After 20 years of appreciation against the dollar, the euro fell sharply. Russia’s war in Ukraine and its energy policies against the European Union, the effects of the coronavirus, rising inflation, rising fuel and energy prices and along with political and economic instability in EU member states has contributed to the Union’s currency decline.
The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) issued its report for June today, Tuesday, as it kept its expectations for the growth of oil demand at 3.4 million barrels per day during 2022, but it expects that the pace of growth in oil demand will decrease to the next half-year, with inflation and conflict controlling the International Economy.
OPEC raised its forecast for oil demand in the third and fourth quarters while lowering it for the second quarter of this year. The organization expects an increase in oil demand by 3.1 million barrels per day in the second half of 2022, saying that daily demand will reach 101.8 million barrels in the second half of the year and confirming its expectations that the demand for oil in 2022 will exceed pre-Corona levels.
According to what "Bloomberg" quoted an OPEC delegate, global oil consumption is expected to increase by 1.8 million barrels per day next year, down from 3.4 million barrels per day scheduled for this year. The forecasts will be reviewed by representatives from the group's member states next week.
OPEC production declined by 176 thousand barrels per day in May compared to April. The OPEC report attributed this to the decrease in production in Iran, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, and Gabon. In comparison, global oil production declined to 98.75 million barrels per day in May.
The report indicated that Russian production decreased by 930 thousand barrels per day in the second quarter.
OPEC and its allies surprised energy markets earlier this month by agreeing to speed up production return, which halted during the pandemic, but spare production capacities are limited to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, and Kuwait.
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development said last week that the global economy would pay a heavy price for the war in Ukraine, including weaker growth, stronger inflation, and potential long-term damage to supply chains.
Russia has accused Washington of trying to withdraw grain reserves from Ukraine, threatening a global crisis.
These statements come a day after United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called on Russia to allow the export of Ukrainian grain stored in this country's ports and demanded the West to enable Russian food and fertilizers to reach global markets, in two measures he confirmed would contribute to solving the growing global food crisis.
"Russia must allow the safe and secure export of grain stored in Ukrainian ports," Guterres said at a ministerial meeting in New York organized by the United States.
He added that it is also possible to "explore alternative transportation routes" to the sea lane for exporting these grains, which are stored primarily in silts in Odesa's Black Sea port city, "even if we know that this will not be enough to solve the problem."
The Secretary-General sounded the alarm because "the specter of global food shortage looms in the coming months," stressing that "if we do not feed people, we are fueling conflicts."
He said that the war in Ukraine doubled the factors that contributed to the global food crisis and accelerated its pace, noting that these factors are climate change, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the widening gap between rich and poor countries.
The Secretary-General warned that the current crisis "could last for years" and "threatens to push tens of millions of people into food insecurity, malnutrition and starvation."
"In just two years, the number of acutely food insecure people has doubled, from 135 million before the start of the pandemic to 276 million today," he noted.
In a related context, US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, said that "22 million tons" of grain are currently in silos in Ukraine and are only waiting to be exported.
The US Secretary explained that his country had decided to allocate an "additional $215 million" to combat food insecurity.
Russia and Ukraine together account for nearly a third of global wheat supplies. Ukraine is also a major exporter of corn, barley, sunflower oil and rapeseed oil, while Russia and Belarus - which has backed Moscow in its war in Ukraine - account for more than 40% of global exports of potash, a crop nutrient.
There are fears that China and Russia, in light of the sanctions that affected the latter due to the Ukrainian crisis, will create a financial system to compete with the West, according to an analysis published by the British newspaper, The Telegraph.
The West kicked Russian banks out of the Swift system, and China's UnionPay stepped in to help Moscow after Visa and Mastercard suspended operations in the country.
"The war has also increased the risk of a more permanent disintegration of the global economy and into geopolitical blocs with distinct technical parameters, cross-border payment systems, and reserve currencies," said Pierre-Olivier Gorenchas, chief economist at the IMF.
He added that this "split" would have substantial economic consequences and pose a significant challenge to "the rules-based framework that has governed international and economic relations for the past 75 years."
While the IMF revealed that global growth will slow sharply from 6.1 per cent in 2021 to 3.6 per cent this year, 0.8 percentage points weaker than expected last January, after the "expectations worsened significantly."
