Weekly Daily Standup Top Stories
The Current State of Critical Minerals in the US Market
In an era defined by the push toward clean energy, electrification, and advanced technologies, critical minerals have emerged as the backbone of modern manufacturing and national security. These essential resources—ranging from lithium for batteries to […]
China and Iran Seal Oil-for-Infrastructure Deal to Bypass U.S. Sanctions
In a bold move amid escalating geopolitical tensions, China and Iran have formalized a significant oil-for-infrastructure agreement, effectively sidestepping U.S. sanctions through a barter system that exchanges Iranian crude for Chinese-built projects. This deal not […]
Texas Oil Driller Taps Trump’s Team to Save California Crude Project
In a bold move highlighting the clash between federal energy priorities and California’s stringent regulations, Houston-based Sable Offshore Corp. is turning to the Trump administration’s National Energy Dominance Council for help in reviving a stalled […]
Baytex Considers $3B Eagle Ford Asset Sale
In a move that could reshape its portfolio and bolster its financial position, Canadian oil producer Baytex Energy Corp. is reportedly exploring the sale of its U.S. Eagle Ford shale assets for up to $3 […]
Where’s the Glut? Says ConocoPhillips CEO Ryan Lance
In the ever-volatile world of oil markets, ConocoPhillips CEO Ryan Lance has recently challenged the prevailing narratives of an impending oil surplus. Speaking at a recent industry event, Lance questioned the notion of a glut, […]
Occidental CEO Hollub Sees Tight Oil Price Range Through 2026 – But what about Natural Gas we ask?
In a market still reeling from geopolitical tensions and shifting global demand patterns, Occidental Petroleum CEO Vicki Hollub delivered a sobering yet strategic outlook at the Energy Intelligence Forum in London this week. Hollub projected […]
Highlights of the Podcast
00:00 – Intro
00:15 – The Current State of Critical Minerals in the US Market
06:54 – China and Iran Seal Oil-for-Infrastructure Deal to Bypass U.S. Sanctions
09:02 – Texas Oil Driller Taps Trump’s Team to Save California Crude Project
11:15 – Baytex Considers $3B Eagle Ford Asset Sale
15:23 – Where’s the Glut? Says ConocoPhillips CEO Ryan Lance
19:16 – Occidental CEO Hollub Sees Tight Oil Price Range Through 2026 – But what about Natural Gas we ask?
22:09 – Outro
Need Power For Your Data Center, Hospital, or Business?
– Get in Contact With The Show –
Video Transcription edited for grammar. We disavow any errors unless they make us look better or smarter.
Michael Tanner: [00:00:00] Why China ban on critical minerals exports could be a great thing for the United States. Next on the Energy Newsbeat weekly recap stand-up. [00:00:07][7.2]
Stuart Turley: [00:00:15] The current state of critical minerals in the United States market, thanks to China’s rashing about last week. It is a huge issue. So I wrote this story on an era defined by the push towards clean energy electrification and advanced technologies. Critical minerals have emerged as the backbone of modern manufacturing. And unfortunately, China has most of the control thanks to the Republicans and Democrats in the US over the last 30 years. China leads critical mineral production. Michael, they got about 80% to 90%, depending on how you want to look at it and why I put this in here. Look at this chart. I’ve got lithium, EV batteries. Australia’s 50%, Chile’s 30%, and China’s 10% for mining. But you look at how they’re being produced, it’s goes over to China. A cobalt battery, you take a look at Australia, Indonesia, and the DRC. China is 70% of the refining of cobalt. China, 35 to 40 percent of nickel. I did not know that. Indonesia, Philippines, and Russia make up a 65, 75 percent of it, basically in the nickel refining and mining. Take a look at graphite. China’s 90 percent, dude. 90 percent of graphite. You ask what is important other than number two pencils? Everything. Graphite goes into a lot of electronics. [00:01:47][91.0]
Michael Tanner: [00:01:48] Yeah. So I I I wanna dive into this a little bit because I think there’s a little bit of a misnomer, you know, when you know, as you mentioned, we’re talking about refining capacity. Refining is different than the actual physical mining. There’s actually not as much mining activity in China as you would expect. So this idea that China has all of these rare earth metals, or in our case, critical minerals, is actually not true. What they have is the refining capacity. Now, that’s critical, but why? The question is, why did it all end up in China? Refining minerals is not that hard. It’s not like creating a semiconductor that it’s some super complex tax. There’s one reason why it all ended up in China. The answer’s pollution, because this is an extremely pollutive industry to have. And so the only country that was willing to take it was China. Again, they were forward thinking. And part of this report is a big reason why the stock market tumbled. You this hundred percent tariff that Trump dropped dropped on Friday is one of the big reasons why I think this is super important. Now I wanna I I wanna s say something here that I actually think China because China then what did they do in in in terms of the the tariff war? Well, they said, Okay, if you’re gonna put a hundred percent tariffs on us, we’re now gonna go ahead and restrict the export of refined metals to the United States. So [00:03:07][78.9]
