Enbridge plans to expand its infrastructure to increase oil transportation from the American Midwest to the Gulf Coast, anticipating rising exports and addressing current market logistical constraints.

Enbridge, a Canadian company specializing in energy infrastructure, is exploring the possibility of increasing the capacity of its pipelines designed to transport crude oil from Flanagan, Illinois, to the U.S. Gulf Coast. The goal is to better meet the growing demand for export logistics. This initiative particularly aims to improve supply to major Gulf terminals, where the volume of oil delivered from U.S. production areas is steadily increasing. Currently, limited pipeline capacity creates logistical constraints for market players.

Strategic Expansion toward Corpus Christi and Houston

Enbridge already maintains extensive infrastructure in the region, including the Houston Oil Terminal (EHOT) at Jones Creek, expected to begin operations by 2026. This terminal will have significant storage capacity capable of receiving and shipping approximately 930,000 barrels per day (b/d). The company also plans to invest around $700 million in constructing the Canyon Oil Pipeline System, capable of transporting 200,000 b/d of crude oil, and the Canyon Gathering System, a dedicated natural gas network with a capacity of 125 million cubic feet per day (MMcf/d). These facilities will primarily support the offshore development of the Kaskida oil field.

Additionally, Enbridge operates the Gray Oak Pipeline, connecting the Permian Basin to Corpus Christi, Texas. This pipeline, currently with a capacity of 980,000 b/d, will soon undergo an additional capacity increase of 120,000 b/d. This expansion aims to ease logistical constraints between major producing basins and export terminals located along the Gulf Coast. Enbridge’s initiative aligns with a broader dynamic aimed at optimizing U.S. domestic oil flows to international markets.

Anticipating Rising Exports

U.S. crude oil exports continue to grow, increasing pressure on existing transportation capacities. This trend generates increased demand for robust logistics services between producing regions, primarily located in the Midwest and Southwest U.S., and Gulf Coast export ports. In response, Enbridge is closely evaluating investments to facilitate crude oil flows to these strategic locations.

These developments could significantly impact price differentials between Permian Basin oil and international markets. The establishment of these new capacities may also influence commercial strategies among U.S. producers and exporters, opening new prospects for oil market participants. Enbridge has not yet confirmed the precise timeline or total cost of the proposed projects.

By: Energynews /  24 June 2025

As Israel strikes Iran and Tehran threatens to close the Strait of Hormuz, the global oil trade braces for disruption to critical supply routes

Oil prices are lurching after Israel confirmed a strike on Iranian territory on 13 June, described by officials as a “pre-emptive strike” linked to Iran’s nuclear activities.

Brent crude leaped over 10%, hitting US$73.12 a barrel, the highest since January, while US crude on the NYMEX exchange matches it at US$73.20. These price swings are accompanied by a growing fear around supply chains, particularly if the conflict expands. 

Now, the Iranian parliament’s decision to vote for the closure of the Strait of Hormuz marks a turning point. This 50km-wide shipping corridor, sitting between Iran to the north and Oman and the United Arab Emirates to the south, is the busiest oil transit chokepoint in the world. Around 20% of global oil passes through this narrow lane daily.

The closure, if implemented, could halt US$1bn worth of oil shipments every day, choking off supply and hitting economies reliant on Middle Eastern crude.

More than just a regional issue, the potential blockage of the Strait of Hormuz poses a serious challenge to global energy flows and supply chains.

In the first half of 2023, about 20 million barrels of oil per day flowed through this route, according to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), representing US$600bn annually. This crude doesn’t just come from Iran – it also moves from Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE to buyers across Asia, Europe and beyond.

“The outlook for Iranian exports is a concern,” says Derren Nathan from Hargreaves Lansdown, “but also the potential for disruption to shipping in the Persian Gulf’s Strait of Hormuz. It’s a key route for about 20% of global oil flows and an even higher proportion of liquefied natural gas haulage.”

Any interruption would squeeze an already tense global supply chain. With tankers carrying both oil and liquefied natural gas threading through this narrow channel – about 33km at its tightest point – the logistical knock-on effects would be felt quickly.

From China and India to Japan and South Korea, importers would face higher costs. In 2022, more than 80% of oil and condensate leaving the strait went to Asia. China alone takes up around 90% of Iran’s oil exports. For countries like India, half of its crude and 60% of its natural gas imports sail through Hormuz. South Korea and Japan rely on it for 60% and 75% of their crude respectively.