The British economy is expected to expand 3.7% this year, one percentage point lower than previous forecasts.
The IMF said that while this would be much stronger than Germany, France and Italy, growth in the UK would suddenly slow to 1.2 per cent in 2023 as inflation in living standards fell, and high borrowing costs hit business investment.
In contrast, Germany's economy is expected to grow at a much slower rate of 2.1 per cent in 2022, nearly half of the expected expansion in January, while Italy's GDP will rise by 2.3 per cent, down 1.5 percentage points.
The two countries' economies are among the most dependent on Russian gas supplies, especially as higher prices pressure households and companies.
The IMF explained that the European Union countries are the second-largest obstacle in its forecasts to global growth after the Russian economy, which is expected to contract by 8.5 per cent.
"The war is adding to the series of supply shocks that have hit the global economy in recent years," Gorenchas said.
He also likened this to seismic waves whose effects will spread widely through commodity markets, trade and financial links, as Russia is a major supplier of oil, gas and minerals and its participation with Ukraine in the supply of wheat and corn.
It is noteworthy that the Russian-Ukrainian war has not only affected the situation in these two countries but affected the region and the world at large. It also indicates the importance of a global safety net and regional arrangements to protect economies from shocks.
Since Russia and Ukraine are major commodity producers, supply chain disruptions have caused global prices to rise sharply, particularly oil and natural gas prices.
Food costs have also jumped in light of the historical level of wheat price, with Ukraine and Russia contributing 30% of world wheat exports.
In a recent report, the World Bank estimated that the Middle East and North Africa economies will grow by 5.2% in 2022. The fastest growth rate since 2016. Thanks to unexpected revenues from high oil prices that are in the interest of the region's oil-exporting countries.
But growing uncertainty surrounds these predictions due to the ongoing war in Ukraine and the ongoing threats from the coronavirus mutant.
In its report on the latest economic developments, issued by the World Bank, entitled "Reviewing the Facts.. Growth Forecasts in the Middle East and North Africa in Times of Uncertainty." The World Bank expected that the region would record an uneven recovery, as the averages in the region hide significant differences.
The report predicted that the oil-producing countries would benefit from higher prices, along with increased vaccination rates from the Coronavirus, while countries suffering from fragility conditions would be delayed.
But the inflation risks are growing in the entire region due to the tightening of monetary policy at the global level, the unpredictability of the developments of the Corona pandemic, the continuing disruptions in supply chains, and the high food prices.
The report indicated that although the growth rate is expected to rise by 5.2%, the per capita GDP, an indicator of living standards, will hardly exceed pre-pandemic levels.
It is estimated that GDP per capita will grow by 4.5% in 2022 in the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council. GDP Per capita is expected to grow in middle-income oil-exporting countries by 3% and by 2.4% in oil-importing countries in the region.
The World Bank said that if these predictions come true, 11 out of 17 economies in the Middle East and North Africa may not recover to pre-pandemic levels by 2022.
As of April 4, 2022, the report explained that the average vaccination rates in the Gulf countries reached 75.7%, which is better than their income counterparts.
The Kremlin announced on Saturday that Russian President Vladimir Putin, with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, discussed a joint positive work in the framework of OPEC +.
The Kremlin stated that Putin and the Saudi crown prince exchanged views on the situation in Ukraine and Yemen, Reuters reported.
The sanctions imposed by Western countries on Russia increase energy prices and destabilize oil supplies.
Russian supplies represent about 40% of European gas needs, while about 2.3 million barrels of Russian crude travel west every day through a network of pipelines.
Saudi Arabia, along with Russia, leads the "OPEC Plus" alliance, which includes 13 members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and ten outside the organization to ensure stable oil supplies. The organization has resisted US pressure to increase production to lower prices.
The "OPEC +" meeting on March 31 concluded that there was no need to change the current production plans and agreed to raise the group's production ceiling by another 432,000 barrels per day, starting from May.
The group's decision is broadly in line with market expectations. The JMMC's Joint Ministerial Follow-up Committee meeting lasted less than 20 minutes to agree on this recommendation.
Geopolitical developments related to the war in Ukraine pushed oil prices to record levels, the highest since 2008.
Foreign Policy Magazine published a report that reviewed the decline of the Russian Ruble in conjunction with the war in Ukraine and then its return to the pre-war levels, which raises a wave of questions about Moscow's ability to recover so quickly.