Stuart Turley: [00:03:07] So you have it backwards. They did that first. [00:03:08][1.8]
Michael Tanner: [00:03:09] Okay, well, but regardless, whether they did it first, whether they did it. Here’s why I think it’s going to come back to bite them in the rear, much like the US semiconductor export bans to China will come back to bite us in the Bahuti. I think there’s two things. So, one, when you are forced not to have something that you need, what do you do? You innovate, you figure out how to replace it. What let’s let’s look at what’s actually happening right now in the US semiconductor space. NDVIA and AMD are not allowed to send their best chips, even the worst chips, they’re out, they’re only allowed to send a finite amount to China. So, what is China doing? They are going to begin creating their own semiconductor industry. And I guarantee you, in 10 years, guess what? They’re going to have chips that are far more advanced with us. Why? Because our policies at home force them to innovate. If I was China, I would understand this and say, why restrict minerals? You want to be the bottleneck when it comes to refining critical minerals, because then you can use that as leverage when you need it down the road, when you attempt to go to war with Taiwan, when you attempt to do all of these things. I think the fact that they’re putting these controls on the exporting of these refined metals, I think is going to eventually stab them in the back. Because of what eventually what’s going to happen is that refining capacity is going to onshore here to the United States. We’re going to find other places in Southeast Asia that that’ll be willing to stand up a refinery capacity. So I actually think this ban on exporting critical minerals or really refined metals is going to backfire on them. And I think the case study is what we’re seeing right now with the NDVIA and AMD chip ban that’s going to China. [00:04:45][95.5]
Stuart Turley: [00:04:45] I agree. And it’s a little more than that. Also, you’ve described it, but it’s also taking a look at South America and Africa. China is playing a really political heavy hand to try to shut us down. They think they have all the cards, but I think Trump is going to get pulled that over. I included this one because David Blackman had a really good point. The mine from Christopher Messina talked about Greenland. There, you bring up a great point, Michael. That is there’s going to be other areas that we can look at. And Greenland is a great source. So maybe Greenland and Canada are gonna fight to become the 52nd state, 51st and 52nd state. Who wants to be the winner there? But when you take a look at that, there are rare earth minerals all over the place. And you are right. Who’s gonna be where do you want to put it? It’s all in the regulations and the EPA’s hands because it’s gonna be the lawsuits and all the anti-climate folks and everybody else doing the lawsuits. [00:05:48][62.6]
Michael Tanner: [00:05:49] Well, it it it it’s gonna end up being like what we see with what’s going on with data centers right now. Everybody wants data centers, everybody would want wants AIs, but then people try to spin up a data center in your backyard and everyone says no, no, no, no, no. And to be honest, I’m kind of with them. You’re gonna have electrical prices increase. There’s a lot of pollution that goes along with some of these massive hyperscale data centers. So that’s I think the the the issue that we’re gonna run into the United States is nobody wants to live next to one of these facilities. So where do we put them? I don’t think Canada’s going to take them. I think that’s off the table. I’ll be interested if Greenland takes them. I think the problem is, you know, Greenland with their, you know, really under the control of the EU. I don’t think the EU is gonna do it. I think our best bet is either to find places here in the United States, or I think what you’re see is a migration down to Southeast Asia, sort of like what happened with with like, you know, low wage labor, all went to China in the early 2000s. And then when China started increasing their labor costs because it they ended up becoming high skilled, they went from low skilled cheap labor to high skilled low wage, all of that, and then the wages follow the high skill, everything moved to Southeast Asia. I think that’s what’s going to happen here. [00:06:53][64.2]
Stuart Turley: [00:06:54] You bet. China and Iran seal oil for infrastructure in a deal to bypass U.S. Sanctions. The great Irina Slav has always said sanctions don’t work as intended. In a bold move to escalate geopolitical tensions, China and Iran have formalized a significant oil for infrastructure agreement. You gotta love a good bartering system there, Michael. The deal not only secures a steady oil supply for Beijing, but bolsters Tehran’s infrastructure amid ongoing economic pressures from Washington. Hey, Iranians, if you’re listening, make sure you check any of their grid equipment that they put in that they can’t remotely shut down, because that’s gonna be pretty much what they put in. They’re gonna put in anything that they own you. So under the new framework, Iran gets the exchange for Chinese contractors developing key infrastructure and rail lines, ports, industrial facilities, settlements occur via non dollar channel, my [00:07:56][62.2]
