Von der Leyen puts forward EU commissioner candidates

Market: Electricity, Emissions, Natural gas
17/09/24

European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen today presented candidates for commissioner posts, confirming names put forward for portfolios including climate, energy, agriculture and trade.

Von der Leyen — who was confirmed by European Parliament as Commission president on 18 July — has committed to doubling down on climate and energy policy. Her 2024-29 mandate stipulates greenhouse gas emissions cuts of at least 90pc by 2040 compared with 1990.

Her commissioners, if appointed, will implement those policies. She is nominating Teresa Ribera to oversee competition policy but also "clean, just and competitive transition" that would include energy, climate, environment and other Green Deal files. Ribera is Spain's deputy prime minister and responsible for the country's ecological transition.

Von der Leyen has proposed the current EU climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra for the portfolio of climate, net-zero and clean growth. Hoekstra, who replaced previous Green Deal commissioner Frans Timmermans, will also be responsible for taxation.

Other nominees include former Danish climate minister Dan Jorgensen, up for energy and housing commissioner. Former Swedish minister for EU affairs Jessika Roswall is proposed for a portfolio including environment and circular economy, and Luxembourgish Christophe Hansen, a former member of EU parliament, is proposed as agriculture and food commissioner.

Von der Leyen now needs to ensure that candidate-commissioners are approved by parliamentary committees and then by plenary. Hearings will also focus on candidates' abilities to implement policies. "Parliamentary scrutiny will not cut corners," European Parliament president Roberta Metsola said.

By Dafydd ab Iago

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News

18/06/25

Banks increased fossil fuel financing in 2024: Report

London, 18 June (Argus) — Banks "significantly increased" their fossil fuel financing in 2024, reversing a trend of steadily declining fossil fuel financing since 2021, a report from a group of non-profit organisations found this week. The 65 biggest banks globally committed $869bn in 2024 to "companies conducting business in fossil fuels", the report — Banking on Climate Chaos — found. Those banks committed $429bn last year to companies expanding fossil fuel production and infrastructure. The report assesses lending and underwriting in 2024 from the world's top 65 banks to more than 2,700 fossil fuel companies. Figures are not directly comparable year-on-year, as the previous report, which assessed 2023, covered financing from 60 banks. The 60 biggest banks globally committed $705bn in 2023 to companies with fossil fuel business, last year's report found. Those banks committed $347bn in 2023 to companies with fossil fuel expansion plans. Of the five banks providing the most fossil fuel finance in 2024, four were US banks — JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup and Wells Fargo. The 65 banks assessed in this year's report have committed $7.9 trillion in fossil fuel financing since 2016, when the Paris climate agreement took effect, the report found. Finance is at the core of climate negotiations like UN Cop summits. Developed countries are typically called upon at such events to provide more public climate finance to developing nations, but the focus is also shifting to private finance, as overseas development finance looks set to drop . But fossil fuel financing banks are increasingly facing the risk of targeted and more complex climate-related litigation, according to a recent report by the London School of Economics' centre for economic transition expertise (Cetex). Climate litigation is not currently adequately accounted for in financial risk assessment, with case filing and decisions negatively impacting carbon financiers, it said. "While early climate cases primarily targeted governments and big-emitting ‘carbon majors', cases against other firms have proliferated quickly," Cetex said. The report also showed that, based on a review of disclosures from 20 banks supervised by the European Central Bank, many banks across Europe recognise litigation risks as material in the context of climate and environmental factors but tend to not be specific about the risks incurred. By Georgia Gratton and Caroline Varin Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more