A few days ago, the US dollar exchange rate returned to about 80 Russian rubles, approximately the exact exchange rate before Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24.
Western sanctions, which affected many sectors and business people, initially destroyed the Russian currency, but it rebounded a few days ago and returned to its previous levels.
"The impression that the Russian currency has recovered is not correct, but rather a deceptive impression," said Adam Tours, an economic analyst and writer at Foreign Policy.
He added, "The Russians understand that the point of the game was to hit their currency. It was done through the sanctions on the central bank, which was the dramatic aspect of the new sanctions during the first week of the war, so they set the recovery of the currency value as their main goal."
"The Russians are completely manipulating the Russian currency market, as much as they control it at home," Tours told Foreign Policy. "They are restricting how foreigners who have invested in Russia, or anyone else, can sell the ruble."
Russians are increasingly asking Europeans to pay for gas in Russian rubles through direct or indirect means. According to Tours, the Russian authorities are creating "artificial sources of demand for the Ruble. Because in the end, it is the balance between supply and demand that determines the value of a currency.
He notes that they ask Russian exporters who can still earn foreign currency to exchange them for rubles. As much as 80% of their export earnings must go to the Ruble. Every time this process repeats, it creates a demand for the rouble. All in all, Russia has a considerable trade surplus right now, and that would be the kind of economic situation in which you would expect the currency to rise.
In late February, Russia began a large-scale military operation in Ukrainian. After the invasion, western countries started imposing harsh economic sanctions on Russia, which led to a dramatic devaluation of the Ruble.
Western countries are considering should Russia remain within the G-20 grouping of major economies after its invasion of Ukraine, US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan has said, emphasizing that it "cannot be business as usual" for Moscow.
"We believe that it cannot be business as usual for Russia in international institutions and in the international community," US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan told reporters at a White House news conference when asked about Russia's membership of G-20.
"But as for particular institutions and particular decisions, we'd like to consult with our Allies, consult with our partners in those institutions before making any further pronouncements," Sullivan added.
Pressed by the high energy dependence (more than 50%), the high volatility of gas and oil prices due to destabilizing geopolitical factors and the urgent need to guarantee a secure energy supply. The EU implemented an energy strategy based on the preferential agreements with Russia and Algeria for the supply of gas.
In the use of obsolete nuclear power plants instead of new generation atomic reactors EPR2 (European Pressurized Water Reactor) and in the extraordinary promotion of renewable energies (1st producer in the world), with the unequivocal objective of achieving self-sufficiency in energy and water resources on the horizon of 2030.
The ambitious European Program on Climate Change was approved for 2030 (the Triple 30) with the commitment to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 30%, improve energy efficiency by another 30% and achieve 30% of the energy consumed comes from renewable sources.
Together with the Reorientation of Land Freight Transport by the new Motorways of the Sea and High-Speed Railways through the imposition of ecological taxes on road transport and vehicles without an ECO label.
However, according to Marie-Helene Fandel, an analyst at the European Policy Center, “the EU’s energy policy suffers from a high dependence on foreign countries due to its scarcity of resources and its limited storage capacity” which, together with the inability of Twenty-seven to develop a true common energy policy will slow down the entire process and make the utopia of European energy self-reliance unfeasible on the horizon of 2030.
The rise in gas and electricity prices would have surprised Europe with gas reserves at historic lows (60%) and would have staged the resounding failure of the energy policies of a European Union incapable of achieving utopian energy self-sufficiency.
Since the Russian gas supplies more than 70% to countries such as the Baltic States, Finland, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Greece, Austria, Hungary and the Czech Republic and more than 80% of the total gas that the EU imports from Russia passes through Ukraine.
The total paralysis of the Nord Stream 2 project that connects Russia with Germany through the Baltic Sea with a maximum transport capacity of 55,000 million cubic meters (bcm) of gas per year and with a validity of 50 years, a vital route for Germany and the Nordic countries will force the EU into US fracking dependency.
Thus, the US will take advantage of the Ukrainian crisis to replace Russia’s European energy dependence (40% of the gas imported by the EU comes from Russia) with fracking dependence, flooding the European market with LNG (natural gas fracked in the US and transported by gas tankers).
