China Tariff Threatens U.S. LNG Boom

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

20 hours ago, KevinH said:

I don't see another Tiananmen Square episode happening again.

Big brother is well and truly in control.

http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/leave-no-dark-corner/10264302

I recommend a trip to China before all these opinionated comments and you might come away with a different viewpoint.

 

From your article:  [abc.net.au]

With one million Uighur sitting indefinitely in "re-education" camps  [read: the gulag, there until death], you have the foundation of a "modern society."  Just lovely. 

Yes, China has some 2.3 million soldiers in its army, and turning the army loose will suppress just about anything.  However, that will seriously tarnish the regime's claim to legitimacy.  Hard to run a huge society when everyone despises you.  Even China. 

[KevinH + 11]

My comment about not seeing a Tiananmen Square episode happening again was based on asking these chinese people and other chinese people what they think about politics and about their President.

None are interested in politics ( read what you will from that response) and they feel their President has a "kind face" and has their best interest at heart.

One again, not my opinion of the situation over there but the feedback from asking the people.

Seems like a big assumption that "everyone despises you" when the man on the street seems to be saying something different.

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

7 hours ago, KevinH said:

Yes Mate,

Mainland chinese who live in Oz working on a chinese owned project where I also work.

I know quite a bit about chinese activity not just here but in Asia and Africa as well having visited and witnessed first hand the impact of that "investment"  in Malaysia, and Zambia last week.

And I was also in China earlier this year.

The chinese are buying vast resources and agri land wherever they can get it, not just in Oz.

I'm not a chinaphobe or super supporter, merely an observer based on seeing and experiencing with my own eyes.

This thread seems to be biased one way and I was keen to put forward a different view.

And don't think the bias is wrong simply because it is different from the fact-set that you know.  I lived and worked in China for 9+ years and was married to 2 lovely Chinese women (not at the same time!).  Having said that, from reading your comments, I'm not sure what position you are even defending.  Could you elaborate or, forgive me if I missed it, repeat what your message was/is?  Thanks.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

5 minutes ago, KevinH said:

My comment about not seeing a Tiananmen Square episode happening again was based on asking these chinese people and other chinese people what they think about politics and about their President.

None are interested in politics ( read what you will from that response) and they feel their President has a "kind face" and has their best interest at heart.

One again, not my opinion of the situation over there but the feedback from asking the people.

Seems like a big assumption that "everyone despises you" when the man on the street seems to be saying something different.

 

Hell, even my wives would not tell me what they really thought about any of the leadership.  Are you kidding me?  They and, more accurately, their parents know very well the price to be paid for belittling the leadership.  And I am not talking only about the National leadership; leadership at the lower provincial/county/city level can be much more "influential" in a citizen's day to day lives.  When you live through something like the cultural revolution with the Little Red Guard (millions and millions and millions of preteen "soldiers" under Mao) turning on even their parents and grandparents, you don't trust anyone with opinions about things you cannot change in any event.  Hence the comments you hear about kind faces and having the Chinese people's interests at heart.  How much more neutral can one get?

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

27 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

From your article:  [abc.net.au]

With one million Uighur sitting indefinitely in "re-education" camps  [read: the gulag, there until death], you have the foundation of a "modern society."  Just lovely. 

Yes, China has some 2.3 million soldiers in its army, and turning the army loose will suppress just about anything.  However, that will seriously tarnish the regime's claim to legitimacy.  Hard to run a huge society when everyone despises you.  Even China. 

My job took me to Xinjiang on a regular basis.  The Uyghurs (pronounced weegers) are by and large Muslim and more like their "stan" brethren (Pakistan, Kazakhstan, etc.) than anything at all like Chinese.  When I first started travelling there in the 1990's, there was very little Chinese presence other than a quiet governance and a small, smiling police force.  That changed rapidly through the 90's, with 100's of thousands of Chinese military and police being relocated there to show who was in control, much like Tibet where I also traveled, but infrequently (nobody was allowed to go to Tibet without escort at that time).  You can very safely assume that the Uyghurs absolutely despise the Chinese government and the rest of China despises the Uyghurs.  China wants to change all of this with their Belt & Road Initiative (BRI), but it will not be done without the military and corruptible governments all along the way.  BTW, Xinjiang is a great place with great people.  Whenever our airplanes landed, and before the door was even opened, the smell of hashish came right into the aircraft ventilation systems.  Welcome to the Silk Road!  You could buy bricks of hash on the street right next to food and other goods, although I'm sure this practice has gone underground by now.

