices can spike with demand—may see dramatic increases in earnings.

This is also reshaping the outlook for infrastructure-focused investors. Pipelines, transmission companies, and storage providers are emerging as critical enablers of the AI revolution. Likewise, energy-related REITs and midstream partnerships may experience tailwinds as capital pours into grid expansion.

That said, the investment story isn’t without risk. Regulatory hurdles, permitting challenges, and community opposition to new infrastructure could delay projects. Companies that fail to adapt may be left behind.

From Regulated to Unregulated: The Role of Utility Structure It’s also important to understand the difference between regulated and unregulated utilities. Regulated utilities—typically the local monopolies delivering power to your home—earn fixed returns set by state regulators. These companies offer predictable, steady dividends and are popular with income investors.

In contrast, unregulated (or competitive) utilities sell electricity into wholesale markets, where prices fluctuate based on supply and demand. These companies are more exposed to market volatility—but also stand to benefit the most from surging demand and price spikes.

In this new environment, unregulated utilities may be the biggest winners. In fact, some of the best performers in the S&P 500 over the past two years are unregulated utilities like NRG Energy and Vistra. Their ability to capture rising electricity prices without regulatory constraints positions them for potentially outsized gains. But regulated utilities will still benefit from increased demand, albeit with more muted returns.

KOSSSMOSSSDEPOSIT PHOTOS

F

or decades, U.S. electricity demand grew at a predictable, modest pace. Utilities could plan around gradual increases driven by population growth and economic activity. But that era is over. A dramatic shift is underway, one that could define the next decade of energy infrastructure—and investment opportunity.

At the heart of this transformation lies the exponential growth of artificial intelligence (AI) and its insatiable appetite for electricity.

The Data Center Explosion Just how fast is AI pushing demand?

Forecasts vary, but all agree on the direction: steeply upward, with some projecting the kind of growth that hasn’t been seen since the early days of industrial electrification.

To put this in perspective, data centers are already among the largest industrial power consumers in the U.S.—and their footprint is expected to double or even triple by the end of the decade. In some regions, AI-related demand is already outpacing available capacity, forcing companies to seek power directly from private producers or delay projects until new infrastructure comes online.

Policy, Planning, and Grid Resilience The implications go beyond Wall Street.

State regulators are struggling to revise outdated Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs) to account for this surge in demand.

Policymakers face pressure to streamline permitting for generation and transmission projects while balancing environmental concerns and grid reliability.

Meanwhile, resilience is becoming a front-and-center issue. With extreme weather events on the rise and cyber threats looming, ensuring the AI-driven grid is reliable and secure is no small task.

Conclusion: AI May Be Virtual, But Its Energy Demands Are Very Real Artificial intelligence may seem like a virtual revolution, unfolding in data centers and software code. But its impact on the physical world—particularly the energy grid—is tangible and immense.

For investors, the message is clear: the AI story is no longer just about chipmakers and software developers. It’s about the concrete, steel, and copper behind the servers. It’s about the utilities and energy companies keeping the lights—and the GPUs—on.

As the world becomes more reliant on artificial intelligence, electricity will become one of the most critical enablers of innovation. Those who understand this dynamic— and position their portfolios accordingly—will be best prepared for what comes next.

About the author: Robert Rapier is a chemical engineer in the energy industry and Editor-inChief of Shale Magazine.

Robert has 25 years of international engineering experience in the chemicals, oil and gas, and renewable energy industries and holds several patents related to his work. He has worked in the areas of oil refining, oil production, synthetic fuels, biomass to energy, and alcohol production. He is author of multiple newsletters for Investing Daily and of the book Power Plays. Robert has appeared on 60 Minutes, The History Channel, CNBC, Business News Network, CBC, and PBS. His energy-themed articles have appeared in numerous media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, and The Economist.

SHALEMAG.COM

27

INDUSTRY

U.S. Biofuels Growth Potential Under Threat By: Felicity Bradstock

The U.S. Biofuels Market Biofuels are liquid fuels and blending components produced using biomass materials known as feedstocks, such as waste crops and algae. Most biofuels are used as transportation fuels, but they may also be used for heating and electricity generation. They are viewed as a cleaner alternative to fossil fuels, emitting lower levels of greenhouse gases when burned.

Some of the most common biofuels in the U.S. include: • Ethanol—an alcohol fuel blended with petroleum gasoline for vehicles; accounted for the largest share of U.S. biofuel production (82%) and of consumption (75%) in 2022 • Biodiesel—a biofuel usually blended with petroleum diesel for consumption; accounted for the second-largest share of U.S. biofuel production (9%) and of consumption (9%) in 2022

28

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

• Renewable diesel—a fuel chemically similar to petroleum diesel fuel used as a drop-in fuel or a petroleum diesel blend; percentage share of total U.S. biofuel production was about 8% and for consumption about 9% in 2022 • Other biofuels—include renewable heating oil, renewable jet fuel (sustainable aviation fuel, alternative jet fuel, and biojet), renewable naphtha, renewable gasoline, and other emerging biofuels that are in various stages of development and commercialization In 2022, approximately 18.7 billion gallons of biofuels were produced in the United States and about 17.6 billion gallons were consumed. The U.S. exported around 1 billion gallons of biofuels in 2022. Fuel ethanol was the most exported form of biofuel.

The U.S. biofuels market value stood at around $64 billion in 2024 and is expected to reach around $106 billion by 2034, growing at a CAGR of 5.17%.

U.S. Biofuel Groups Call for Political Support In February, oil and biofuel groups – including the American Petroleum Institute and the Renewable Fuels Association and Growth Energy – wrote a joint letter calling on the Trump administration to increase the volume of renewable fuels that must be blended into the U.S. fuel mix starting in 2026. The collaboration between the two industries is unusual as they typically have not agreed on the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program.

Later that month, the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture Winter Policy Conference (NASDA) members voted to amend the group’s biofuels policies to

boost support for U.S.-produced biofuels.

The policy change is expected to help increase biofuel production and eliminate trade barriers for the export of biofuels.

“NASDA recognizes the importance biofuels play in the future of agricultural production, energy independence and our economy,” NASDA’s CEO Ted McKinney said. “State agriculture departments see greater demand for biofuels as a win-win for their mission to enhance agricultural production and strengthen rural economies across the nation.”

Biofuels Funding and Challenges In January, before President Joe Biden left office, the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced $6 million in financing for three projects to advance biofuel development. Funding comes from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The projects will support research to improve performance and reduce costs of high-impact biofuel production tech-

SCHARFSINNE/DEPOSIT PHOTOS

T

here is significant potential for growth in the U.S. biofuels market, as hard-to-abate industries look for cleaner fuel alternatives.

The aviation sector is driving sectoral growth, with many major airlines investing heavily in the production of sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs).

Agriculture is also supporting biofuels growth through the development of greener fertilizers, while heavy industry is expected to invest more in the development of clean fuels to support decarbonization efforts in the coming years. However, the current uncertainty surrounding the clean energy industry, under the Donald Trump administration, could hinder the expansion of the biofuels sector.

nologies; scale up production systems with industry; and support the U.S. bioeconomy.

They also support the goals of the DoE’s Synthetic Aviation Fuel (SAF) Grand Challenge.

However, since President Trump came into power in January, the biofuels sector has faced greater uncertainty over its role in the U.S. energy industry. In response, several U.S. and Canadian biofuel companies have reduced production to restrict potential losses due to the uncertain policy environment.

The looming U.S. trade war with Canada puts several sectors under threat for fear of price hikes related to the imposition of tariffs from both sides of the border. In addition, some fear that the existing U.S. biofuel subsidy programs, including a Biden administration tax credit that states how much producers pay for the oils and fats they make into biofuel, will be discontinued.

If the sector contracts, it could harm rural communities and decelerate decarbonization efforts. The Director of Energy at Capstone LLC in Houston Paul Niznik explained, “If this uncertainty drags on, which is what we expect, the biodiesel and renewable diesel industry will contract but not disap-

pear. It will shrink, painfully at times.”

The U.S. biofuels industry has expanded rapidly in recent years in response to the growing demand for clean fuels to help decarbonize hard-to-abate industries. This growth was expected to continue over the next decade, supported by federal financial incentives. However, the current uncertainty around the Trump administration’s clean energy policies and the potential imposition of tariffs on foreign goods could result in a mid-term contraction of the biofuels industry.

About the author: Felicity Bradstock is a freelance writer specializing in Energy and Industry. She has a Master’s in International Development from the University of Birmingham, UK, and is now based in Mexico City.

Biofuels are liquid fuels and blending components produced using biomass materials known as feedstocks, such as waste crops and algae.

SHALEMAG.COM

29

INDUSTRY

Breaking Records: How Natural Gas is Shaping the Global Energy Mix By: Robert Rapier

T

Record-Breaking Natural Gas Consumption and Production According to the latest EIA data, natural gas production remains at record levels despite relatively low levels of new drilling activity. This resilience has contributed to stable supply levels, ensuring that the market remains well-supplied even as demand reaches new highs.

