MDN’s Energy Stories of Interest: Wed, Aug 20, 2025 [FREE ACCESS]
NATIONAL: With supply abundant and demand easing, natural gas futures falter again; Is CO2 truly a pollutant? We break down the debate; Time to stop endangerment of developing economies with CO2 regulation; INTERNATIONAL: Oil falls as Trump pushes summit; LNG demand, prices to rise further this year, O’Neill says.
NATIONAL
With supply abundant and demand easing, natural gas futures falter again
NGI’s Daily Gas Price Index/Kevin Dobbs
Natural gas futures failed to muster momentum on Tuesday, held back by forecasts for diminished demand and steadily strong supply. Following a 2.6-cent decline to start the week, the September Nymex gas futures contract fell by a steeper 12.4 cents on Tuesday to settle at $2.766/MMBtu. NGI’s Spot Gas National Avg. followed suit and shed 4.5 cents to $2.525. While above-average temperature reigned across most of the Lower 48 on Tuesday, heat was projected to begin fading by midweek in northern markets, according to NatGasWeather. Milder conditions were then expected to spread across much of the northern half of the Lower 48 by next week, curbing cooling demand substantially in the final stretch of August. Forecasts show a “not nearly hot enough pattern” across the northern half of the United States in the last third of August, the firm said. [MDN: Yuck. Back down into the $2.70s. We were hoping to get above $3 and stay there. Not in the cards for now.]
Is CO2 truly a pollutant? We break down the debate
Wall Street Journal/Eric Niiler
A growing political and scientific debate questions whether carbon dioxide should be classified as a pollutant under U.S. law. While a 2007 Supreme Court ruling required the EPA to regulate CO2 as a threat to public health, the Trump administration argues it is not harmful to humans and seeks to revoke the “endangerment finding” that underpins federal emissions rules. Proponents of reclassification highlight CO2’s natural role in photosynthesis, its non-toxic nature at current levels, and its potential to boost plant growth, while critics stress that human-caused emissions have driven a 50% rise in atmospheric CO2 since preindustrial times, contributing to global warming, extreme weather, and rising sea levels. A Department of Energy review questions climate models and emphasizes potential agricultural benefits, but critics argue it downplays nutrient losses in crops and broader climate risks. The issue has sparked lawsuits, public hearings, and uncertainty over future emissions regulations, setting the stage for a major legal and policy battle. [MDN: This article says “As the scientific consensus on CO2’s role in climate change has solidified…” That statement alone exposes the author as fraudulent. Science is NEVER about consensus (i.e., opinion). Science is about provable facts. Political science is about opinion. The left says if you don’t believe the way they do, you are an outcast. An apostate. Evil. The left demands fealty to their accepted narratives. No more! Trump is breaking the mold. He is returning science to true/real science. And none too soon.]
Time to stop endangerment of developing economies with CO2 regulation
CO2 Coalition/Vijay Jayaraj
The article criticizes the classification of carbon dioxide (CO?) as a pollutant under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 2009 Endangerment Finding, arguing that this bureaucratic move launched harmful anti-fossil fuel policies worldwide. It contends that CO?, essential for plant growth and exhaled naturally by humans, has been falsely vilified as the dominant driver of climate change, enabling regulations that undermine reliable energy and prosperity. The piece highlights a July U.S. Department of Energy study suggesting CO?-induced warming may be less economically damaging than feared, and that overly aggressive mitigation policies cause more harm than benefit. With EPA Secretary Lee Zeldin proposing repeal of the Endangerment Finding, the article frames this as a potential end to costly green policies that have hindered energy development, particularly in poorer nations. It urges developing economies to reject CO? restrictions, embrace fossil fuels, and prioritize affordable, reliable energy over what it calls pseudoscientific climate agendas. [MDN: It’s time to kick the so-called endangerment finding to the curb. This article makes the point that not only has the lunatic endangerment finding harmed our country, but it’s harmed other countries around the world. Stop the harm.]
INTERNATIONAL
Oil falls as Trump pushes summit
Bloomberg/Alex Longley, Christopher Charleston
Oil prices fell as traders assessed potential progress toward a Ukraine ceasefire, with President Donald Trump urging a summit between Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky after meetings in Washington. West Texas Intermediate declined 1.7% to $62.35, while Brent slipped 1.2% to $65.79, reflecting expectations that any peace deal could ease restrictions on Russian crude, though Moscow has maintained exports throughout the conflict. Trump emphasized the need for flexibility from both sides, while Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned of possible tariffs on India over Russian oil purchases. Market sentiment suggests traders are cautiously pricing in potential sanction relief, even as fighting persists, with Ukraine striking Russia’s Druzhba pipeline and Moscow hitting a Ukrainian refinery. Meanwhile, U.S. Gulf Coast crude is trading at strong premiums, signaling more exports ahead, and WTI’s widening discount to Brent could further support shipments abroad. Oil remains down over 10% this year amid trade policy concerns and OPEC+ supply growth. [MDN: Doom & Gloom-berg always pitching a lower oil price as THE END of the world. It’s the opposite. It’s great! Yes, keeping the price above $65 is a good level so shale drillers in the U.S. can make more profits, but honestly, we’re just fine in the low $60s. Some drillers will stop drilling. That’s called free enterprise and capitalism. It creates less supply, which drives prices higher, which then brings about more drilling. The best economic system ever devised by humans.]
LNG demand, prices to rise further this year, O’Neill says
Bloomberg/Keira Wright
Woodside Energy Group Ltd., Australia’s largest LNG producer, expects global liquefied natural gas demand and prices to rise through year-end, driven by declining domestic production and growing energy needs in emerging Asian economies such as India, Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines, while Japan, South Korea, and China remain key buyers. CEO Meg O’Neill highlighted rising demand from non-OECD Asia and noted that Woodside benefits from selling about a quarter of its LNG indexed to gas prices rather than oil, positioning the company well ahead of peak Northern Hemisphere winter demand. Despite strong LNG fundamentals, Woodside reported a 24% drop in underlying profit to $1.25 billion due to a $143 million impairment from exiting its U.S. H2OK hydrogen project and a $430 million provision for decommissioning offshore fields after discovering unexpected residual hydrocarbons. Revenue rose 10% to $6.6 billion with the launch of Senegal’s Sangomar project, but dividends fell 23%, sending shares lower. [MDN: Woodside is an important U.S. player too, having purchased Tellurian and its Driftwood LNG project last year (see Australia’s Woodside Buying Tellurian & Driftwood LNG for $1.2B). Woodside renamed the project after buying Tellurian, now called Woodside Louisiana LNG. When the CEO of Woodside predicts rising LNG demand and prices, everyone listens.]