[KevinH + 11]

Dan you are far more qualified to speak about matters China than I will ever be.

TWO chinese wives !!! One can only dream mate.

My comments were related to speaking with people on the ground including Europeans who have lived there for many years (like yourself).

They were complimentry of the current government, maybe because their lives were prosperous and they did not have any problems with the authorities. They worked hard and were left alone to get on with their business.

The position I was taking was in relation to the suggestion that the masses were unhappy and would rise up at some point and there would be another T square incident. I don't see this at all based on the current situation in China.

This thread was was about LNG and how this tit for tat tariff battle might impact exports from the US and how the US commencing exports of LNG had kept the price in check for all the other incumbent suppliers including Australia.

I had an opinion on that suggestion in that the LNG trade is very mature with Australia commencing exporting back in 1985, and the recent price drop around 2014 from $6 MMBtu down to $2 MMBtu last year, was due to a glut of production with all the additional LNG production coming online last year and flooding the market and not due to the US being an recent new exporter of LNG, keeping those other suppliers in check.

Our good friend @TomKirkman is far more expert on the LNG story having commented on it extensively over the last few years, but I am loathe to draw him into this discussion

Edited September 24, 2018 by KevinH

[Guillaume Albasini + 851]

36 minutes ago, KevinH said:

Dan you are far more qualified to speak about matters China than I will ever be.

TWO chinese wives !!! One can only dream mate.

My comments were related to speaking with people on the ground including Europeans who have lived there for many years (like yourself).

They were complimentry of the current government, maybe because their lives were prosperous and they did not have any problems with the authorities. They worked hard and were left alone to get on with their business.

The position I was taking was in relation to the suggestion that the masses were unhappy and would rise up at some point and there would be another T square incident. I don't see this at all based on the current situation in China.

This thread was was about LNG and how this tit for tat tariff battle might impact exports from the US and how the US commencing exports of LNG had kept the price in check for all the other incumbent suppliers including Australia.

I had an opinion on that suggestion in that the LNG trade is very mature with Australia commencing exporting back in 1985, and the recent price drop around 2014 from $6 MMBtu down to $2 MMBtu last year, was due to a glut of production with all the additional LNG production coming online last year and flooding the market and not due to the US being an recent new exporter of LNG, keeping those other suppliers in check.

Our good friend @TomKirkman is far more expert on the LNG story having commented on it extensively over the last few years, but I am loathe to draw him into this discussion

 

I agree with you Kevin. I think the US LNG exporters need more the Chinese market than the Chinese importers need the US LNG. With a production glut it's easier to find another producer. Otherwise China wouldn't have targeted US LNG with tariffs just before the winter season.

[KevinH + 11]

Thanks Guillaume,

I also think that the chinese buying US LNG is more to appease the trade imbalance between the two nations than a need to secure LNG from the US.

Imposing a tariff just makes the US product less competitive and gives the chinese a get out of jail card to stop buying from the US.

As you suggested, there are other suppliers who can easily supply China, and the glut is set to continue with these other supplier nations also ramping up more output over the next few years.

Price today still $2.96 with no uptick in sight despite tariffs being imposed, suggesting there is ample supply out there.

 

 

Edited September 24, 2018 by KevinH

[PaulG + 21]

13 hours ago, KevinH said:

And This:

https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/president-s-folly-china-reaches-into-us-heartland-in-trade-war-20180924-p505ky.html

Hard to know who to believe with all the "fake news" going around ?

 

What's not fake is that Trump as used 12 billion of tax payers money to help the US farmers

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

U.S. Gas Shunned by China as Goldman Sees Swift End to Trade

in Freight News 24/09/2018

 

Even with China’s smaller-than-threatened tariff on U.S. natural gas, American cargoes may still be kryptonite for Chinese traders trying to navigate the ongoing trade war.

Chinese buyers will seek to avoid purchasing U.S. liquefied natural gas as long as any tariffs are in place because of the risk that duties may rise further and possibly without warning, according to officials from four importers. While they said they would prioritize cargoes from other suppliers, they couldn’t entirely rule out buying U.S. shipments. The officials asked not to be identified discussing procurement strategy.