One major factor in this record consumption is the increasing role of natural gas in power generation (see How AI Data Centers Are Reshaping America’s Electric Grid), industrial applications, and exports. The expansion of LNG facilities, such as the newly commissioned Plaquemines LNG project, has further strengthened demand, while colder-than-expected weather patterns have also driven up usage.

However, despite these bullish factors, high natural gas prices have started to displace gas-fired power generation in favor of coal, reversing some progress in the transition to cleaner energy sources.

30

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

Enverus Intelligence Research (EIR) Outlook: Challenges and Opportunities While natural gas demand remains strong, Enverus Intelligence Research (EIR) has highlighted a mixed outlook for prices. EIR recently upgraded its NYMEX Henry Hub gas price forecast for the rest of 2025, citing the rapid expansion of LNG exports and favorable weather conditions. However, the firm expects prices to average around $3.90/MMBtu, approximately 30 cents below the current forward strip, suggesting that record production will continue to keep prices in check.

According to the latest EIA data, natural gas production remains at record levels despite relatively low levels of new drilling activity. This resilience has contributed to stable supply levels, ensuring that the market remains well-supplied even as demand reaches new highs.

DNAUMOIDDEPOSIT PHOTOS

he U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) recently reported that U.S. natural gas consumption set new winter and summer consumption records in 2024, highlighting the growing importance of natural gas in the global energy mix.

This surge in consumption comes amid record production levels, even as drilling activity remains subdued. The implications of these trends are significant, influencing everything from energy prices to power generation choices.

“High natural gas prices are a headwind to gas-fired generation, to the benefit of coal,” said Al Salazar, director at EIR. This shift raises concerns about the energy transition and the long-term viability of natural gas as a bridge fuel in the move toward decarbonization.

The Broader Market Implications Despite record-breaking consumption and production, natural gas markets are not without challenges. The geopolitical landscape, particularly U.S. trade policies, remains a significant factor affecting investment and market stability. Tariffs on imported materials could raise costs for pipeline construction and LNG export terminals, potentially slowing future supply growth.

At the same time, global energy markets remain volatile due to OPEC’s decision to unwind production cuts and uncertainty surrounding U.S. economic policies. While these factors primarily impact oil prices, they also create ripple effects that influence natural gas markets, investor sentiment, and long-term infrastructure planning.

Looking Ahead As 2025 unfolds, natural gas remains a key player in the evolving energy landscape. Record consumption and production levels indi-

cate strong demand, yet price pressures and competition from coal highlight ongoing market challenges. With strategic investments and accurate forecasting, the industry must navigate these complexities while ensuring reliable and sustainable energy supply for the future.

About the author: Robert Rapier is a chemical engineer in the energy industry and Editor-in-Chief of Shale Magazine. Robert has 25 years of international engineering experience in the chemicals, oil and gas, and renewable energy industries and holds several patents related to his work. He has worked in the areas of oil refining, oil production, synthetic fuels, biomass to energy, and alcohol production. He is author of multiple newsletters for Investing Daily and of the book Power Plays. Robert has appeared on 60 Minutes, The History Channel, CNBC, Business News Network, CBC, and PBS. His energy-themed articles have appeared in numerous media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, and The Economist.

SHALEMAG.COM

31

INDUSTRY

Will Alaska Expand Its Fossil Fuel Operations?

By: Felicity Bradstock

The Biden Administration Approach to Alaska In 2023, the Biden administration approved the controversial Willow Project, a massive drilling project in Alaska, which environmentalists argued was at odds with Biden’s climate pledges.

The former government approved a scaled-down version of ConocoPhillips’ Willow, located in the National Petroleum Reserve (NPR-A) on the North Slope.

ConocoPhillips expects to produce 180,000 bpd of oil from the project.

However, in April 2024, the Biden administration introduced restrictions on new oil and gas leasing in other parts of the state. The restriction was placed on 13 million acres of the NPR-A to help protect wildlife. The move followed several years of discussion over whether it was viable to develop the land for fossil fuel projects in the face of environmental challenges. The region had been relatively untouched until the late 1990s when exploration began.

Then, before leaving office in January this year, Biden introduced new protections on 1.3 million acres in Alaska’s North Slope to restrict further exploration, which took effect immediately. However, at the time, President-elect Donald Trump vowed to grant broad access to fossil fuel

32

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

companies to drill on federal land.

Alaska’s oil production fell from around 2 million bpd in 1988 to 426,000 bpd in 2023, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Currently, just two major projects are under development, ConocoPhillips’s $8 billion Willow and Santos’ Pikka, which are expected to increase the state’s output to 650,000 bpd.

Trump’s Executive Orders Could Drive Fossil Fuel Development in Alaska When President Trump came to office in January, he signed a flurry of executive orders in support of greater fossil fuel development. “We will drill, baby, drill,” the president said in his inaugural address. He also overturned two of the Biden administration’s restrictions on oil and gas exploration. The first was a restriction on several U.S. coasts from future oil and gas drilling, including the entire U.S. East Coast, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, parts of the Pacific coast, and portions of Alaska’s Bering Sea. The second was the limit on almost 3 million acres of the Arctic Ocean in the NPR-A, which Biden introduced when approving Willow in 2023.

Trump aims to expedite the permitting and leasing of energy projects in Alaska, undo resource development

restrictions on state and federal lands, overturn the cancellation of leases within the ANWR, and prioritize the development of LNG. However, many oil majors remain wary about developing new projects in Alaska due to the risk of policy changes under future governments, as well as local opposition and the potential for long delays.

Interior Department Reopens Millions of Acres in Alaska In March, The Interior Department announced plans to expand fossil fuel drilling opportunities in the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the neighboring NPR-A. The Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said he expected the move to boost interest in Alaska’s “abundant and largely untapped resources.”

“For far too long, the federal government has created too many barriers to capitalizing on the state’s energy potential,” Burgum said in a statement.

“Interior is committed to recognizing the central role the State of Alaska plays in meeting our nation’s energy needs while providing tremendous economic opportunity for Alaskans.”

Approximately 82% of the available land in the NPR-A will be made available to leasing and energy development, largely reversing the Biden-era protections on the region. However, a 1976 law states that the Interior Department must protect certain parts of the reserve with wildlife or with scenic or historical value when leasing land for new projects.

Potential New LNG Connection Between Alaska and Asia The removal of certain restrictions on Alaskan oil and gas projects, as well as mounting pressure from

CBOSWELL/DEPOSIT PHOTOS

It has appeared increasingly complicated to develop new oil and gas projects in Alaska in recent years due to concerns over the environmental implications of exploration activities in the region and opposition from both environmentalists and indigenous communities. The former Biden administration placed several limits on oil and gas operations in Alaska, restricting the leasing of land and limiting development. Now, under President Donald Trump, there is a revived interest in Alaskan oil and gas, so will the state attract new investment in fossil fuels?

Currently, just two major projects are under development, ConocoPhillips’s $8 billion Willow and Santos’ Pikka, which are expected to increase the state’s output to 650,000 bpd.

the Trump administration for countries to purchase more U.S.-produced liquified natural gas (LNG) to avoid tariffs, is spurring greater interest in the region.

In March, Trump announced that Japan and South Korea plan to work with the United States to develop a $44 billion LNG export project. The project “Alaska L.N.G.” would include the construction of an 800-mile pipeline from fields north of the Arctic Circle to southern Alaska for gas to be shipped to Asia. The project has been under discussion for several years, but the complexities involved in developing such a project have led it to be tabled until now.

It is still uncertain whether the LNG export project will go ahead, but recent progress in discussions demonstrates the renewed interest in the region. Nevertheless, developing new oil and gas projects in Alaska will be an uphill battle, as many environmentalists and local communities continue to oppose such development. In addition, many oil and gas companies have shifted their operations to more sustainable regions, with the promise of “low-carbon” oil, to ensure their longevity. By contrast, commencing new exploration activities in Alaska could be risky due to potential policy changes within just a few years under a new government.

About the author: Felicity Bradstock is a freelance writer specializing in Energy and Industry. She has a Master’s in International Development from the University of Birmingham, UK, and is now based in Mexico City.

SHALEMAG.COM

33

INDUSTRY

U.S. Solar and Battery Storage Boom in 2025

S

olar power and battery storage are expected to lead new U.S. generating capacity additions in 2025, according to the Energy Information Organization (EIA).

The EIA expects 63 gigawatts (GW) of new utility-scale electric-generating capacity to be added to the U.S. grid in 2025. This is 30% higher than the 48.6 GW of capacity added in 2024, the largest capacity installation year since 2002. Solar and battery storage are expected to contribute 81% of this year’s capacity increase.

Solar Additions In 2024, generators added a record 30 GW of utilityscale solar power to the U.S. transmissions network,

34

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

contributing 61% of capacity additions. The EIA expects this trend to continue in 2025, with the addition of 32.5 GW of new utility-scale solar capacity.