With which the US would achieve the objective it was pursuing after the Ukrainian crisis, leaving France as an energy island thanks to the new generation EPR2 nuclear power plants.
The International Energy Agency (IEA), in a report entitled “Global Perspectives for Investment in Energy”, warned that it would be necessary to invest $48 Billion by 2035 to cover the world’s growing energy needs. But the abrupt collapse in the price of crude up to $50, made it impossible for producing countries to obtain competitive prices (around $80) that would allow the necessary investment in energy infrastructure and the search for new exploitations, having as a collateral effect the bankruptcy of countless US shale oil companies.
The increase in world energy demand combined with the boycott imposed on Russian crude oil and the lack of resolution of the Iranian dispute have caused a daily deficit of 1.6 million barrels per day in 2022 according to the IEA and a dangerous “supply anxiety”. To increase the inventories of the countries that has led to a rise in the price of crude oil to $130 a barrel and runaway inflation rates in the US, China and the EU that will have the collateral effect of increases in the price of money by the Central Banks and the economic suffocation of countless countries with a stratospheric Public Debt.
In the European context, in an attempt to satisfy a minimalist energy demand, dependent Russian countries such as the Baltic States, Germany, Poland and Romania will proceed to reactivate dormant coal-fired power plants. While others such as Belgium, Spain, Bulgaria, Hungary and Slovakia will opt for the extension of the useful life of nuclear power plants suffering from a serious functional menopause after almost 40 years of useful life, with the added risk of a runaway increase in CO2 emissions and the possibility of re-editing a new Chernobyl.
By: Julia Glum
But do all those people know what they're talking about? Maybe not.
According to a new poll from Money and Morning Consult, only 1 in 4 U.S. adults can actually say what an NFT is.
Money teamed up with decision intelligence company Morning Consult to test Americans' awareness and knowledge of NFTs. And although roughly a third (35%) of our 2,210 respondents said they had a general sense of or knew exactly what an NFTs is, just 26% could correctly pick the definition of an NFT out of a lineup.
The rest were... confused.
What is an NFT?
In short: NFTs are unique digital assets, bought with crypto (often ether), for which ownership data is stored on a blockchain. NFTs date back to 2014, but they spiked in popularity last year, in part due to record-breaking art auctions that saw a Beeple collage sell for $69 million and a Pak project generate nearly $92 million.
While 26% of respondents in our survey chose the correct definition for an NFT, about 12% reported thinking NFTs are digital assets bought and sold with traditional (fiat) money like U.S. dollars rather than cryptocurrency. Some 12% said they believed NFTs themselves are a kind of cryptocurrency. Another 7% said they thought NFTs are physical assets traded on the blockchain, and the remaining respondents — 43% — said they didn't know or had no opinion.
Charlotte Principato, a Morning Consult financial services analyst, wrote in an email that the results were not surprising.
"Although NFTs have been in the headlines a lot in the past few years, they are still a relatively new digital asset compared to cryptocurrency," Principato added. "Their utility is also slightly less straightforward. While cryptocurrency has the word ‘currency’ in it and consumers can grasp the concept that it’s used to pay for things, a ‘non-fungible token’ is a less self-explanatory name, and I suspect many consumers struggle with the idea of what to do with an NFT."
Understanding of NFTs varied based on demographics.
More males (32%) than females (20%) selected the actual definition of an NFT. So did younger people, though Gen Z lagged slightly behind the millennial generation. Respondents between the ages of 35 to 44 were most likely to know what NFTs are, with 31% picking the right answer, compared to 29% of 18- to 34-year-olds, 22% of 45- to 64-year-olds and 24% of those 65 and older.
Both of these trends track with previous research showing young men are the group most likely to have used crypto. It's hard to pinpoint how many people actually own NFTs, but blockchain data firm Chainalysis estimates the market in 2021 reached roughly $44 billion.
We also found people tend to overestimate just how much they know about NFTs. Among the Money/Morning Consult respondents who said they knew exactly what NFTs are, only half (53%) actually chose the correct definition. On the flip side, adults unfamiliar with NFTs truly were unfamiliar: Just 3% of those who reported they'd never heard of NFTs selected the right answer.
Principato said it's likely the people who reported grasping the concept of NFTs are crypto owners. But the biggest barrier to widespread understanding is in the very nature of NFTs: the fact that they, and related products, involve a complex mix of blockchain and crypto technology.