“The tariff could end direct trade in LNG between the two countries,” Goldman Sachs Group Inc. analysts including Christian Lelong said in a Sept. 19 report. “The decline in trade flows will likely be swift because China imports most of its LNG from the U.S. on a spot basis.”

China announced Tuesday a 10 percent tariff on American goods, including LNG, starting Sept. 24 in retaliation for a similar-sized levy imposed by the U.S. While China struck below the 25 percent duty it threatened last month, the ongoing trade tensions are seen turning off buyers in China, the world’s biggest and fastest-growing natural gas market.

That could go for both taking individual, or so-called spot, cargoes, as well as tying themselves to projects with long-term spending and supply commitments in the U.S., where more than a dozen projects are seeking about $139 billion in investments.

“For a Chinese buyer, the overall risk profile for procuring U.S. LNG remains heightened,” Saul Kavonic, Credit Suisse Group AG’s director of Asia energy research, said by email. “Even with a smaller tariff, there has likely been some longstanding damage done to the perception of reliability of U.S. LNG supply in the eyes of Chinese buyers who will shape the next wave of global LNG projects.”

U.S. LNG sales are linked to the nation’s benchmark Henry Hub gas price, which is down about 1 percent this year, while supply from most other exporters is tied to oil, which has gained 18 percent over that period. That’s made American fuel cheaper than other sources, an advantage that’s being eroded by tariffs.

China may shift its buying from the U.S. to other exporters, including Qatar and Papua New Guinea, according to Bloomberg Intelligence analysts Lu Wang and Kunal Agrawal. There is about 103 million tons a year of aggregate capacity in new LNG plants near final investment decisions in those countries, along with Russia, Nigeria and Mozambique, that benefit from the tariffs, Goldman said.

Prospective U.S. projects will likely seek to work out deals with non-Chinese buyers, making it more difficult but not impossible to reach investment decisions, Barclays Plc analyst Samuel Phillips said in a Sept. 19 report.

PetroChina Co. signed a deal earlier this month with Qatargas Operating Co. to purchase 3.4 million tons of LNG annually, the Chinese company’s biggest supply deal, while inking a mid-term contract with the PNG LNG project earlier this year. PetroChina’s parent, China National Petroleum Corp., signed a deal to buy U.S. LNG from Cheniere in February. CNPC didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Source: Bloomberg

[KevinH + 11]

7 hours ago, PaulG said:

What's not fake is that Trump as used 12 billion of tax payers money to help the US farmers

Yes good point !

And what about the de facto subsidy attached to shale oil production ?

When oilpro.com was running there were numerous threads about the whole shale oil play as being a ponzi scheme that could never hope to turn a profit.

Imposing tariffs is one thing, but what about the whole subsidy scenario that prevents trade from occuring on a level playing field.

 

[KevinH + 11]

Looks like we are more than friends now.

We're "mates"  !

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/how-china-is-driving-australia-and-trump-into-each-other-s-arms-20180924-p505mr.html

Edited September 25, 2018 by KevinH

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

19 hours ago, KevinH said:

Our good friend @TomKirkman is far more expert on the LNG story having commented on it extensively over the last few years, but I am loathe to draw him into this discussion 

Thanks Kevin, but yes, I'm going to mostly sit this one out, at least for a while.  I've commented exhaustively on Global LNG back on the now defunct Oilpro forum, and my predictions from 2015 and 2016 have mostly proven correct so far.  But I can't prove it because all of my 8,000 comments from Oilpro were erased from the internet when Oilpro was forced to shut down by Rigzone, and the server permanently disconnected.  About the only thing I can still prove from Oilpro is my 8k comments (somewhere I have a whole page screencap as well).

Maybe after my frustration about all my old comments being wiped out gets settled down, I'll wade into this LNG issue again.  My views haven't much changed since 2015 / 2016, still looking at around 2022 or so for the global LNG balance to tip from oversupply to undersupply.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

22 hours ago, KevinH said:

My comments were related to speaking with people on the ground including Europeans who have lived there for many years (like yourself).