Texas and California are expected to account for nearly half of these additions, with 11.6 GW and 2.9 GW to be added, respectively. Meanwhile, Indiana, Arizona, Michigan, Florida, and New York are each expected to add over 1 GW of new solar capacity in 2025, contributing around 7.8 GW in total.

In addition to the development of new solar farms, the U.S. has also dramatically expanded its solar manufacturing sector. In February, the country’s solar module manufacturing capacity surpassed 50 GW. Since the introduction of the Inflation Reduction Act

RCLASSENLAYOUTS/DEPOSIT PHOTOS

By: Felicity Bradstock

ing that the Trump administration is threatening tariffs on the import of various products from Canada, Mexico, China, and other countries.

(IRA), the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the CHIPS Act, U.S. solar module manufacturing has grown five-fold, making the U.S. the third-largest solar module producer in the world, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association.

During the last two years, solar manufacturers have announced $36 billion in investments in the sector, supporting the creation of an anticipated 44,000 manufacturing jobs. This investment is expected to increase the total solar module manufacturing capacity to 56 GW, which is enough to meet the U.S. solar project pipeline demand. This is key consider-

Battery Storage Additions U.S. battery storage additions could reach record levels this year, with 18.2 GW of utilityscale battery storage expected to be added to the grid, higher than the record figure of 10.3 GW added in 2024. This marks a significant increase from the 4 megawatts (MW) added to the grid in 2010. By July 2024, there was over 20.7 GW of battery energy storage in the U.S. Battery storage helps to balance supply and demand and improve grid stability. It is expected to play a leading role in the future of the world’s energy as the U.S. and other countries worldwide increase their renewable energy capacity. Batteries will be used to store excess electricity from renewable energy projects, such as wind and solar farms, during high production hours. They will store this energy to deliver to consumers during low/no production hours. For example, it will supply electricity from solar projects to the grid at night, when the sun is not shining but the power demand remains high.

While the U.S. battery storage capacity is expected to increase this year, the industry could suffer from the imposition of tariffs on imports by the Trump administration, as the U.S. is still heavily reliant on China for its lithium-ion batteries.

In 2023, the U.S. had 60 GWh of lithiumion battery manufacturing capacity for all applications. However, the demand for batteries for electric vehicles alone exceeded this capacity. In the second quarter of 2024, China contributed 82% of U.S. lithium-ion battery imports, followed by Japan, Hungary, South Korea, and Poland.

President Trump’s introduction of additional 10% tariffs on Chinese goods, on top of the existing tariffs, could have a significant impact on the price of U.S. battery imports.

Other Energy Sources in 2025 The EIA expects 7.7 GW of wind energy capacity to be added to the U.S. grid in 2025, an increase from 5.1 GW in 2024. Texas, Wyoming, and Massachusetts will contribute nearly half of all new wind additions.

Natural gas is expected to contribute 4.4 GW of new grid capacity this year, with Utah, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Tennessee leading these additions.

Meanwhile, the EIA predicts that coal retirements will accelerate, with 6%, or 11 GW, of coal-generating capacity being removed

The EIA expects 63 gigawatts (GW) of new utility-scale electricgenerating capacity to be added to the U.S. grid in 2025. This is 30% higher than the 48.6 GW of capacity added in 2024, the largest capacity installation year since 2002. from the U.S. electricity sector in 2025, and a further 2%, or 4 GW, leaving the grid in 2026.

Despite the uncertainty surrounding the U.S. renewable energy industry at present, solar power and battery storage are expected to contribute a large proportion of the additions to the U.S. grid this year. Wind power will also play a major role in new transmission network additions. However, the introduction of tariffs on the import of goods from China could drive up the cost of batteries, which may contribute to higher spending by utilities and may ultimately drive up consumer costs.

About the author: Felicity Bradstock is a freelance writer specializing in Energy and Industry. She has a Master’s in International Development from the University of Birmingham, UK, and is now based in Mexico City.

SHALEMAG.COM

35

INDUSTRY

EU Imports Record Quantities of U.S. LNG By: Felicity Bradstock

The Shift Away from Russian Gas After Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, the U.S. and EU quickly introduced sanctions on Russian energy, despite Europe’s heavy dependence on Russian oil, gas, and uranium.

The EU sections on Russia’s energy sector include a price cap relating to the maritime transport of Russian oil and petroleum products, and bans on: • Imports from Russia of crude oil, petroleum products and coal • Imports from Russia of liquified petroleum gas (LPG) • Re-exports of Russian liquified natural gas (LNG) in EU facilities

36

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

• Exports to Russia of goods and technologies for the energy industry • The provision of gas storage capacity for Russian nationals • New investments in Russia’s energy and mining sectors • New investments in Russia’s LNG projects Sanctions have been tightened since 2022 as Europe has gradually weaned itself off Russian gas and other energy products.

In January, Russian gas finally stopped being transported to EU states via Ukraine following the expiration of a five-year deal, bringing an end to a decadeslong arrangement. The European Commission said that the EU had diversified its supplies to prepare for the change, although some Eastern European states, such as Slovakia, are expected to experience shortages. Russia continues to transport gas to Turkey and Serbia via the TurkStream pipeline in the Black Sea. Russia contributed around 40% of the EU’s gas imports in 2021, a figure that fell to less than 10% in 2023 following the imposition of sanctions and a shift to other suppliers.

Poland, which was a heavy importer of Russian gas, now

gets its supplies from the U.S., Qatar, and the North Sea. Most EU countries are thought to have access to alternative supplies with the European Commission laying out plans to entirely replace gas transiting through Ukraine in December.

Winter Demand Boost In recent months, U.S. exports of LNG to Europe have risen significantly as cold weather increased demand. Following two consecutive milder winters, Europe is experiencing its first extended cold spell since 2022.

In December, half of the 10.89 million metric tonnes (MT), imported by the EU came from the U.S. Meanwhile, in January, almost nine out of every 10 cargoes leaving the U.S. were destined for Europe, with 7.25 million MT, or 86%, going to Europe, compared to 5.84 million MT, or 69%, in December.

The increased gas demand in Europe has led to reduced inventories. The region now needs to increase its overseas supply for the rest of the cold months, as well as to fill up storage sites for next winter.

FAHRONI./DEPOSIT PHOTOS

T

he U.S. has been exporting larger quantities of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe recently, a trend that is likely to continue. Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and subsequent sanctions on Russian energy, the EU hurried to shift its reliance away from Moscow. Many countries turned to the U.S. to fill the gap and have not looked back since. In recent months, export figures have been driven even higher due to the cold winter temperatures being seen across Europe.

Russia contributed around 40% of the EU’s gas imports in 2021, a figure that fell to less than 10% in 2023 following the imposition of sanctions and a shift to other suppliers.

The U.S. is expected to help fill this gap with its rising production and export capacity, as the world’s largest LNG exporter.

Venture Global’s second facility, Plaquemines LNG, commenced operations in January and Corpus Christi Stage 3 produced its first gas in December. U.S. LNG exports rose to a record high of 8.5 million MT in December, increasing the annual total by 4.5%. Exports are expected to climb by 15% in 2025 thanks to the increase in capacity, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Tariffs Threat The EU has significantly shifted its reliance on gas away from Russia to other markets, principally the U.S. The increase in LNG

production and export capacity from the U.S. reassured Europe and other regions of the world, such as Asia, that it would remain a key trade partner for decades to come. However, in recent weeks, President Trump stated that he is considering the introduction of tariffs on the EU if the bloc does not increase its import of U.S. gas.

On his first day as President, Trump was asked what the EU could do to avoid tariffs, to which he replied: “The one thing they can do quickly is buy our oil and gas.”

The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, previously stated her support for buying more U.S. LNG to shift away from Russia. “Why not replace it by American LNG, which is cheaper for us and

brings down our energy prices?” she said in November. However, recent remarks from Trump may encourage Europe to reconsider as the threat of trade tariffs looms.

In February, Trump hinted that the EU could be next to face tariffs after he introduced (and then temporarily rescinded) 25% levies on Mexican and Canadian goods. When asked whether there was a timeline for introducing EU tariffs, Trump said: “I wouldn’t say there’s a timeline, but it’s going to be pretty soon.”

There is now talk of tariffs on certain goods from both sides, with the EU responding to Trump’s statements with reciprocal tariff plans. This has the potential to change U.S.EU trade relations dramatically in the coming months and years.

The EU has gradually increased its reliance on the U.S. for its gas imports, shifting dependence away from Russia.

This shift was expected to help boost long-term energy trade relations between the two powers, with U.S. LNG exports to Europe increasing significantly over the last year. However, the recent threat of tariffs on the EU by President Trump has made the outlook more uncertain.

About the author: Felicity Bradstock is a freelance writer specializing in Energy and Industry. She has a Master’s in International Development from the University of Birmingham, UK, and is now based in Mexico City.

SHALEMAG.COM

37

38

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

SHALEMAG.COM

39

POLICY

Federal Judge Rules that Biden Administration Wrongfully Cancelled Oil and Gas Leases in Alaska By: Jess Henley

History of ANWR Oil Leases The crux of the case is the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which passed during President Donald Trump's first term in office. The law dictated two lease sales for oil and gas development within the coastal plain of ANWR.