"In reality, cryptocurrency is both the gateway and the barrier to the world of not only NFTs, but DeFi and Web3 as well," she added.
The plan laid out a phased approach to developing a domestic hydrogen industry and mastering technologies and manufacturing capabilities, while pointing to the country’s carbon peaking and neutrality commitments as an overarching driver.
The long-term plan builds on hydrogen-related visions and plans in several recent documents, including the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021–2025), where hydrogen is identified as a “frontier” area and one of the six industries for focused advancement. China is increasingly cultivating the production and consumption of lower-emission hydrogen to help meet energy needs while also decarbonizing its economy.
China’s push for clean hydrogen is an important step in the country’s stride toward its climate goals. China is the largest producer of hydrogen today, at about 33 million tons (Mt), where most of the volume is produced from fossil fuels as feedstocks in refineries or chemical facilities. The China Hydrogen Alliance has suggested that China’s hydrogen demand would reach 35 Mt in 2030 (at least 5 percent of the Chinese energy supply) and 60 Mt in 2050 (10 percent). Meanwhile, according to the latest government plan, China would produce 100,000 to 200,000 tons of renewable-based hydrogen annually and have a fleet of 50,000 hydrogen-fueled vehicles by 2025. Today, China is already the third-largest fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEV) market and the first for fuel cell trucks and buses in the world. Using low-carbon sources to produce hydrogen and using clean hydrogen in various industrial sectors would help mitigate China’s carbon emissions. For example, the Chinese government estimates that its 2025 target for renewable-based hydrogen could reduce the country’s carbon emissions by one to two million tons annually.
While China’s latest hydrogen plan provided some details, it has also raised several questions. Despite a strong outlook for renewable capacity expansion, the 2025 target volume for renewable-based hydrogen in the range of 100,000–200,000 tons annually is notably modest. For example, China plans to expand its solar and wind generation capacity, aiming to double the capacity from nearly 600 gigawatts (GW) in 2020 to 1,200 GW by 2030. Also, the aforementioned China Hydrogen Alliance has projected that renewable-based hydrogen production could reach 100 Mt by 2060, accounting for 20 percent of China’s final energy consumption. It is possible that China significantly expands the renewable-based hydrogen production between 2025 and 2060, but will the renewables expansion keep apace with the demand growth from both electricity generation and hydrogen production?
Hydrogen-related technology research and innovation is a growing focus for the Chinese government, as noted by the latest plan. The focus reflects the country’s desire to overcome the current deficit in expertise, experience, and infrastructure in producing low-carbon forms of hydrogen. For example, China’s current competitiveness lies with alkaline electrolysis technology, which is well established and cheap but much less compatible with intermittent renewable energy sources than polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) electrolyzers. PEM electrolyzers account for less than 10 percent of the Chinese market, which is otherwise dominated by alkaline electrolyzers. Will China acquire competence in advanced technologies to outcompete other economies in a hydrogen-related innovation race?
Another focus of the Chinese long-term plan is manufacturing capacity. As of 2020, China accounted for 8 percent of the global stock of electrolyzers and for 35 percent of the global manufacturing capacity of electrolyzer equipment and components. Chinese companies seek to build out its electrolyzer manufacturing capacity to 1.5–2.5 GW in 2022, in order to supply both domestic and overseas markets. Will China emerge as a dominant, global manufacturer of electrolyzer equipment and components, particularly for more advanced technologies? Relatedly, will a global supply chain for hydrogen technologies become a geo-economic issue between China and the West the same way supply chains for other clean energy technologies have become in the recent years?
Even in the absence of a national strategy, many state-owned enterprises (SOEs) have been investing in hydrogen projects while a number of subnational governments have identified hydrogen as a key economic priority or formulated hydrogen development plans. It is unclear how many of these SOE undertakings have a long-term commercial viability, or whether many of the subnational plans are aligned with how the national policymakers seek to shape the country’s hydrogen economy. How does the long-term national hydrogen plan affect these numerous, uncoordinated subnational and business sector undertakings?
The direction, pace, and scope of China’s low-carbon hydrogen endeavors warrant close attention for multiple implications, not only for the Chinese economy but also for the course of global hydrogen industry development.