Should Iran attempt to close it, experts suggest mines laid by fast-attack boats or submarines could make the strait impassable. While Iran’s navy could threaten commercial or military ships, retaliation by US forces would be likely.

The US, which escorted Kuwaiti tankers during the Iran-Iraq conflict in the 1980s, retains military options, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio stating: “It would hurt other countries’ economies a lot worse than ours.”

Trade routes shift

Efforts to find alternative paths are well underway but can’t match Hormuz’s scale.

Saudi Arabia operates its 1,200km East–West pipeline that runs to the Red Sea, shifting up to five million barrels a day. The UAE channels oil from inland fields to Fujairah on the Gulf of Oman, capable of handling 1.5 million barrels per day. Iran’s Goreh–Jask pipeline, launched in 2021, carries 350,000 barrels, but exports have stalled since September 2024.

Those routes aren’t without risk, as Saleem Khan, Chief Data & Analytics Officer at Pole Star Global explains: “This morning, at 00:15 GMT, we saw the collision of two oil tankers in the UAE’s Persian Gulf.

“The collision between the Adalynn and Front Eagle does not seem to be “security related” according to maritime security monitor, Ambrey. However an analysis by Pole Star seems to hint toward a potential AIS jamming scenario. The Combined Maritime Force’s JMIC information centre said in an advisory this week that it had received reports of electronic interference originating from the vicinity of Iran’s Port of Bandar Abbas.” 

Even without disruption, collectively these routes can only manage about 3.5 million barrels a day – less than a fifth of what flows through the Strait of Hormuz.

The EIA notes that in 2024 the strait handled over one-quarter of global seaborne oil trade and one-fifth of all petroleum consumption. Meanwhile, disruptions elsewhere, such as at the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, have already prompted countries like Saudi Arabia to divert shipments through inland pipelines.

While the US now imports just 7% of its crude via Hormuz thanks to rising domestic and Canadian supply, the strait remains vital to the rest of the world.

As energy analyst Vandana Hari explains, Iran has “little to gain and too much to lose” from closing the strait. Such a move would not only isolate it from neighbours but also risk damaging ties with China.

By: Libby Hargreaves / June 23, 2025

On the heels of my recent article outlining how California’s unique fuel regulations — not corporate price gouging — are driving up gasoline prices in the state, new developments have added urgency to that conversation.

On May 6, California Senate Minority Leader Brian W. Jones (R-San Diego) sent a letter to Governor Gavin Newsom sounding the alarm over what could become an energy and economic crisis in the state. Citing an analysis by University of Southern California professor Michael Mische, the letter warns that gas prices could spike 75% by 2026 — reaching as high as $8.43 per gallon — if two major refineries are allowed to shut down as planned.

This follows Professor Mische’s earlier study, which I referenced in my prior article. His research identified structural factors and policy-driven costs as the primary reasons California gasoline prices are consistently the highest in the nation — not oil company profiteering. These factors include high state taxes, a boutique fuel blend required only in California, and an increasingly constrained refinery landscape.

A Looming Supply Crunch

Two key in-state refineries are scheduled to close in the coming months: the Phillips 66 refinery in Los Angeles by the end of 2025, and the Valero refinery in Benicia by April 2026. Together, these facilities produce approximately 20% of California’s gasoline supply.

Professor Mische’s projections are stark. He estimates that gas prices could reach $6.43 per gallon after the first closure and climb to $8.43 by the end of 2026 after the second. These numbers assume stable crude oil prices. But if global oil markets turn volatile — as they often do — the ceiling could be even higher.

What’s Driving the Closures?

Refining gasoline in California has become increasingly difficult. The state’s stringent environmental rules, such as the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), coupled with recent legislation like SBX1-2 and ABX2-1, have layered on costly compliance burdens. Add in uncertainty around future bans on internal combustion vehicles and a hostile investment environment, and it’s not hard to see why refinery operators are opting to exit the state.

The problem isn’t limited to fuel prices. According to Senator Jones’ letter, the closures would also eliminate around 1,300 direct jobs and nearly 3,000 more indirectly. These are good-paying, union and trade jobs in communities that can ill afford the loss. Beyond economics, the closures also increase the state’s reliance on imported fuel — most of which must be transported by ship — raising logistical risks and, arguably, national security concerns.