40

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

The massive land area, which spans about 1.56 million acres of biodiverse wilderness, contains significant oil reserves. However, the reserve is also home to an intricate ecosystem that has become one of the most controversial plots of land in the past few decades.

In 1980, Congress avoided placing permanent protection on the land area because of the potential enormous oil reserves it contained. The USGS estimates that there are between 4.3 and 11.8 billion barrels of oil in the coastal plain. In comparison, Kukaruk, Alaska’s second largest oil reserve, contains 2.5 billion barrels.

In 2017, Congress passed the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, which allowed drilling along ANWR’s Coastal plain for the first time in history. In the days just before President Biden took office, the Alaskan Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) secured leases on just under 400,000 Acres in ANWR that included 10-year terms.

However, on January 20th, 2021, the Biden Administration issued an executive

order demanding that the Department of the Interior place a temporary pause on all activities related to the coastal plain oil and gas leasing program. The former president's executive order fulfilled his campaign promises to protect the Arctic Reserve from drilling, suspending the leases pending environmental review. In September 2023, his administration officially canceled them, claiming ecological concerns and the need for further study.

AIDEA sued the federal government, stating that the least cancellations violated the terms set forth in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The agency argued that it was unlawful for an executive order to cancel leases, claiming only a court order, not an executive order, had the authority to nullify leases. A lengthy and arduous court battle ensued, ultimately ruling in favor of the AIDEA. Ruling & Implications Near the end of March, U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Gleason agreed with AIDEA’s arguments, stating that the Interior

FREEPIK.COM

A

federal judge in Alaska ruled that the Biden administration lacked the authority to cancel oil and gas leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) that had been issued during Trump's presidency. The ruling favors the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, which argued that the lease cancellations violated a 2017 law mandating drilling opportunities in ANWR. The decision paves the way for the Trump administration to reinstate the leases, aligning with its broader push for U.S. energy dominance. The Interior Department, now under Trump, has pledged to move quickly to restore the leases, while Alaska officials see the ruling as a major win for the state's economy.

Department failed to follow congressionally mandated procedures for canceling the leases. Gleason, appointed by President Barack Obama, sent the matter back to the Interior Department for further action.

An Interior Department spokesperson told Reuters, "The Department of the Interior is moving quickly to reinstate the wrongfully terminated leases, consistent with President Trump’s order to unleash Alaska’s energy resources and further ensure American energy dominance."

Cori Mills, Alaska’s deputy attorney general, claims the ruling as a “definite victory,” stating, “The state looks forward to working with the current federal administration on fully realizing the vast potential of ANWR to grow Alaska’s economy and help America’s energy independence.”

Opening the Door for Alaskan Drilling Again?

While the ruling does not mean immediate drilling for the coastal plain in ANWR, it does

open the door for future bids on leasing in the area. Under Trump's leadership, the Department of the Interior has been directed to proceed with further action on this issue. Although there's ample support from both energy companies and Alaskan republicans, the vast opposition from environmental groups presents the likelihood of further legal challenges in the future.

Although the possibility seems more positive, thanks to this ruling, AIDEA had little competition when it first won the majority of lease sales in 2021 after all significant oil companies declined to bid.

This may be due to environmental concerns, potential instability of drilling in the area due to opposition, or the financial strain of drilling in the region. However, following Judge Gleason's ruling, there’s likely to be an increase in bids in the near future.

Stay Connected with Shale Magazine Whether you're in the northernmost corner of Alaska or in the heart of Texas,

you can count on Shale Magazine to deliver the timely and reliable information you need to stay in the know. Subscribe to Shale Magazine or listen to the Energy Mixx Radio Show to get the latest insight on energy, investment, and sustainability.

About the author: Jess Henley began his career in client relations for a large manufacturer in Huntsville, Alabama. With several years of leadership under his belt, Jess made the leap to brand communications with Bizwrite, LLC. As a senior copywriter, Jess crafts compelling marketing and PR content with a particular emphasis on global energy markets and professional services.

SHALEMAG.COM

41

POLICY

Who Is U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright?

By: Jess Henley and Tyler Reed

W

ith the appointment of Chris Wright as the new U.S. Secretary of Energy, the energy sector stands at a crossroads.

Wright is leading the charge to herald in a new era marked by American Energy dominance. With multiple decades of leadership experience in the oil, gas, solar, nuclear, and geothermal energy sectors, Wright’s appointment marks a shift towards energy abundance, deregulation, and innovation—a night-and-day contrast from the net-zero emissions policies of previous years.

Secretary Wright was confirmed in a bipartisan vote of 59-38. Seven Democrats and one Independent voted across the aisle to confirm Wright’s cabinet appointment. So, what does this mean for the American energy landscape? What are Secretary Wright's priorities, and how do they align with President Trump's energy agenda? Let’s take a deep dive to get to know the new Secretary of Energy.

Secretary Wight’s Background Secretary Wright graduated from MIT with an undergraduate degree in mechanical engineering and pursued graduate work in electrical engineering at UC Berkeley and MIT. He founded Pinnacle Technologies and served as its CEO from 1992 to 2006. Pinnacle Technologies is responsible for creating the hydraulic fracture mapping industry and helped launch commercial shale gas production in the late 1990s.

Wright was chairman of early shale gas producer Stroud Energy, which was later acquired by Range Resources in 2006. Most recently, Wright served as chairman and CEO of Liberty Energy, expanding shale gas production to include oil as well as natural gas. His efforts include endeavors to broaden shale production technology to ramp up geothermic energy production and helped launch small modular reactors.

Secretary Wright’s background, while centered mainly around oil and gas production, includes a broad scope of energy resources, spanning the gap from nuclear to solar power. As far as resumes go, few candidates could be more qualified, especially given President Trump’s ambitions to pursue American energy dominance through expanded and unfettered oil and gas production. Wright’s

42

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

bipartisan confirmation demonstrates that members on both sides admire his qualifications and competencies.

Key Priorities 1. Prioritizing Energy Growth Over Net-Zero Constraints With his first order directing the Department of Energy to take immediate action to “Unleash American Energy,” Wright has made it clear that he intends to amplify

American energy resources, bringing a much-needed surge to energy production across sectors. However, this represents a pivot from previous priorities of net-zero emissions. Instead of emphasizing lowering global emissions, the new Secretary of Energy production across oil, natural gas, nuclear, coal, thermal energy, and hydropower.

2. Accelerating Technological Innovation in Oil, Gas, and Advanced Energy Sectors Secretary Wright has long been a forerunner of innovative technologies, with a rich history of developing key equipment and methods for radical efficiency and cutting-edge capabilities. He plans to bring new innovations and technologies to create better fossil fuel efficiency, nuclear power facilities, and geothermal drilling.

Additionally, he intends to invest in nuclear fusion and quantum computing and strengthen American supply chains securely, emphasizing manufacturing competitiveness.

3. Reviving LNG Exports Although the Biden Administration placed extensive limitations on LNG exports, Secretary Wright intends to strengthen the United States’ position by removing previous regulations and pauses.

4. Defending Consumer Choice and Increase Affordability The DOE will conduct a comprehensive examination of appliance efficiency standards, ensuring that regulations do not incur unnecessary costs for American families. This approach prioritizes lowering costs for consumers, energy efficiency without over-regulation, and free-market competition to drive innovation.

5. Other Priorities The new Secretary of Energy has promised multiple initiatives that prioritize energy amplification over previous regulations. These initiatives include: • Replenishing and strengthening the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR).

• Driving a nuclear power resurgence to grow America’s nuclear energy stockpile.

• Expanding and strengthening power grid reliability and broadening US Energy infrastructure.

• Heading through red tape and overregulated permitting to allow energy companies to expand rapidly.

The new Department of Energy, under Wright’s leadership, is clearly headed into a new era of energy amplification. His pro-growth attitude and pro-innovation approach are set to reframe U.S. energy policy for years, if not decades, to come.

He prioritizes abundance, affordability, and security while providing a strong foundation for President Trump's energy ambitions.

Keep In Touch with Shale Magazine As the new era of energy unfolds, you can bet we’ll be the boots on the ground to keep you informed. Subscribe to Shale Magazine for sharp insight into the arenas that matter most to your life. And don't forget to listen to our riveting podcast, The Energy Mixx Radion Show, where our very own Kym Bolado interviews the most extraordinary thought leaders, business innovators, and industry experts of our time.

About the author: Jess Henley began his career in client relations for a large manufacturer in Huntsville, Alabama. With several years of leadership under his belt, Jess made the leap to brand communications with Bizwrite, LLC. As a senior copywriter, Jess crafts compelling marketing and PR content with a particular emphasis on global energy markets and professional services.

About the author: Tyler Reed began his career in the world of finance managing a portfolio of municipal bonds at the Bank of New York Mellon.

Four years later, he led the Marketing and Business Development team at a high-profile civil engineering firm.