News

Adding credits, CO2 removals to EU ETS ‘fatal’: Study

18/06/25

News

18/06/25

Adding credits, CO2 removals to EU ETS ‘fatal’: Study

London, 18 June (Argus) — Allowing the use of international carbon credits or carbon removals for compliance under the EU emissions trading system (ETS) risks undermining the environmental integrity of the scheme and hindering the bloc's achievement of its climate targets, warned a study by research body the Oeko-Institut published today. Under the three scenarios examined in the study, which was commissioned by non-governmental organisation Carbon Market Watch, the EU ETS's supply-demand balance does not need to be artificially adjusted before 2035. But beyond this date the total number of allowances in circulation could fall below zero, meaning sectors under the scheme would either need to be fully decarbonised by this date or shut down unless flexibility is introduced to the system. Any reforms to increase ETS supply should focus on the system's market stability reserve, the study found, a mechanism which absorbs a percentage of excess supply from circulation each year but can also release permits if supply falls too low. Changes to the scheme's linear reduction factor — the amount by which its supply cap falls annually — would achieve the same thing but risk weakening the system's ambition, and is more likely to be politically challenging, the study said. Some EU member states have expressed interest in allowing the use of international carbon credits issued under Article 6 of the Paris climate agreement for ETS compliance for this purpose, and the European Commission said last week it is taking the option into consideration , although any such use would entail only "very high integrity" credits representing a "very small proportion" of the bloc's climate action. But introducing Article 6 credits to the ETS "poses significant risks to the functioning and environmental integrity of the system", the study found, pointing to the past use of Clean Development Mechanism credits to offset some ETS obligations to which it attributed the "collapse" of the carbon price. Including carbon removals in the scheme would pose a similar risk, the study found, concluding it is "crucial" they remain in a separate framework. The European Commission is expected to publish a report next year examining their potential inclusion. The commission will also assess in 2031 the feasibility of linking the existing ETS to the EU ETS 2 for road transport and buildings, scheduled for launch in 2027, which could increase the liquidity of the two schemes. But such a link "cannot ease tension in the [ETS] market with certainty, and administrative barriers to the merger are high", the study warned. By Victoria Hatherick Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Malaysia's Petronas to build third LNG import terminal

18/06/25

News

18/06/25

Malaysia's Petronas to build third LNG import terminal

Singapore, 18 June (Argus) — Malaysian state-owned Petronas plans to develop the country's third LNG regasification terminal, the firm's chief executive Tengku Muhammad Taufik said at the Energy Asia 2025 conference in Kuala Lumpur on 17 June. The need for the third regasification terminal in peninsular Malaysia comes on the back of expectations of rising demand, Taufik added. The plan follows a government directive to ensure energy supply security in peninsular Malaysia, according to state-controlled news agency Bernama. There are two import terminals presently operational in the peninsular — the 3.8mn t/yr Melaka and 3.5mn t/yr Pengerang import facilities. The third terminal will likely be built in Lumut, southwest Perak, and have a nameplate capacity similar to existing terminals, Bernama reported. Malaysia's LNG receipts have held stable in recent years, having steadily increased since the country began importing in May 2013. Imports totalled 1.04mn t over January-May, little changed from 1.06mn t a year earlier, Vortexa data show. And gas-fired power generation comprised 41pc of the power generation mix over the same period, averaging 5.7 GWh/d, up from 5.5 GWh/d a year earlier, data from electricity planning authority Single Buyer show. This indicates imported LNG makes up about 32pc of total gas used in power generation. Malaysia is mulling becoming a net LNG importer within the next 10-20 years because of declining natural gas reserves and growing energy demand. Gas is set to account for as much as 56pc of the country's energy mix by 2050. But Petronas continues to retain an "advantaged" position in east Malaysia to export LNG in fulfilling its contractual obligations, Taufik stated. Malaysia exports LNG through the 30mn t/yr Bintulu terminal in Sarawak alongside the 1.5mn t/yr PFLNG Satu and 1.3mn t/yr PFLNG Dua floating LNG (FLNG) units offshore Sabah. By Irfan Jaafar Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