They were complimentry of the current government, maybe because their lives were prosperous and they did not have any problems with the authorities. They worked hard and were left alone to get on with their business.

The position I was taking was in relation to the suggestion that the masses were unhappy and would rise up at some point and there would be another T square incident. I don't see this at all based on the current situation in China.

Thanks, I think, but I did not bring up the fact that I was fortunate enough to have had two Chinese wives to brag (although....); I mentioned it because I was hoping to be clear that I absolutely love the Chinese people, by and large.

So, now, when I read your point about speaking to Europeans who were complimentary of the current government and about their feelings that they worked hard and were left alone to get on with their business, I get what they related to you and agree for the most part.  The Chinese government does indeed work very hard (not sure if you meant your friends or the government worked hard, so I'll address the government).  I have rarely seen evidence so strong of a government working hard on governing, weeding out corruption, and promoting their country's business and growth. 

Their motivations for this seem obvious enough: They have learned from the mistakes of the past and are doing something about not remaking those same mistakes, or allowing those mistakes to be made against them.  They want great things for the Chinese people, and they deserve it (IMHO).  They wish to build their country into a strong enough powerhouse such that they can never be dominated and exploited by outside forces ever again.  They deserve it.  Chinese history over the past 50-100 years proves that the entire country, except for a very few elite, has lived through at least a couple of generations of doing without almost everything, and the government and the people see no reason for this to continue.  They deserve to live better, freer lives.  Chinese people, over 1,000's of years have been responsible for some of mankind's great achievements, and they are proud of that fact.  And they should be.  The Chinese people want a government that does not burden them with endless elections.  The leadership seems keenly aware of this and does seem to work for the people (although President Xi taking almost absolute, lifetime power seems a stretch!).  I could go on.

About Tiananmen Square-ish events happening in the future:  I had been in Beijing on a special jet engine rebuild project in April/May of 1989, when this infamous event was going on, working with the people in the then-recently established Ameco Beijing joint venture.  My hotel was one of two in which foreign businessmen regularly stayed, the Jianguo Hotel on Jianguomen Lu (road).  The other hotel was the Great Wall Sheraton.  Jianguomen Lu runs East and West and if you take it to the West, you will run between The Forbidden City on the right and Tiananmen Square, the Mao Mausoleum and the Great Hall of the People on the left.  Beijing University was to the East and, hence, every day during the latter part of my stay we could stand in front of our hotel and watch the students/protesters walk to and from Tiananmen Square for their daily peaceful protests.  In fact we were all quite in awe at this spectacle, because it was very quiet and orderly and because it was large enough to fill the very wide Jianguomen Lu (road) for a long distance as they passed.  Thousands and thousands of quiet, orderly, mostly young protesters.

 

Still, this was China, and we sensed that the protesters were taking a very large chance standing up to the government, day after day.  I ate a number of my meals in the engine workshop, together with my Chinese colleagues and, yes, even their families.  The wives and children would bring whole cooked chickens and crates of warm beer and we would share this feast in the shop.  When I realized that the company was not providing these things to give me and that they represented a large portion of these family's rations, I was quite humbled by the honor.  They didn't have to give me food and drink or anything else, but they were such wonderful hosts and they treated me like a true co-worker and friend.  Anyway, I quietly asked my hosts at these meals what they thought of the students in the Square.  They told me that they were hopeful for the students, but that they felt it might be "too soon" and they hoped there would not be trouble for the students. 

I left Beijing/China on the day that Gorbachev arrived for meetings.  Soldiers, jeeps and tanks lined the road all along the route to the airport and complete control was definitely established.  From the departure hall I could see Gorbachev's aircraft arrive.  Due to the fact that the protesters had filled the Square for their now-daily ritual, Gorbachev had to be ushered into a side door to the Great Hall of the People, which was seen as a great loss of face for the sitting government (I know, but it was what it was).  When I arrived back in the U.S., checked into my hotel and turned on the news, I was just in time to see protesters with blood running down their faces and the young protester facing down the tanks.  Soon thereafter the screens went blank: China had shut down all media feeds out of China.  My thoughts went back to my colleagues in the engine shop at Ameco, and tears rolled down my face.  That was hard.