He had a focus on energy development in federal, state, and local pursuits. He picked up an Executive MBA from the University of Florida along the way. Following an entrepreneurial spirit, he founded a content writing agency. There, they service marketing agencies, PR firms, and enterprise accounts on a global scale. A sought-after television personality and featured writer in too many leading publications to list, his penchant for research delivers crisp and intelligent prose his audience continually craves.

EYEEM/FREEPIK

SHALEMAG.COM

43

POLICY

Could the EU Overtake the U.S. as a Renewable Energy Power?

By: Felicity Bradstock

The European Union was, for a long time, seen as a leader in the global green transition, as it invested heavily in renewables and introduced policies to shift away from fossil fuels. That all changed with the introduction of former President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) – the most farreaching U.S. climate policy to date, in the summer of 2022. The U.S. began to rapidly attract high levels of private investment in green energy and clean tech, putting it ahead of its European ally in terms of investment.

An Opportunity for the EU In January, Poland’s deputy climate minister Krzysztof Bolesta said that President Trump’s order to pause spending on U.S. climate and infrastructure laws could provide Europe with an opportunity to attract more green energy and cleantech funding.

Since Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20, he has signed numerous executive orders calling for a pause in spending associated with the IRA and other climate policies, a freeze on both leasing federal areas for new offshore wind projects, the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement, and favoring higher levels of oil and gas production. He has also made significant staff cuts at the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) and other government departments.

Bolesta responded to Trump’s recent moves by saying, “I think this

44

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

is our moment. This is our window of opportunity, because many companies I’ve had conversations with, they were complaining about the IRA.” The deputy climate minister said that companies had threatened to move investments to the U.S. to avoid strict EU regulations and benefit from financial incentives from the IRA. However, as the U.S. energy sector investment environment becomes more uncertain, companies may now be wary about making the move.

Bolesta explained, “Now I think the money will be harder to get in America, and we have our chance, so I just very much hope we will not blow it.”

EU Pulling Ahead Europe is progressing well in meeting its climate goals. Renewable energy sources contributed a record 47% of Europe’s electricity in 2024, according to a January report from the London-based think tank Ember.

The publication found that solar power provided Europe with 11% of its electricity, overtaking coal for the first time. Meanwhile, solar and wind power combined provided more electricity than natural gas. This shift from fossil fuels to renewables has been made possible by the introduction of favorable energy policies from governments across the political spectrum in the region.

The increase in renewable energy capacity over the last half a decade has saved Europeans billions of dollars

on fossil fuel imports, the report found.

Europe continues to spend around half a trillion dollars a year importing fossil fuels each year at present.

Much in the same way as Biden introduced the IRA, the EU established the Recovery and Resilience Fund after the Covid-19 pandemic to pull Europe out of a recession. The fund has attracted $1.87 trillion in investments, a third of which have gone to green energy.

In 2022, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and subsequent sanctions on Russian energy forced Europe to diversify its oil and gas imports. This was another driver for accelerating the rollout of renewable energy projects across the region, to ensure the EU’s energy sovereignty and security.

The lead author of the Ember report, Chris Rosslowe, stated, “Fossil fuels are losing their grip on EU energy.”

Rosslowe added, “At the start of the European Green Deal in 2019, few thought the EU’s energy transition could be where it is today; wind and solar are pushing coal to the margins and forcing gas into structural decline.”

Against the Clock Despite Trump’s repeated threats to rein in climate spending, many U.S. energy leaders still believe that the green transition is unstoppable. Both Democrat and Republican states have benefitted from the growth in green investment in recent years, with several oil and gas companies even supporting the financial incentives for green spending. Therefore, Europe may only enjoy a short period of time in which it can benefit from the uncertainty of the U.S. investment environment to attract more funding to its energy market.

FROLOPIATON PALM/FREEPIK

As U.S. President Donald Trump vows to focus on expanding the country’s fossil fuels sector and move away from the former administration’s focus on renewable energy, this could provide Europe with an opportunity to pull ahead in the race to green.

The increase in renewable energy capacity over the last half a decade has saved Europeans billions of dollars on fossil fuel imports, the report found. Europe continues to spend around half a trillion dollars a year importing fossil fuels each year at present.

To benefit from the ‘window of opportunity’, Europe must make itself attractive to energy companies by enhancing access to the region’s energy sector through streamlining bureaucratic processes and providing a wide range of incentives.

In January, the European Commission launched A Competitiveness Compass for the EU, aimed at setting a “path for Europe to become the place where

future technologies, services, and clean products are invented, manufactured, and put on the market while being the first continent to become climate neutral”.

The EU must follow the guidelines set out in this initiative, as well as continue to encourage member states to establish strong climate policies, to attract investment away from the U.S. and solidify the region’s position in the global green transition.

About the author: Felicity Bradstock is a freelance writer specializing in Energy and Industry. She has a Master’s in International Development from the University of Birmingham, UK, and is now based in Mexico City.

SHALEMAG.COM

45

POLICY

Trump Turns Tariffs on Any Country Buying Venezuelan Oil By: Jess Henley

P

resident Donald Trump signed an executive order installing tariffs on countries that import Venezuelan oil. The move follows Trump's claims that Venezuela is deliberately sending criminals to the U.S. and comes as he prepares for a broader set of reciprocal tariffs on imports.

While several nations could be recipients of this 25% tariff, the primary aim is to pressure Nicolás Maduro’s regime while also escalating tariffs against China, Venezuela's largest oil customer.

The imposed duty took effect April 2nd and will likely see a broad impact across the global market.

The Policy in a Nutshell A 25% tariff effective April 2nd will be imposed on all countries importing Venezuelan oil. This tax applies to any country importing Venezuelan oil, whether directly from a South American country or indirectly via third parties.

According to the White House fact sheet, tariffs will expire one year after a country ceases importing Venezuelan oil or sooner if deemed appropriate by officials.

The tariff would apply to all goods from nations importing Venezuelan oil, whether directly or as a proxy. This means China, Venezuela's largest oil customer, and several neighboring countries, including Hong Kong and Macau, would all be affected.

According to the White House website, President Trump is leveraging America's economic might to protect our interests and punish those who support

46

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

Maduro's regime. The president claims tariffs are “a powerful, proven source of leverage for protecting the national interest, sending a clear message that access to our economy is a privilege, not a right, and countries importing Venezuelan oil will face consequences.”

Why Target the Maduro Regime This particular tariff is a part of a broader initiative to pressure the Maduro government, which the White House has accused of cultivating corruption, suppressing democratic processes, and enabling widespread transnational criminal organizations like the Tren de Aragua gang. President Trump claims that Venezuela intentionally sent such violent criminals into the U.S., calling it a threat to national security.

The White House posits that the Maduro government systematically suppresses free and fair elections, illegitimately consolidating power. Furthermore, the White House alleges that Venezuela's corruption and mismanagement under Maduro have desolated the Venezuelan people and prompted a regional humanitarian and public health crisis, with millions of Venezuelans fleeing the oppressive regime into neighboring countries.

However, accusations of Venezuelan corruption are not unique to the Trump presidency. According to the Commerce Department, the United States was one of the largest purchasers of Venezuelan oil. In total, the U.S. bought $5.6 billion of oil and gas from

A 25% tariff effective April 2nd will be imposed on all countries importing Venezuelan oil. This tax applies to any country importing Venezuelan oil, whether directly from a South American country or indirectly via third parties.

there in 2024. However, this purchase period was short-lived as President Biden reinstated sanctions against Venezuelan oil after accusing Maduro of failing to hold free and fair elections.

The president's executive order targets the economic stability of the Maduro regime by ramping up the cost of imported goods from potential buyers of Venezuelan oil. This move places a chokehold on Venezuela's oil profitability, giving a viable reason to cut trade ties with the South American nation.

Despite prior sanctions on Venezuelan oil, U.S. refiners like Chevron continue to import crude under a special license, which was recently extended. While markets remained stable, experts warned that the tariffs could fuel inflation, impact global oil trade, and add strain to U.S.China relations, with China strongly opposing the policy.

The Trump Administration has extended special licensing for Chevron to continue its import of Venezuelan crude until May 27th, providing sufficient time to transition away from Venezuelan oil sources if necessary.

China In the Middle It's estimated that Venezuela produced 921,000 barrels of crude oil per day in 2024. Of that, China purchased over a third of Venezuelan crude oil last year. The new tariffs would stack on top of additional sanctions against China, which President Trump had previously established. As Venezuela is the largest oil purchaser in the country, an additional tariff levied against China could be a significant blow to its economy.

With the existing 20% tariffs on Chinese imports, an additional 25% tariff stacked on Chinese goods could severely discourage U.S. consumers from purchasing any Chinese goods, not to mention the extensive tariffs on steel and aluminum that the Trump Administration issued earlier in 2025.

Naturally, China has vehemently opposed the move, calling it an illegal and unilateral intervention in Venezuela's affairs.

Meanwhile, oil futures jumped nearly 1.5% on the planned tariff, indicating a potential boon to the global market.

Stay informed with Shale Magazine.