Why This Matters

The letter from Senator Jones reads as both a policy critique and a plea for realism. It challenges Governor Newsom to reconsider regulations that are squeezing fuel producers out of the state and proposes collaboration with the energy industry to explore solutions. Those could include tax incentives to maintain refining capacity, or temporary relief from some of the more onerous rules that disproportionately affect California refiners.

It’s important to understand that California’s fuel market is largely isolated. The state’s environmental regulations and fuel specifications make it difficult to import gasoline from other states or countries. When refineries close, there aren’t many viable alternatives. And when supply tightens in a market with limited flexibility, prices surge — sometimes dramatically.

Reframing the Debate

Much of the public and political dialogue around gas prices in California has focused on oil company profits and alleged price gouging. But the data simply doesn’t support that narrative.

Multiple independent investigations — including those by the FTC and the California Energy Commission — have found no clear evidence that refiners are colluding or manipulating the market. The price premiums in California are mostly structural, driven by policy choices.

Those choices may reflect environmental priorities, but they also carry economic consequences. Policymakers must grapple with this trade-off, especially as the state’s energy mix continues to evolve.

The Bottom Line

If California continues down a path that discourages in-state refining while failing to address the growing supply gap, residents should brace for more sticker shock at the pump. Gasoline prices of $8 or more per gallon are no longer hypothetical; they are within view if the state doesn’t take action.

To be clear, this is not an argument against clean energy. California can pursue its climate goals and still maintain a stable, affordable energy supply. But doing so will require pragmatic policies that ensure reliability and economic viability — not just ambition.

As I wrote in my previous article, this isn’t about corporate greed. It’s about structural and regulatory decisions that have real-world consequences for working families, small businesses, and anyone who drives a car in California.

The choice isn’t between climate progress and affordable fuel. The choice is whether we make that transition responsibly — or let the market punish those who can least afford it.

By: Oil Price / June 17, 2025 

KUALA LUMPUR, June 16 (Reuters) – The importance of oil and gas can’t be underestimated at times when conflicts occur, something that was currently being seen, the head of Saudi oil giant Aramco (2222.SE), opens new tab told an energy conference on Monday.

Aramco CEO Amin Nasser delivered his speech to the Energy Asia Conference in Kuala Lumpur by a video link.

Oil prices jumped last week after Israel launched strikes against Iran on Friday that it said were to prevent Tehran from building an atomic weapon. The fighting intensified over the weekend.

“(History has) shown us that when conflicts occur, the importance of oil and gas can’t be understated,” Nasser said.

“We are witnessing this in real time, with threats to energy security continuing to cause global concern,” he said, without directly mentioning the fighting between Israel and Iran.

Nasser also said that experience had shown that new energy sources don’t replace the old, but added to the mix. He said the transition to net-zero emissions could cost up to $200 trillion, and renewable sources were not meeting current demand.

“As a result, energy security and affordability have at last joined sustainability as the transition’s central goals,” he said.

Aramco is the economic backbone of Saudi Arabia, generating a bulk of the kingdom’s revenue through oil exports and funding its ambitious Vision 2030 diversification drive.

By: Reuters / June 16, 2025

Mangaluru – In a landmark development for India’s energy infrastructure, Sea Lord Containers, a wholly owned subsidiary of Aegis Logistics, has inaugurated a state-of-the-art cryogenic LPG terminal at Mangalore Port. The facility, with a static storage capacity of 82,000 metric tons, marks a significant leap in strengthening the country’s coastal petroleum logistics.

Built by Sea Lord for the Aegis Vopak Terminals joint venture, the terminal is strategically positioned to support India’s growing LPG needs while enhancing storage flexibility and safety. Unlike traditional pressurized storage, cryogenic LPG systems operate at low temperatures and atmospheric pressure, making them more secure and efficient.

The terminal is seen as a response to India’s clean fuel goals, enabling better management of seasonal demand fluctuations, improving energy security, and contributing to a transition away from high-carbon energy sources. Industry observers note this development aligns closely with India’s Maritime Vision 2030 and clean energy frameworks, which emphasize decentralized storage, port carbon reduction, and supply chain resilience.

Equipped with modern safety protocols, environmental safeguards, and automated operations, the facility is operated by Aegis Vopak, a JV with global tank terminal leader Royal Vopak. The terminal’s scale and technological capabilities position it as a future benchmark for green port infrastructure in India.

Experts say the project could become a national model if it ensures transparency, equity in access, and community participation, including inclusive infrastructure development for women and marginalized groups.

By News Karnataka / 14 June 2025