Michael Tanner: [00:07:56] Ding. That’s the scariest part. And I was about to point that out. Settlement occurs in non-dollar channels. I mean, this is the same thing that China’s been doing with their Belt and Road initiative for years now, these loan to own programs where they’ll loan you a bunch of money, loan you a bunch of stuff. And then now we’re all of a sudden going to end up owning you. In this case, we’re going to own the oil flows. If I were Iran, I think this is a bad deal for Iran. Iran needs to be, Iran needs to be, if, you know, again, I don’t want to pretend I’m the Ayatollah and that’s not, that’s not necessarily, I don’t need to be giving advice to that guy. But if I was in charge of a country, I wouldn’t necessarily want to give away my biggest resource, my most profitable resource in exchange for goods and services. I would prefer to get some sort of, you know, cash, whether it’s via non dollar channels, whether it’s dollars, whether it’s gold, whether it’s whatever, and then use that and shop my infrastructure around. And maybe I end up going with China, but I can use more of a competitive market. I don’t necessarily like this from a strategic standpoint. It is gonna be interesting. And yeah, check all that stuff. They’re gonna be listening devices everywhere. [00:08:59][62.1]
Stuart Turley: [00:08:59] Yep. And then they’re gonna shut him down. Texas oil driller taps Trump’s team to Save California crude project, the same one that we were talking about, the sable one. Houston based Sable Offshore Corp is turning to the Trump administration National Energy Dominance Council for help in reviving a stalled offshore oil project in Santa Barbara. For our podcast listeners, there is this is very critical. I’m reached out to Jim Flores to make sure to see if I can get him on the podcast, Michael. But this is critical because he’s going to federal. This is federal, and there’s a pipeline that can tie into the main artery in California. Right now, that main artery for oil transportation in California is losing, Michael. Are you ready? Two million dollars a month is what it’s losing. That cannot stay open. Now now, Herr Gell Newsome has already put out that he is going to allow Kern County and he’s gonna put about 2,000 new drilling permits, which are gonna get slow walked by the deaths deep state in California. So it’s gonna be slow walked and not done. They’re not gonna have the volume that they need. It is a real problem. I think Gavin Newsom may have done a real number on California’s oil and gas industry. [00:10:23][83.8]
Michael Tanner: [00:10:24] Well, I mean, he absolutely did. There’s there’s no question about that. Do I I think it’s smart for for Sable to appeal to the Trump administration? The question is, is there well what legal action then comes around? Because we live in a federalized democracy where states do have rights. So if a state decides they don’t want oil and gas production as dumb as I think that is, the real question is what’s the Supreme Court gonna say? You know, that’s where I think it gets interesting. [00:10:49][25.3]
Stuart Turley: [00:10:50] It is gonna get dicey and here’s why. Because the Chevron refinery is gonna be starved and they they’re gonna bring bringing that one back online. That’s forty percent of the jet fuel in the military bases for California. So as soon as Trump can’t defend the United States, you’re gonna see federal involvement dropping in. [00:11:12][22.6]
Michael Tanner: [00:11:13] Yeah, no, absolutely. Well, Bay Tex Energy, they’re actually a can majority Canadian oil producer entered the Bach in shale in 2018. They’ve reportedly put their US Eagleford assets up to spale for up to three billion dollars. This was actually first reported by Bloomberg, actually had Bay Tech shares up about four percent, which kind of can tell you what the street thinks about this. They actually, I I lied, these specific assets, which are part of a slightly larger Eagleford position, which they started gathering in 2018, was actually the bulk of it was through Ranger Oil Corporation, which was a purchase they did in 2023. And what’s funny is they actually bought Ranger for $3.4 billion, or about really that’s Canadian, so $2.5 billion USD at the same time. So not not maybe the greatest accretive transaction that everybody talks about. Oh, we’re gonna, you know, every every every one of these mergers, Stu, it’s all accretive. Trust me, it’s all accretive. We’re doing it right. Maybe, maybe not. Pretty interesting here. You know, the report goes on to show Bloomberg says that Bay Tex is working with advisors to gage interest, and there are there are multiple entities looking to purchase this. My guess is you’re going to see some some private equity companies step in. I wouldn’t be surprised if Kimmerge Texas Gas, who just rechanged their name to something stupid. I don’t know what it is, but Kimmerge, Texas Gas just rebranded into something stupid. I don’t know what it is. My guess is they’re looking heavily at this, considering their position in the Eagleford, but it’s gonna be interesting. [00:12:40][86.9]