Whether you need energy insight, economic information, or the latest breaking news that impacts your world, you can count on Shale Magazine to deliver the facts day in and day out. Subscribe to Shale Magazine or listen to The Energy Mixx Radio Show to stay informed about what makes our world turn.

About the author: Jess Henley began his career in client relations for a large manufacturer in Huntsville, Alabama. With several years of leadership under his belt, Jess made the leap to brand communications with Bizwrite, LLC. As a senior copywriter, Jess crafts compelling marketing and PR content with a particular emphasis on global energy markets and professional services.

MILLAFEDOTOVA/DEPOSIT PHOTOS

SHALEMAG.COM

47

POLICY

Hon. James E. Campos: Unlocking Virginia’s Energy Potential – The Strategic Importance of Its Southern and Southwest Regions

T

he Honorable James E. Campos currently serves as Executive Director of the Virginia Tobacco Region Revitalization Commission (TRRC) /Energy under Governor Glenn Youngkin. The Commission’s mission is to foster a diverse and thriving economy across Southern and Southwest Virginia— regions that have become increasingly central to the Commonwealth’s energy and innovation strategy. Prior to this role, he served as a Cabinet Deputy Secretary of Commerce and Trade, focusing on energy innovation/ generation and rural economic development.

Mr. Campos brings a distinguished background in both the public and private sectors, with experience spanning energy, publishing, telecommunications, state and federal government, strategic and political consulting, and entrepreneurship. He has also served as an adjunct professor of business. In April 2018, Mr. Campos was confirmed by the United States Senate as an Assistant Secretary/Director at the U.S. Department of Energy with overwhelming bipartisan support (96-2).

In recent years, Southern and Southwest Virginia have emerged as pivotal players in the Commonwealth’s strategy for energy generation and innovation. While the promise of artificial intelligence and data centers is widely recognized, far less attention is given to the immense energy demands these technologies require.

Without immediate scaling of reliable energy production, the growth of these sectors could be severely constrained.

48

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

To address these challenges, Governor Youngkin has championed an “AllAmerican, All-of-the-Above” energy strategy.

This approach seeks to rapidly expand Virginia’s energy production capacity to meet current needs while future-proofing the energy economy across the state.

Among the most promising emerging technologies are Small Modular Reactors (SMRs /AMR's) —next-generation nuclear solutions that offer compact, scalable, and safe energy infrastructure ideal for rural and economically developing regions.

However, while these technologies hold tremendous potential, they are still in the early stages of widespread deployment.

In the near- to mid-term, natural gas offers Virginia a critical opportunity to bridge this gap and produce needed baseload energy.

Although intermittent sources like wind and solar remain components of the overall energy mix, they alone cannot meet the rapidly expanding demand. Natural gas provides a reliable, flexible, and sustainable backbone to support Virginia’s energy economy as next-generation technologies come online.

As Executive Director of the TRRC, Mr. Campos launched the Energy Ingenuity Fund—a grant program designed to establish a “best-in-class” energy economy in Southern and Southwest Virginia through investments in grid resiliency/infrastructure, energy manufacturing supply chains, energy generation and energy storage solutions. By advancing resilient energy infrastructure and expanding access to natural gas, this initiative is helping to build a skilled workforce and attract critical manufacturing jobs to Virginia’s rural regions.

The development of rural energy capacity is not only essential to meeting the needs of rural communities across America, but also to ensuring a smooth transition to the advanced energy technologies that will define America's future for generations to come. By embracing a diverse mix of energy sources—including natural gas, oil, nuclear, and renewables—these regions can help our great county meet today’s energy demands, lead the way in rapidly advancing sectors like data centers and AI, and deliver lasting jobs and investment for all communities.

GET YOUR GOOGLE FREE BUSINESS SNAPSHOT

HOW HEALTHY IS YOUR DIGITAL PRESENCE? Get one of our business snapshots today to find out how you rank.

LISTINGS

REVIEWS

SOCIAL

The Listings grade is

Review grades are

Social grades are

Website grades are

The Advertising

The Search Engine

business’s online

business’s online

business’s social

business’s website

of your business’s

grade is a reflection

a reflection of your

listings. Each listing

source is assigned a score based on how popular the site is.

For example, having an accurate listing

on a popular site like Google will have a

greater influence on your Listing Score.

The Listings grade is determined by the

percentile range your business falls into

when compared to

other businesses in the same industry.

a reflection of your review performance.

Each grade in the

Reviews section is

determined by the

percentile range your business falls into

when compared to

other businesses in the same industry.

a reflection of your media presence.

Each grade in the Social section is

determined by the

percentile range your business falls into

when compared to

other businesses in the same industry.

WEBSITE a reflection of your performance,

based on Google’s

PageSpeed Insights.

Each grade in the

Website section is

determined by the

percentile range your business falls into

when compared to

other businesses in the same industry.

ADVERTISING grade is a reflection online campaign performance.

The grade is

determined by the percentile range

your campaign’s

estimated cost per

click falls into when compared to other businesses in the same industry.

SEO Optimization (SEO) of your business’s search engine

visibility. The grade

is determined by the

percentile range your keywords’ estimated value per click falls

into when compared

to other businesses in the same industry.

ALLOW SHALE TO HELP YOUR BUSINESS REACH ITS FULL DIGITAL POTENTIAL!

INQUIRE ABOUT OUR BUSINESS SNAPSHOTS TODAY TO LEARN MORE The business snapshot rates and scores your business by your Google ranking.

Easily see your strengths and weaknesses.

Learn more: 210-240-7188 or email james@shalemag.com SHALEMAG.COM

49

50

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

SHALEMAG.COM

51

BUSINESS

Why Falling Crude Prices Now Signal Trouble for America’s Trade Balance By: Robert Rapier

N

ot long ago, falling oil prices were widely celebrated in the United States. Cheaper gasoline meant more disposable income for consumers, lower transportation costs for businesses, and a boost to sectors that rely on oil as an input. But in 2025, that simplistic view no longer holds up.

The economic equation has changed—dramatically.

From Net Importer to Net Exporter In 2005, the U.S. was importing a staggering 12.5 million barrels of oil and finished products per day. At that time, a drop in oil prices translated into major savings on our import bill. The net benefits to the economy were clear. But in 2025, the picture is reversed. Thanks to the fracking boom, the U.S. is a net exporter of about 2.3 million barrels per day of oil and refined products. When oil prices fall, the U.S. now loses more on exports than it saves on imports.

That means falling oil prices today actually worsen the U.S. trade deficit—the very thing that tariffs are supposedly being used to fix. There’s irony in the fact that some of the loudest advocates for tariffs—arguing they’ll fix our trade imbalance—are also cheering falling oil prices. They’re cheering a trend that undercuts our export strength and broadens the deficit.

Look at the Signal, Not Just the Price It’s also critical to consider why oil prices are falling.

Prices drop when supply increases, demand decreases, or markets anticipate economic trouble. In 2020, oil prices famously collapsed—briefly even turning negative—not because the economy was booming, but because the COVID-19 pandemic had triggered a global shutdown. That price crash was a harbinger of deep economic pain.

Fast forward to today: oil prices are falling again, not because we’re swimming in cheap energy, but because market sentiment is shifting toward the possibility of a recession. This isn’t good news—it’s a flashing warning sign.

If economic conditions deteriorate further, investments in energy infrastructure and new production will slow. The same people chanting “drill, baby, drill” may find themselves wondering why rigs are being idled, capital expenditures are being slashed, and jobs are being cut. When prices fall below profitability thresholds, producers pull back—and that has ripple effects across the broader economy.

52

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

Energy Is a Pillar of the U.S. Economy While consumers do benefit from lower gas prices at the pump, it’s important to understand that the energy sector is now a major driver of the U.S. economy. It supports millions of jobs, anchors the economies of entire states, and is a major contributor to GDP. When oil prices fall sharply, tax revenues decline, employment shrinks, and corporate earnings in the sector suffer.

Yes, certain sectors—like transportation and some manufacturers—may benefit from lower input costs.

But the net impact on the U.S. economy is no longer straightforwardly positive.

A Nuanced Picture So, the next time someone claims that falling oil prices are “good for the economy,” consider the fuller picture. In 2005, maybe that was true. In 2025, it’s a lot more complicated.

We should be cautious about using yesterday’s playbook to understand today’s economy. The energy world has changed and so has America’s place in it. A drop in oil prices may still provide relief at the gas pump—but as a signal of what’s happening across the broader economy, it’s a red flag we ignore at our peril.

About the author: Robert Rapier is a chemical engineer in the energy industry and Editor-in-Chief of Shale Magazine. Robert has 25 years of international engineering experience in the chemicals, oil and gas, and renewable energy industries and holds several patents related to his work. He has worked in the areas of oil refining, oil production, synthetic fuels, biomass to energy, and alcohol production. He is author of multiple newsletters for Investing Daily and of the book Power Plays. Robert has appeared on 60 Minutes, The History Channel, CNBC, Business News Network, CBC, and PBS. His energy-themed articles have appeared in numerous media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, and The Economist.