Sorry for the long story, but as I mentioned earlier, the Chinese are quite capable of learning from their mistakes and Tiananmen Square, 1989, was something to learn from.  So, no, I don't believe there will be another event like that anytime soon, and I do believe the current government finds myriad other ways to make such an event unnecessary.  They do this by trying to meet everyone's needs and wants, and keeping the citizenry proud of themselves and their government.  It is a massive multi-faceted task for a massive population, but they have proven they are up to the task so far, incredibly so if you ask me.  I hope they continue to do what's best and I wish them success negotiating their way with the West.

Edited September 25, 2018 by Dan Warnick

[KevinH + 11]

And this:

https://www.smh.com.au/national/let-me-buy-rio-tinto-china-s-brazen-bid-to-buy-our-companies-20180910-p502rz.html

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-24/hong-kong-political-party-banned/10298836

Bye bye Hong Kong

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

4 hours ago, KevinH said:

https://www.smh.com.au/national/let-me-buy-rio-tinto-china-s-brazen-bid-to-buy-our-companies-20180910-p502rz.html

An excellent article that tells many of the internal dangers of the rapid growth, its need to sustain itself, and the take no external prisoners concepts I have sensed for many years.  China is still immature, but does not see itself this way.  They took great lessons from the Americans willing to guide them early on, but have since decided the teacher is no longer useful, I think.  In this regard, President Trump needs good solid counsel (and I hope Dr. Kissinger, at least, and others are able to give it to him).  I believe China will start to make some external military moves in the next 10 years or so, starting out small-ish in their own neighborhood initially and, depending on how that goes, they may venture further out.  If foreign powers reject those moves it could ultimately lead to nuclear war.  My concern is whether cooler heads will prevail when that day comes, because if they don't, China could be willing to take far more losses than any allied countries may be able to take.  Ultimately, the West could help the government of China with a serious population issue while leaving enough survivors to ensure their longevity.  Ugly thoughts, aren't they?

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

4 hours ago, KevinH said:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-24/hong-kong-political-party-banned/10298836

Hong Kong forgets what family they come from.  The British stole (my words) Hong Kong away by a limited lease of 99 years when China was struggling/weak and GB was a rising colonial power.  That lease has been up since 1997.  Hong Kong absolutely, positively, unarguably is China and China will govern it as they see fit.  These protests are, of course, natural coming from a population that grew up as an independent state; not as Chinese, except in the sense that it benefited them, and not as British, except in the sense that it benefited them.  As such, and equally important, the Hong Kong people, by and large, don't want to see themselves compared to or ruled by "peasant" mainland Chinese.  Hong Kong has no military to speak of and it holds no military alliance of any substance.  However, the People's Liberation Army is right across the border and waiting to be given the order.  The unruly sibling will be welcomed back into the fold with open arms, and without a shot fired, overnight.  Bankers will be given attitude adjustments and, if they can't cope, they will be relieved of their financial holdings (a fate worse than death!).  Of course, that's just my opinion.  I could be wrong.

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

25/09/2018

 

Shipping confidence dipped very slightly in the three months to end-August 2018, according to our latest Confidence Survey.

The average confidence level expressed by respondents was down to 6.3 out of a maximum possible score of 10.0, this compared to the four-year-high of 6.4 recorded in May 2018. Confidence on the part of owners, however, was up from 6.6 to 6.8, equalling the highest level achieved by this category of respondent when the survey was launched in May 2008, with an overall rating for all respondents of 6.8 out of 10.0.

Confidence on the part of charterers was also up, from 6.7 to 7.0, the highest level for nine months. The rating for managers, however, was down from 6.7 to 6.2, and for brokers from 6.3 to 4.9. Confidence in Asia was up from 6.1 to 6.3, equalling the highest rating achieved over the past 12 months.

The likelihood of respondents making a major investment or significant development over the next 12 months was up from 5.2 to 5.5 out of 10.0. Owners’ confidence was up from 5.5 to 6.5, but charterers recorded a drop from 6.7 to 4.0. Expectations of major investments were up in both Asia (from 5.9 to 6.1) and Europe (from 4.8 to 5.3).

The number of respondents who expected finance costs to increase over the coming year was down to 59% from 63% last time. Owners (up from 64% to 70%) and charterers (up from 33% to 50%) expected such costs to increase, but managers (down from 65% to 45%) and brokers (down from 75% to 71%) were of the opposite opinion.