[00:12:41] As always, guys, the news and analysis you just heard is brought to you by world’s greatest website, www.energynewsbeat.com. Stu and the team do a tremendous job making sure that website stays up to speed. Everything you need to know to be the tip of the spear when it comes to the energy and the oil and gas business. Go ahead and hit the links in the description below for all links to the timestamps, links to the articles, and specifically subscribe to the show on YouTube. Subscribe to the show on Apple iTunes. Give us a follow there. Subscribe to our show on Spotify. Please leave comments there and subscribe to our substack, theenergynewsbeat.substack.com. That’s probably the best place to support the show. Stu does a great job of releasing, you know, two to three articles a week that really encompass the big themes that are going on. We also drop all of our podcasts there, which give a little bit of a breakdown. We just had a great, great podcast. So I highly, highly recommend everybody subscribe to our substack, theenergynewsbeat.substack.com. We’d also like to thank friends of the show, Reese Energy Consulting for supporting the show, guys. Reese Energy Consulting is the foremost midstream expert. Guys, if you at all are dealing with issues in the midstream space, whether you’re an upstream company and need help with your first purchasers contract or renegotiating your gas contracts or figuring out where you’re going to tie in your next pad because you got you’ve got multiple different options and you’re trying to break it all down. Reese Energy Consulting and help. If you’re in the midstream space, I need an extra pair of hands, need some permitting or regulation help, you know, or need some red team analysis on a final investment decision, guys. They have the team that can help you. Check out Reese Energy Consulting.com. They have clients everywhere and all throughout the country, from two people in a garage all the way up to the largestly publicly traded companies in the world. So if you’re wondering, are you a good fit for them? The answer is yes. Reese Energy Consulting.com. And finally, guys, invest in oil.energynewsbeat.com. We are coming up on the end of the year. And I promise you guys, you do not want to be paying money to Uncle Sam. You want to keep as much money in your pocket. You want to diversify your portfolio a little bit and you want to get some dividends. You can do that by investing in oil and gas. Check out investinoil.energynewsbeat.com. Fill out our portfolio survey and our tax calculator. And guess what, you guys, you guys are going to get and get a nice e-book that tells you here’s what you should look for when you invest in oil and gas. And also figure out what your tax burden is and figure out how much you might save relative to your tax burden if you did invest in oil and gas, guys. We practice what we preach here, guys. We do this stuff ourselves. Invest in oil.energynewsbeat.com. Don’t give your money to Uncle Sam. Figure out and find out if oil and gas investing is for you. Depending on if you qualify, we will again send you all that information. And we may or may not point you in the right direction. Again, invest in oil.energynewsbeat.com. [00:15:20][159.1]
Michael Tanner: [00:15:23] Where’s the glut? Says Conico Phillips CEO, Ryan Lance. This is a really interesting article. Ryan Lance recently sort of came out and has kind of challenged the prevailing narratives of what people are really calling this impending oil surplus. He was at an event, and really what he did, and I’ll kind of read straight from the article here. Speaking at a recent industry event, Lance questioned the notion of a glut, emphasizing that global oil demand continues to grow steadily. He argued that the market is tighter than current sentiment suggests, pointing out that the key challenge lies in sourcing conventional oil supplies in the coming years. He was also optimistic that oil prices could rebound to the 70, 75 per barrel range as quote unquote the market rebalances from any short-term supplies. These comments were actually made about two days ago, which sort of is in opposition of a lot of the sentiment that’s out there right now. I mean, you specifically talk about things that have happened both at the IEA and internally. So think about the IEA has anticipated that world oil supply will rise by about three million barrels per day to 106.1 million barrels per day in 2025, leading to a quote huge oversupply that is causing theoretically these prices to fall as where we stand today. We’ve also seen JP Morgan research, who I tend to kind of, I don’t want to say follow blindly, but they tend to be kind of the most accurate and I think the most paired back. Obviously, we’re not a Goldman Sachs company here. But JP Morgan research forecasts Brent crew to average about 2066 per barrel in 2025, which drops to 58 in 2026, mainly driven again by the supply demand imbalances and trade frictions. You know, we’ve seen OPEC has continued to maintain this bullish stance. They’ve kind of doubled down on their expectations of strong oil demand. I mean, again, I think that we’re we’re seeing that what you see out of OPEC is they want to say demand is strong so they can continue to raise oil production without severely impacting prices. And we’ve also seen the EIA, which is the US Energy Information Administration, has has sort of aligned with what the IEA is saying. They are forecasting global liquid fuels production to increase by 2.7 