While consumers do benefit from lower gas prices at the pump, it’s important to understand that the energy sector is now a major driver of the U.S. economy.

MAXXYUSTAS/DEPOSIT PHOTOS

SHALEMAG.COM

53

BUSINESS

U.S. Grid Improvements Needed Imminently By: Felicity Bradstock

T

here have been rising concerns about the stability and durability of the U.S. electricity grid. However, with vast growth in U.S. renewable energy capacity in recent years and the rapidly increasing electricity demand across the country, improvements are needed imminently.

Whether it’s green energy or fossil fuels, both the Biden and the Trump administrations have been clear in their plans to make the U.S. a dominant global energy power and ensure the future of the country’s energy security. However, to achieve this, it will require more than just expansion of U.S. renewable energy capacity or a boost in fossil fuel output.

The U.S. is in dire need of a massive overhaul of its transmission network to prepare the country for a huge influx of energy in the coming years.

How Does the U.S. Grid Work?

The U.S. grid consists of a vast network of power plants, transmission lines, and distribution centers. It must constantly balance supply and demand, ensuring it transports the correct amount of electricity to households, businesses, and industry, day and night.

The U.S. transmission system is highly fragmented with different states and regions responsible for various parts of the infrastructure. The U.S. is home to around 3,000 utility companies that all run their systems differently and focus on varying energy projects, from wind and solar to nuclear power or oil and gas.

At present, the federal government is unable to carry out the necessary modernization of the U.S. transmission system due to the grid’s fractured nature.

Infrastructure investments are managed

54

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

by a multitude of local, state, and regional regulators, with varying ideas and budgets, making it impossible to overhaul the whole system.

Key to U.S. Energy Dominance While a complete overhaul may be impossible, grid modernization is what is needed to ensure U.S. energy dominance.

To guarantee its competitiveness in the race to develop complex technologies, such as AI, the U.S. must be able to deliver vast amounts of energy to various locations across the country using a resilient transmission system.

U.S. electricity demand is expected to continue increasing, by 128 GW over the next five years, or five times more than projected just two years ago. Meanwhile, developing new transmission lines is expected to reduce household electricity bills by over $300 a year based on current electricity consumption levels.

Slow Progress and a Backlog In 2024, the Department of Energy (DoE) Office of Policy launched a report entitled “Queued Up… But in Need of Transmission.” The publication focuses on the vast amount of energy projects that are ready to be connected to the grid but are being made to wait because of the backlog.

In recent years, there has been a growing gridlock of, mainly renewable energy, projects waiting to be connected to the grid. Many of these projects are being developed in non-conventional energy-producing regions of the U.S., such as rural areas, where the transmission lines are not adequately developed for new connections.

Connecting the massive quantity of energy expected to come online over the

The U.S. grid consists of a vast network of power plants, transmission lines, and distribution centers.

It must constantly balance supply and demand, ensuring it transports the correct amount of electricity to households, businesses, and industry, day and night.

next decade will require a huge federal investment in the modernization of the country’s grid.

The report highlighted that the U.S. may need to expand transmission systems by 60% by 2030 and perhaps triple those systems by 2050. It is worth noting that the projected energy demand during this period has risen further since the publication of the report.

The Potential for a National Grid Despite the complications in overhauling the U.S. grid system, there could be significant benefits in developing a national grid.

Gregory Wetstone, the CEO of the non-profit American Council on Renewable Energy, stated, “The system we have for planning and paying for new transmission does not adequately value or promote the vital benefits of interregional transmission. Transmission planning does not sufficiently take into account the benefits of a holistic system over the long term.”

He explained that the regulatory framework that has evolved at the regional level does not function when it comes to planning longer, larger-scale transmission lines.

However, using longer more efficient lines would help decarbonize the grid system and reduce consumer energy costs. In addition, establishing national regulations and standards could help to build a system that is resilient to severe weather, such as floods, freezes, and fires.

This led to DoE to complete the National Transmission Planning Study in 2024 under the Biden administration, in a bid to understand the potential for improving the grid at the national level. The study can now be used by utilities and grid planners to identify projects for possible development, according to the director of DoE’s Grid Deployment Office Maria Robinson. It is essentially a toolkit for each region rather than a comprehensive federal strategy for grid modernization.

The fragmented nature of the U.S. transmission system means that it is highly unlikely there will be a complete overhaul of the grid, as would be done in an ideal scenario. It also means that grid modernization will likely be more costly and time-consuming than it would be under a federal-level transformation. However, the DoE’s National Transmission Planning Study helps in providing guidance for state and regional level actors to begin to update the grid. Nevertheless, a meaningful transformation of the U.S. transmission system will require both billions of dollars in investment and the collaboration of thousands of state and local actors to collectively modernize the grid.

About the author: Felicity Bradstock is a freelance writer specializing in Energy and Industry. She has a Master’s in International Development from the University of Birmingham, UK, and is now based in Mexico City.

GINASANDERS/DEPOSIT PHOTOS

SHALEMAG.COM

55

BUSINESS

Risks and Uncertainties Facing New LNG Projects on the U.S. Gulf and East Coasts By: Robert Rapier

M

ajor long-term capital investments require predictable profitability and stable capital costs. For the eight large-scale liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects proposed on the U.S. Gulf and East Coasts, both of these factors appear increasingly uncertain.

Unlike many global LNG projects that rely on stranded natural gas with little domestic competition, U.S. LNG exports depend on a vast but historically volatile internal market.

The Gulf and East Coast LNG sites also face hurricane risks, which could lead to long-term force majeure events and rising insurance costs.

Capital Cost Uncertainty and Workforce Challenges One of the biggest risks for these projects is unpredictable capital costs. The Biden administration and President Donald Trump have imposed tariffs on steel and critical energy infrastructure components, but future tariff rates remain uncertain. LNG facilities require specialty materials, such as highcost cryogenic steel, which could be subject to tariffs of 25%, 50%, or even higher. This could significantly increase construction costs.

Another challenge is labor availability. Building large LNG facilities requires a substantial skilled workforce willing to relocate.

With multiple ongoing projects and a limited labor pool, competition for workers will drive up wages and could lead to project delays.

The Role of Associated Gas and Future Supply Constraints The U.S. natural gas market relies heavily on associated gas production from oil wells. Currently, about 25% of U.S. natural gas production comes from fracked oil wells in the Permian (20%), Bakken (3%), and Eagle Ford (5.5%) basins. Unlike conventional gas fields, where production declines slowly, fracked wells see rapid declines after just a few years.

If oil drilling slows due to falling global prices, U.S. natural gas production could drop sharply.

If this coincides with increased domestic gas demand for power generation, LNG exports may face restrictions to protect U.S. energy security. A future administration could impose limits on LNG exports rather than allowing market forces to dictate supply and demand.

Long Project Timelines and Market Uncertainty LNG projects typically take five years to complete after a Final Investment Decision (FID), meaning that investments today must forecast profitability starting around 2030.

While permitting under the Trump administration may not be an issue, global LNG supply and demand from 2030 to 2045 remain uncertain.

Geopolitical Risks and the U.S. as an Unreliable Supplier Foreign buyers of LNG must also consider geopolitical risks.

The United States has recently demonstrated a willingness to disrupt trade agreements. Given the scale of U.S. LNG exports, foreign buyers may choose to avoid over-reliance on a single, potentially unpredictable supplier.

56

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

Canada is already shifting its ~8 billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d) of gas exports from the U.S. to LNG exports aimed at East Asia.

This will further tighten the U.S. domestic market, potentially impacting prices for U.S. Gulf and East Coast LNG projects.

Meanwhile, Mexico is increasing its natural gas pipeline imports from the U.S., both for domestic use and for LNG exports via its own Pacific Coast LNG projects. A 2 bcf/d pipeline from the Permian Basin

is nearing FID, with another 2 bcf/d pipeline planned. This could create additional competition for U.S. Gulf Coast projects in the Asia-Pacific LNG market.

Global Competition LNG from the U.S. Gulf and East Coasts faces intense competition from other global projects: Canada’s Pacific Coast: A 5 bcf/d pipeline serving a 1.85 bcf/d LNG plant in British Columbia is set to start operations this year,

with a second 1.85 bcf/d phase planned. A smaller LNG facility near Vancouver is already under construction.

Mexico’s Pacific Coast: A major LNG plant sourcing gas from the Permian Basin is under development. More LNG facilities could be built after 2030.

Alaska’s LNG Projects: Former President Trump is pushing a $44 billion LNG project on Alaska’s southern coast. If Japan and other Asian buyers commit, 3.1 bcf/d could come online well before 2045.

Guyana, West Africa, and the Mediterranean: These regions are developing LNG projects that could compete with U.S. exports to the Atlantic Basin.

Pipeline Alternatives to Europe: The EU’s reliance on LNG could decline if Russian pipelines are reactivated or if new supplies from Iraq, Iran, or Turkmenistan become available.