The number of respondents expecting higher rates over the next 12 months in the tanker trades was up by 3 percentage points to 53%. In the dry bulk sector, there was a 16 percentage-point fall, to 38%, in the numbers anticipating higher rates, while the numbers expecting higher container ship rates fell from 43% to 26%. Net sentiment in the tanker sector was +44, in the dry bulk trades +27, and for container ships +3.

Demands trends were identified by 28% of respondents as the factor likely to influence performance most significantly over the coming 12 months. Competition (23%) was in second place, followed by finance costs (17%).

In a stand-alone question, 44% of respondents said they expected tariff wars to have “some” impact on the industry over the next 12 months. Meanwhile, 42% categorised such impact as “considerable,” and 11% felt that it would be “minimal”.

Richard Greiner, Partner, Shipping & Transport, says, “A small dip in confidence is not the news the industry wanted to hear, but confidence remains at its second-highest level for four-and-half years. Moreover, it is significant that the confidence of both owners and charterers actually increased.

“Concerns about geopolitical factors dominated the comments from respondents. These were led by President Trump’s efforts to transform US trade relations, but also included state support for shipping in China and South Korea. Shipping will always stand to reap the benefits of its global identity and presence, but will also court the risks that this must inevitably embrace.

Fortunately, shipping is accustomed to playing on the big stage, against a volatile backdrop and to a demanding audience. The Baltic Dry Index is up on a year ago and oil prices are on the rise. These and other positive portents encourage the belief that shipping is starting to recover, albeit slowly, from a ten-year downturn.
Source: Moore Stephens

[KevinH + 11]

12 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Hong Kong forgets what family they come from.  The British stole (my words) Hong Kong away by a limited lease of 99 years when China was struggling/weak and GB was a rising colonial power.  That lease has been up since 1997.  Hong Kong absolutely, positively, unarguably is China and China will govern it as they see fit.  These protests are, of course, natural coming from a population that grew up as an independent state; not as Chinese, except in the sense that it benefited them, and not as British, except in the sense that it benefited them.  As such, and equally important, the Hong Kong people, by and large, don't want to see themselves compared to or ruled by "peasant" mainland Chinese.  Hong Kong has no military to speak of and it holds no military alliance of any substance.  However, the People's Liberation Army is right across the border and waiting to be given the order.  The unruly sibling will be welcomed back into the fold with open arms, and without a shot fired, overnight.  Bankers will be given attitude adjustments and, if they can't cope, they will be relieved of their financial holdings (a fate worse than death!).  Of course, that's just my opinion.  I could be wrong.

There is a strong logical sequence to what you are suggesting Dan, and it could very well play out as you have described.

Agree with your other comments about China now choosing to go on their own and deciding they no longer need the mentor.

I was in Japan in January this year and then in QIngdao in May and the contrast was quite stark.

More from a sophistication and service perspective it still feels like China is playing catch up with one impediment being the use or lack of use of English. But it was interesting how many road signs and building markings had English words.

I was told that there is little English in Japan but found the opposite to be true.

There still is s feeling that China has lost 50 years of development ( little red book era) but that they are on a fast track to catch up as we speak.

 

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

48 minutes ago, KevinH said:

There is a strong logical sequence to what you are suggesting Dan, and it could very well play out as you have described.

Agree with your other comments about China now choosing to go on their own and deciding they no longer need the mentor.

I was in Japan in January this year and then in QIngdao in May and the contrast was quite stark.

More from a sophistication and service perspective it still feels like China is playing catch up with one impediment being the use or lack of use of English. But it was interesting how many road signs and building markings had English words.

I was told that there is little English in Japan but found the opposite to be true.

There still is s feeling that China has lost 50 years of development ( little red book era) but that they are on a fast track to catch up as we speak.

 

https://www.scmp.com/business/global-economy/article/2081771/be-afraid-china-path-global-technology-dominance

[KevinH + 11]

2 minutes ago, ceo_energemsier said:

https://www.scmp.com/business/global-economy/article/2081771/be-afraid-china-path-global-technology-dominance

Be Afraid, be Very Afraid !

And it seems like China and Russia must look to Donny ( You're Fired !!) Trump as the gift that just keeps giving.

