Resource nationalism on the rise amid geopolitical tensions

Good day from Houston.

The information from Texas: ExxonMobil is doubling down on oil — regardless of issues that the market faces a looming oversupply disaster.

The US supermajor stated yesterday that it might crank up output by virtually a fifth by the top of the last decade, dialling up spending plans whilst a few of its friends maintain again amid rising fears of a provide glut.

The 5.4mn barrels of oil equal the corporate plans to pump day by day by the top of the last decade is greater than that of most Opec nations and would flip the west’s largest producer into a world oil and fuel behemoth.

Exxon’s argument is that it may produce oil way more cheaply than its rivals, making it greatest positioned to produce what it predicts will likely be an everlasting world thirst for fossil fuels — even when costs slide.

Elsewhere, the Biden administration yesterday hit China with a volley of recent tariffs on vital mineral imports, a parting present by the president to Beijing as he appears to shore up the nascent US cleantech manufacturing area earlier than leaving workplace. My colleague Aime Williams had the inside track.

That can be the subject of right this moment’s publication. With useful resource nationalism on the march over the metals and minerals wanted to energy the economies of the long run, our commodities correspondent Camilla Hodgson digs into a brand new report on what this implies for an already-tense geopolitical scenario.

The decision? We’ve entered a brand new period of protectionism. Learn on for extra.

As ever, thanks for studying. Electronic mail me at [email protected] — Myles

Western democracies drive a world rise in useful resource nationalism

Companies worldwide face elevated danger from a world rise in protectionism as nations scramble to safe entry to the minerals vital to battery manufacturing and the power transition, in response to new analysis. 

Rising geopolitical tensions have fuelled an increase in state intervention and protectionism “not seen because the first half of the twentieth century in western democracies”, world danger intelligence firm Verisk Maplecroft stated on Thursday. 

The change has been significantly acute in Europe and North America, with governments in each areas looking for to safe their entry to vital minerals comparable to lithium and copper — the availability chains for that are dominated by China — the researchers stated.

Elevated tensions within the sector have worsened in latest weeks with vital minerals changing into an ever extra carefully watched geopolitical soccer. This month, China banned shipments to the US of a number of essential minerals and metals in retaliation for brand new export controls imposed by the Biden administration designed to focus on Beijing’s improvement of synthetic intelligence. Earlier this yr, a coalition of western nations together with the US and UK introduced financing plans for minerals initiatives in an effort to diversify away from China.

“The fracturing geopolitical panorama and the fallout from main shocks just like the pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have spurred an acceleration of insurance policies geared toward buying the minerals wanted to energy the tech and defence industries, in addition to the inexperienced transition to bolster power safety,” stated Jimena Blanco, chief analyst at Verisk Maplecroft. 

“State deal with provide chain safety has opened the door for firms to benefit from engaging incentive schemes, however geopolitical divergence might more and more restrict alternatives to allied or pleasant jurisdictions,” she stated. 

In line with the researchers’ newest useful resource nationalism index — a quarterly evaluation that measures authorities management of financial exercise within the mining and power sectors — 72 nations out of the 198 assessed had seen a “important enhance” in interventionist and protectionist insurance policies over the previous 5 years.

Venezuela, Russia and Mexico had been judged to be the three nations the place companies confronted the best dangers of state intervention and expropriation within the sectors.

However the analysts stated that the danger scores for Germany, Spain, the UK and Poland had all worsened considerably since 2019, with Germany registering the most important drop of any nation in the course of the interval. It has come as a consequence of protectionist strikes by Berlin such because the seizure of Russian power belongings following the nation’s invasion of Ukraine, and the providing of subsidies to spice up home mineral processing and manufacturing, they stated.

Extra broadly, the analysts identified that European and North American governments had taken steps to shore up their home mining and power industries and prohibit international funding from rivals with insurance policies together with US President Joe Biden’s Chips and Science Act. 

Forty-one nations that had been chargeable for 41 per cent of worldwide mineral output had been now labeled as being both “excessive” or “very excessive” danger for protectionist insurance policies, the researchers stated. That was a rise from 30 nations 5 years in the past.

“The most certainly state of affairs is that western nations will more and more use a mixture of commerce and funding insurance policies, together with stricter sustainability requirements, to limit commerce with rivals and push for localised provide chains,” stated Blanco.

Heightened dangers throughout a number of jurisdictions exacerbated the general challenges confronted by firms and traders, given the advanced and cross-border nature of many vital mineral provide chains, the group stated. For instance, a mineral could also be mined in a single nation however processed in one other and bought to a producer working in a 3rd.

The evaluation thought-about nations’ protectionist and interventionist insurance policies, state participation in useful resource extraction and situations of direct and oblique expropriation, comparable to asset nationalisation or regulatory modifications that make doing enterprise within the sectors much less worthwhile. (Camilla Hodgson)

Energy Factors

Vitality Supply is written and edited by Jamie Smyth, Myles McCormick, Amanda Chu, Tom Wilson and Malcolm Moore, with assist from the FT’s world crew of reporters. Attain us at [email protected] and observe us on X at @FTEnergy. Atone for previous editions of the publication here.