The LNG Market in Europe and Asia The European Union and the UK remain committed to reducing carbon emissions, which may put pressure on long-term natural gas demand.

While LNG remains critical for energy security, renewables and hydrogen are projected to displace natural gas over time.

In Asia, the market remains in flux. Russia is pushing the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline to China, although China is demanding steep discounts.

Meanwhile, Turkmenistan is debating whether to sell more gas east to China or west to the EU. Australia continues to modestly expand its LNG export capacity, providing stable competition.

Critically, LNG projects in Canada, Mexico, and Alaska can serve Asian markets more efficiently than Gulf and East Coast projects. They benefit from shorter shipping distances, lower costs, and no reliance

on the increasingly expensive and congested Panama Canal.

Additionally, Gulf and East Coast LNG projects face hurricane risks that could disrupt operations for months or even years.

Investment Risks and Long-Term Viability Given these uncertainties, the massive U.S. LNG expansion proposed may face a smaller and more competitive market than anticipated. Some financial risks can be mitigated through long-term contracts, but they cannot be eliminated entirely.

Prospective investors will need to carefully weigh the potential for cost overruns, supply chain disruptions, and global competition. While LNG demand is expected to remain strong in the near term, the landscape beyond 2030 presents significant challenges for Gulf and East Coast projects.

About the author: Robert Rapier is a chemical engineer in the energy industry and Editor-in-Chief of Shale Magazine. Robert has 25 years of international engineering experience in the chemicals, oil and gas, and renewable energy industries and holds several patents related to his work. He has worked in the areas of oil refining, oil production, synthetic fuels, biomass to energy, and alcohol production. He is author of multiple newsletters for Investing Daily and of the book Power Plays. Robert has appeared on 60 Minutes, The History Channel, CNBC, Business News Network, CBC, and PBS. His energy-themed articles have appeared in numerous media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, and The Economist.

CORLAFFRA/DEPOSIT PHOTOS

SHALEMAG.COM

57

BUSINESS

Trump Doubles Down on Most U.S. Energy Sanctions By: Felicity Bradstock

Trump to Tighten Rules on Venezuelan Oil In the last week of February, oil prices increased by more than 2% after President Trump revoked a license that allowed the U.S. oil major Chevron to operate in Venezuela.

Chevron will no longer be permitted to export Venezuelan crude. In addition, Venezuela’s state-owned oil company PDVSA will not be allowed to export oil previously exported by Chevron to U.S. refineries.

The tightening of sanctions could encourage Chevron to seek a new deal with PDVSA to export crude to countries other than the U.S. Chevron was exporting around 240,000 barrels per day (bpd) of oil from its operations in Venezuela, equating to over a quarter of the South American country’s current crude output.

“The U.S. government has made a damaging and inexplicable decision by announcing sanctions against the U.S. company Chevron,” Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodriguez said in a statement.

Venezuela was once one of the largest oilproducing countries in Latin America. However, the introduction of sanctions on PDVSA during Trump’s first term as president made Venezuela’s oil output decrease dramatically.

Venezuela produced an average of 3.2 million bpd of oil in 2000, which fell to 735,000 in September 2023. Meanwhile, its crude exports to the U.S. fell from 1.3 million bpd in 2001 to 153,000 bpd in July 2023, when sanctions were eased under the Biden administration.

Trump blamed the decision to tighten sanctions on Venezuelan President Nicolas

58

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

Maduro’s failure to progress on electoral reforms and migrant returns. Trump stated, “The regime has not been transporting the violent criminals that they sent into our Country (the Good Ole’ U.S.A.) back to Venezuela at the rapid pace that they had agreed.”

Stricter Sanctions in Iran Earlier in February, President Trump reinstated his “maximum pressure” approach to Iran. Trump signed a presidential memorandum reimposing the same strict policy on Iran that he

The tightening of sanctions could encourage Chevron to seek a new deal with PDVSA to export crude to countries other than the U.S. Chevron was exporting around 240,000 barrels per day (bpd) of oil from its operations in Venezuela, equating to over a quarter of the South American country’s current crude output.

implemented during his first term in office.

“With me, it's very simple: Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon,” Trump stated.

The memorandum directs the Treasury and State Departments to carry out a campaign aiming to reduce Iran’s oil exports to zero. However, he also suggested that he was open to a deal with Iran.

Trump accused former President Joe Biden of not enforcing strict U.S. sanctions on Iranian energy, which, he suggests, allowed it to fund its nuclear program. Iran is “dramatically” accelerating enrichment of uranium to up to 60% purity, close to the roughly 90% weapons-grade level, according to the chief of the U.N. nuclear watchdog. However, Iran has denied plans to develop a nuclear weapon.

Iran’s oil exports to China, which does not adhere to U.S. energy sanctions, have risen in recent years. China has found several ways to circumvent sanctions, such as using shadow tankers and a network of middlemen, which have allowed the Asian giant to buy discounted crude from several sanctioned countries.

Possible Sanctions Relief for Russia One country where Trump appears less intent on strengthening sanctions is Russia. Trump praised his talks with Russian President Putin last month and promised “major economic development transactions” with Moscow.

The Biden administration worked with Europe to impose sanctions on Russian energy following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in early 2022. After almost three years, several countries that previously depended heavily on Russian oil and gas have shifted their reliance away from Moscow, thereby significantly reducing Putin’s energy exports and hitting the country’s revenues hard.

This month, the U.S. is reportedly drafting a plan to provide Russia sanctions relief as Trump aims to restore the U.S. relationship with Moscow, according to a

GENERATOR/DEPOSIT PHOTOS

U.S. President Donald Trump has doubled down on existing energy sanctions on both Iran and Venezuela. The two oil-rich countries have gradually increased their oil production in recent years and exported oil and gas via clandestine routes. Trump plans to clamp down on Iran and Venezuela, making it more difficult for the two countries to profit off energy export revenues. Meanwhile, reports suggest the U.S. president may offer Russia a possible sanctions relief.

U.S. official. The White House has reportedly requested that the State and Treasury departments draft a list of sanctions that could be eased for U.S. officials to discuss with Russian representatives in the coming days.

Just before leaving office, Biden introduced Washington's toughest yet measures on Russia. Despite initially threatening to increase sanctions on Russia if Putin did not agree to enter negotiations to end the conflict with Ukraine, Trump administration officials have since acknowledged the potential for easing sanctions on Russia. Trump has effectively

made a U-turn on the Biden administration’s approach to Russia, as he once again opens the channels of communication with Putin.

The uncertain outlook for U.S.-Russian relations has led the EU to approve a new sanctions package against Russia. “We now have the most extensive sanctions ever, weakening Russia’s war effort,” stated the EU’s top diplomat Kaja Kallas. The latest move by the EU suggests the region’s steadfast stance on Russia-Ukraine and opposes any plans Trump may have to ease sanctions on Moscow.

About the author: Felicity Bradstock is a freelance writer specializing in Energy and Industry. She has a Master’s in International Development from the University of Birmingham, UK, and is now based in Mexico City.

SHALEMAG.COM

59

Rise above the River Walk for elevated experiences in this cultural epicenter. Unmatched skyline vistas, magnetic gathering places, refined guest rooms, and celebrated cuisine await at Thompson San Antonio – Riverwalk.

SHALE CORPORATE RATE $179 BASED ON AVAILABILITY

For more information call or email, james@shalemag.com 210 240-7188

115 LEXINGTON AVE 210.942.6019

www.hyatt.com/hotel/thompson-hotels

60

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

Opening Doors in San Antonio Since 1974

ONLY TEXANS TEXANS

KNOW HOW TO FEED

Reaping the earth’s bounty is what we do best. That’s why you should plan your next offsite onsite by catering with Freebirds.

From custom-rolled burritos to an entire burrito bar, your folks will attend this meeting and even look forward to the next.

Place your order now.

KING REALTORS is dedicated to helping San Antonio and the oil industry with their real estate needs.

If you are looking to buy or sell a property, call us and say you saw it in SHALE Magazine!

Freebirds World Burrito San Antonio & South Texas Catering Sales Manager Josie Nieves P: 210-560-5002 F: 866-421-0876 jnieves@freebirds.com

TABITHA KING 210.414.4255

5600 Broadway Avenue • San Antonio, TX 78209 KingRealtors.com tabitha@kingrealtors.com SHALEMAG.COM

61

A PRIVATE OASIS IN THE TEXAS HILL COUNTRY

Our expanded Ranch Club complex is the perfect paradise for rest, relaxing and recreation. Just steps from Clubhouse Village, it now offers many additional resort-style amenities including four separate swimming pools, Jacuzzi, Ranch Club Grill featuring a wood burning pizza oven, a luxurious open-air pavilion for lounging and seating for up to 300, lighted hard-surface tennis and sport courts, and much more.

To learn more please contact Sean Gioffre at 830-990-7693 / sgioffre@bootranch.com or Andrew Ball at 830-997-6200 / aball@bootranch.com. bootranch.com

62

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

SHALEMAG.COM

63

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2

SHALEMAG.COM

3

4

VOLUME 3 // ISSUE 2