No one pretending to be polite anymore,, they just laugh ?

https://www.9news.com.au/2018/09/26/01/14/us-president-donald-trump-addresses-un-general-assembly-new-york?ocid=edm-nine.com.au-ninedaily--180926&mktg_scr=edm-ninedaily

[ronwagn + 6,290]

I think the "Ugly Chinese" will take the place of the "Ugly Americans" in many places. 

[KevinH + 11]

God Save America ? ( I'm right, You're wrong, You're fired ) The Scariest Revelations About Trump and Trade From Bob Woodward’s ‘Fear’   Kimberly Ann Elliott | Tuesday, Sept. 25, 2018       I was hoping that Bob Woodward’s new book would help me understand the strategy behind President Donald Trump’s trade policy. But like much of the rest of Washington, I found the “revelations” in the book, in a sense, shocking but not surprising. On trade policy, it largely confirmed what we already knew—the president just doesn’t like trade and will not listen to anything that contradicts his long-held views. Beyond the broad distrust of trade and trade agreements, specific policy decisions were disturbingly random, often depending on nothing more than who had last managed to catch the president’s ear. So, the lesson seems to be to expect continued chaos. In one of the most telling moments in the book, Woodward reports that Trump wrote “TRADE IS BAD” in the margins of a speech he was revising. When asked by Gary Cohn, the then-chair of the National Economic Council, why he had such negative views on trade, Trump responded, “I just do. I’ve had these views for 30 years.” On another occasion, he insisted that when it came to the importance of trade deficits and the use of tariffs, “I know I’m right. If you disagree with me, you’re wrong.” ...

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

49 minutes ago, KevinH said:

God Save America ? ( I'm right, You're wrong, You're fired ) The Scariest Revelations About Trump and Trade From Bob Woodward’s ‘Fear’   Kimberly Ann Elliott | Tuesday, Sept. 25, 2018       I was hoping that Bob Woodward’s new book would help me understand the strategy behind President Donald Trump’s trade policy. But like much of the rest of Washington, I found the “revelations” in the book, in a sense, shocking but not surprising. On trade policy, it largely confirmed what we already knew—the president just doesn’t like trade and will not listen to anything that contradicts his long-held views. Beyond the broad distrust of trade and trade agreements, specific policy decisions were disturbingly random, often depending on nothing more than who had last managed to catch the president’s ear. So, the lesson seems to be to expect continued chaos. In one of the most telling moments in the book, Woodward reports that Trump wrote “TRADE IS BAD” in the margins of a speech he was revising. When asked by Gary Cohn, the then-chair of the National Economic Council, why he had such negative views on trade, Trump responded, “I just do. I’ve had these views for 30 years.” On another occasion, he insisted that when it came to the importance of trade deficits and the use of tariffs, “I know I’m right. If you disagree with me, you’re wrong.” ...

We have all seen the loss of American manufacturing and manufacturing jobs to China and elsewhere, with the trade deals that were made in haste or short term vision and or hidden agendas. Recall the Chinese attempt to buy influence with the Clinton Admin and Al Gore's Temple of Cash back in 1996. I believe Bob Woodward had done some reporting on that as well.

People with business experience construction, manufacturing, international trade and commerce within the US are aware of the damage done with these trade deals. Trade is not bad, trade is what drives the world and supports the world. Cannot be an isolationist. Now, the problem is to have achieve a better deal among countries. It is the same thing as doing business with another company. Fair and balanced contracts and terms and pricing , supply, demand, quality. A level playing field is needed and so far it has been proven to be very imbalanced.

Perhaps a solution is to go down the list , industry by industry, what you need more of from us and what we need from you and what are strategic products, good and services, then general commodities and working out the values of those under each category and coming as close to having a monetary value adjusting the currency issues and volumes of sales among other things. Industry and business leaders from across the spectrum need to put forward proposals in general as well for specific industries.

There is a deal with Mexico and one signed with SKO, so all is not lost. This is a very telling statement from Mr. Chen Bo.

I hope he is correct and we can have this trade war over so I can resume selling them as many American barrels as I can for the long long term.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

"

The disruption of trade with the U.S. will prove temporary, according to Chen, who said that American oil helps Unipec diversify supply sources. “We are confident that the trade war is for the short term, but in the long term we will very active in the U.S.,” he said on Monday at the Asia Pacific Petroleum Conference in Singapore.