US Supreme Court asked to rule on tariffs

17/06/25

News

17/06/25

US Supreme Court asked to rule on tariffs

Washington, 17 June (Argus) — Plaintiffs in one of the legal cases challenging President Donald Trump's authority to impose tariffs are asking the Supreme Court to hear their arguments even before US federal appeals courts rule on their petition. The legal case brought by the plaintiffs — toy companies Learning Resources and hand2hand — resulted in a ruling by the US District Court for the District of Columbia in late May that Trump did not have the authority to impose tariffs by citing a 1978 law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). That case is currently on appeal at the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. The plaintiffs today urged the Supreme Court to take the case and schedule oral arguments at the start of its fall term in October, or possibly in a special September sitting. The plaintiffs argued the Supreme Court will eventually have to rule on the case given the unprecedented use of IEEPA by the Trump White House to impose tariffs, so special consideration should be given to the case even before appeals courts rule on it. The Supreme Court is under no obligation to fast-track the case. The schedule for legal challenges to Trump's authority is clashing with his claims to be negotiating multiple deals with foreign trade partners. Trump cited the IEEPA to impose, then rescind, tariffs of 10-25pc on energy and other imports from Canada and Mexico in February-March. He used the same law to impose 20pc tariffs on China in February-March, and to impose 10pc tariffs on nearly every US trading partner in April. The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit has stayed the toy companies' case until the resolution of a separate, broader legal challenge to Trump's tariff authority. In that case, the US Court of International Trade ruled in late May that Trump's use of IEEPA was illegal and ordered the administration to remove all tariffs it imposed under that rubric and to refund all import duties it collected. The trade court's ruling is under review at the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which scheduled an oral argument on 31 July to hear from plaintiffs — a group of US companies and several US states — and from the Trump administration. The trade court's ruling in late May was unexpected, as it "actually ruled on the merits of the case, as opposed to just granting or denying an injunction," according to Alec Phillips, chief political economist with investment bank Goldman Sachs' research arm. "The question now is, will the Federal Circuit uphold the ruling, and will ultimately the Supreme Court uphold the ruling?" The Trump administration argued that the legal challenges to its tariff authority could undermine its ability to negotiate with foreign trade partners. The administration has so far produced two limited trade agreements, with the UK and China, despite promising in early April to unveil "90 deals in 90 days". Trump on Monday described ongoing trade negotiations as an easy process. "We're dealing with really, if you think about it, probably 175 countries, and most of them can just be sent a letter saying, 'It'll be an honor to trade with you, and here's what you're going to have to pay to do'", Trump said. But on the same day he pushed back on calls from Canada and the EU to negotiate trade deals, arguing that their approach is too complex. "You get too complex on the deals and they never get done," Trump said. The legal challenges to Trump's authority under IEEPA will not affect the tariffs he imposed on foreign steel, aluminum, cars and auto parts. US trade statistics point to a significant tariff burden in place in April, the latest month for which data are available.The effective US tariff rate on all imports — the amount of duties collected divided by the total value of imports — rose to 7.1pc in April from 2.4pc in January. Trump has dismissed concerns about the impact of tariffs on consumer prices, noting on Monday that "we're making a lot of money. You know, we took in $88bn in tariffs." Treasury Department revenue data show that the US has collected $98bn in customs revenue for the year through 13 June, up from $63bn in the same period last year. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Keyera acquiring Plains' Canada NGL assets for $3.75bn

17/06/25

News

17/06/25

Keyera acquiring Plains' Canada NGL assets for $3.75bn

Houston, 17 June (Argus) — Midstream operator Keyera will acquire Plains All American's Canadian natural gas liquids (NGLs) business for C$5.15bn ($3.75bn). The transaction, which is expected to close by the first quarter of 2026, includes 193,000 b/d of fractionation capacity in western Canada, more than 1,500 miles of pipelines gathering 575,000 b/d of NGLs, 23mn bl in NGL storage capacity, and the 5.7 Bcf/d Empress straddle gas processing plant. The acquisition is expected to deliver C$100mn of annual synergies between the assets in the first year, according to Keyera. Plains said the divestiture will allow the US-based midstream operator to focus on its crude handling assets in both the US and Canada. Plains will keep nearly all of its NGL assets in the US. The acquisition of Plains' assets gives Keyera NGL fractionators and gas processing plants in Fort Saskatchewan, and at the Empress facility in western Canada as well as storage at Sarnia, Ontario. It also links Keyera's existing assets to takeaway agreements for LPG exports out of British Columbia. Keyera chief executive Dean Setoguchi said the acquisition "... brings key infrastructure under Canadian ownership, keeping value and decision-making closer to home." Plain's Canadian business is underpinned by fee-based contracts with an average remaining life of 10 years, Keyera said. Associated NGL production in Canada is expected to grow by 500,000 b/d by 2040, according to Keyera, as natural gas production in western Canada climbs by 6 Bcf/d during the same timeframe. By Amy Strahan Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more