million barrels, so a little less than that 3 billion barrels. And they’ve put US crude production to average about 3.5 million barrels per day. You know, we we have seen steady production refinery demand, which there is strength to bite these gluts. You know, on a long-term view, I mean what Ryan Lance is doing is you have to put this into context. He just laid off 25% of his workforce because they overspent on some acquisitions, they didn’t control cost as much. So the real question is why is he coming out and saying this? Who’s he talking to? Who’s his audience? His audience isn’t his the analysts that are covering his stock. They they’re not gonna listen to this, but oh well, Ryan Lance thinks oil’s gonna be 70 to 75 dollars. What he’s trying to do, in my opinion, is he’s trying to signal to his employees that we have a bullish view in the future and this 25% layoff is done. Don’t you don’t need to walk around the hall scared that we’re gonna come out and do another 10%. You don’t need to worry about all this. We are still bullish on oil and gas. And it’s more of a signal to his company that hey, we’re still gonna keep at this. We’re not just gonna pack it in and go home. And obviously, no one just wants to pack it in and go home, but I think he’s dealing with a very nervous company base who just saw 25% of their friends go home and are wondering, are we next? And I think for now, the answer is no. Now, do I think 70 to 75 per barrel in the next 18 months is legitimate? That’s the top side, in my opinion. I I think, you know, I think what he’s saying is is correct on some levels. The market is not in a huge surplus, like what the IEA says. You know, I I think again, the answer usually always when you when you when you sort of plot on a scatter plot all of these different theses. You’ve got where, you know, the IEA and and EIA are, you’ve got where oil companies are. It probably lands somewhere in the middle. So Ryan Lance, he’s a big believer in in oil prices at 70 to sp 75. [00:19:15][232.5]
[00:19:16] And so in sort of contrast to the first segment there, you know, Vicki Hollow was was basically at the wasn’t at the same conference, was at the Energy Intelligence Forum, which is held in London each week or each year. She had a pretty sobering outlook on the oil and gas business relative to where pricing is going to go. She basically said that there’s a range that she sees of 58 to 62 through the end of 2026. She described that range as tight, even amid sub persistent supply constraints and what are sort of they’re saying is balanced demand. It’s pretty interesting that she would come out and say this. I think to be honest, she’s probably making the opposite virtue signal. I think that Occidental has has yet to really gone through a big wave of layoffs. They’re they’re one of the few what we would call larger cap companies. We’ve seen Exxon Chevron and Conical Phillips attempt to theoretically right size their business. And so now the funny part is Oxy, who’s kind of in that tier two range when it comes to large cap companies, you know, they’re probably next on the list. I mean, their acquisition of of Crown Quest in 2023 by all accounts is is going fairly poorly. They’ve kind of loaded themselves up with debt and maybe acquired some locations that aren’t maybe necessarily panning out. So I think it’s interesting that she’s coming out and now trying to put a bearish spin on this, probably trying to prep her employees for a potential layoff, whether it’s, you know, whether it’s it’s large, small, anywhere in between, you know, and her forecast really sort of aligns with what we talked about in the last segment, the IEA and the EIA relative to where it’s going. Now, I think the interesting part is okay, what what does that mean for natural gas? Cause she also touched on natural gas. She’s a big believer in the AI boom. She continues to believe that that dry gas production will continue to increase. And and her comments specifically on natural gas has specifically again to do with AI data centers and electrifications, the forecast that that they are seeing internally, on top of what’s also being spoken about externally, is that you know, you could see data center could could account for 10% of electricity by 2030. And You’ve got, you know, hyperscalers like Google and and and Amazon continuing to ramp up gas fire generation to meet the demand. So I I think what she’s signaling, ironically, is that yes, we’re heavy into oil, but if we are to make a move, we are interesting and interested in moving into natural gas. And I think if you’re an investor and you’re looking to, well, where do I sort of begin to allocate my money? You know, I think you have to take a hard look at natural gas and say, okay, is there some natural gas players out there that is worth allocating to? I think there’s a few, and we would highly again recommend doing your research. We’re not an investment company here, but you know, kind of the tale of two cities over here. You’ve got Ryan Lance on one end and Vicky Holub on another. Who, and who would have thought I would agree with Vicky Holub? It’s the that’s the funny part. I agree with Vicky Hollob, not Ryan Lance. It’s, you know, we will write this down in history. October 15th, 2025. Michael Tanner agrees with Vicky Hollub. [00:19:16][0.0]
[1135.7]
Be the first to comment