The company will lift U.S. supply for third-party trading in September-October, Chen said in an interview on the sidelines of the APPEC event. West Texas Intermediate crude, the American benchmark, was up 0.4 percent at $72.35 a barrel at 7:13 a.m. London time on Tuesday.

"

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

U.S. oil exports to China another trade war casualty

Unipec puts plan to boost U.S. oil imports on hold: Chen Bo. Trading unit of Sinopec sees U.S.-China dispute as temporary

By Alfred Cang and Serene Cheong

U.S. oil exports to China are becoming a casualty of Donald Trump's trade war with Xi Jinping's administration.

Unipec, the trading unit of top Chinese refiner Sinopec, has put a plan to boost U.S. crude imports on hold as it assesses the impact of the Asian nation's trade war with America, according to company President Chen Bo. It previously planned to raise volumes to 500,000 barrels a day in 2019, compared with 300,000 barrels daily from January to August this year, he said.

The reluctance to boost purchases shows how the trade war between the major economies is reverberating in the world of energy trading even though crude isn't yet subjected to tariffs. Buyers are already bracing for higher prices and a supply crunch due to impending American sanctions on Iran. Unipec's caution means China -- the world's biggest oil importer -- may not be able to fully take advantage of booming output at U.S. shale fields.

Earlier this year, Unipec had shunned U.S. crude purchases due to the threat of oil being included among U.S. imports that will incur tariffs in China. The trader later resumed some purchases after crude was removed from the list by Beijing. Still, the possibility that it may be re-introduced is making buyers wary.

China on Monday said talks to resolve the impasse over trade with the U.S. can't happen as long as Trump keeps threatening to impose further tariffs. Just over an hour after the U.S. imposed further duties on another $200 billion in Chinese goods, Beijing published a document reiterating its position. Talks scheduled for this week were canceled as the imposition of fresh duties by Washington neared.

The disruption of trade with the U.S. will prove temporary, according to Chen, who said that American oil helps Unipec diversify supply sources. “We are confident that the trade war is for the short term, but in the long term we will very active in the U.S.,” he said on Monday at the Asia Pacific Petroleum Conference in Singapore.

The company will lift U.S. supply for third-party trading in September-October, Chen said in an interview on the sidelines of the APPEC event. West Texas Intermediate crude, the American benchmark, was up 0.4 percent at $72.35 a barrel at 7:13 a.m. London time on Tuesday.

Unipec was earlier this year embroiled in a dispute with Saudi Arabia, saying the top OPEC producer's prices were costly and cutting purchases. That's now been resolved and trading volumes with the Middle East nation are back to normal levels, according to Chen, who added that oil prices at $60-$80 a barrel are acceptable.

Before the tariff kerfuffle, U.S. crude exports to China had risen to 15 million barrels in June, the highest volume in data going back to 1996, according to U.S. Census Bureau and Energy Information Administration data. That made the Asian country the biggest buyer of American supply.

_________________________

Story by Alfred Cang and Serene Cheong from Bloomberg News.

bloomberg.com 09 24 2018

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

On 9/23/2018 at 3:55 PM, KevinH said:

Yes Mate,

Mainland chinese who live in Oz working on a chinese owned project where I also work.

I know quite a bit about chinese activity not just here but in Asia and Africa as well having visited and witnessed first hand the impact of that "investment"  in Malaysia, and Zambia last week.

And I was also in China earlier this year.

The chinese are buying vast resources and agri land wherever they can get it, not just in Oz.

I'm not a chinaphobe or super supporter, merely an observer based on seeing and experiencing with my own eyes.

This thread seems to be biased one way and I was keen to put forward a different view.

G'Day Mate,

I am not biased against China or a Chinaphobe either.

I make statements about the Chinese desire to garner influence and yield power across the globe, portray events and issues to their population through an act of smoke and mirrors and always making themselves look better and stronger based on their history.

I would personally prefer the US-Chinese trade issues get resolved sooner than later for the benefit of all.

Chinese have been buying resources globally, and you are correct they are all over Africa buying up minerals, metals, hydrocarbons, food, agri land, timber, livestock, and doing the same in LATAM and Canada as well and yes certainly Australia.