Energy market analysis Aug. 27, 2025

China is rushing to buy Russian oil as India pulls out.

“India acts as a global clearing house for Russian oil, turning embargoed crude into high-value export products while providing Moscow with the dollars it needs.” – Peter Navarro, White House trade adviser

Trump last month went on a rant against India for buying Russian oil with punitive tariffs in response to prevent sanctions violation. However he ignores for now China which also imports glorious volumes of Russian oil. India processes Russia’s crude oil and sells the refined products to Europe at a high premium. With the spotlight now on India, it has become more reluctant to purchase millions of Russian barrels. According to Kpler, Chinese state-owned companies and mega-refineries are now stepping into the gap left by India. They are buying Russian oil cargoes for delivery in October and November.

Bloomberg previously reported that Indian refiners are looking for alternative supply. State-owned companies this week bought large volumes of non-Russian oil for delivery in September and October. Indian Oil Corp. and Bharat Petroleum Corp. have attracted cargoes from all corners of the market, including the Americas, Brazil and the Middle East. These spot market purchases come on top of supply from long-term sellers such as Saudi Arabia, which is sending about 22.5 million barrels of crude toward India for delivery in September, according to traders.

Chinese refiners bought about 13 cargoes of Urals and Varandey crude oil for delivery in October and at least two Urals cargoes for November. This reports Kpler analyst Muyu Xu. The last time China took Varandey crude oil was September 2023. Still, increased Chinese demand for Russian oil is insufficient to offset the loss of Indian demand. The price of Urals is trading at a premium of $0.80 per barrel to Brent. This premium was $2 per barrel as recently as July, before India cut its offtake.

Urals premiums could fall some more if India continues to shun Russian oil. Although the country is now forced to purchase oil on the open market, broader benchmark prices will find solid support in coming weeks. In recent days, we have seen four green candles toward the daily cloud. A red candle followed on Tuesday.

Price Crude oil – Brent okober 2025 ($/barrel) – day cloud candle, log scale

Global nuclear power production at record high.

“In 2024, global nuclear power generation reached 2,817 terawatt-hours, a modest increase from 2023, but more than the previous record set in 2021.” – Robert Rapier, chemical engineer in the energy sector

Global nuclear power generation reached 2,817 terawatt-hours (TWh) in 2024. A new record since 2021. Most of the growth came from non-OECD countries. The Asia-Pacific region, led by China’s 13% annual growth, now accounts for more than 28% of global nuclear production. This marks a major geopolitical and energy shift. While Eastern Europe, Europe, the UAE and a select few others are expanding their nuclear capacity, Western Europe and North America are running into stagnation, closures or politically-driven phase-outs.

Nuclear electricity has always been a paradox. It can produce low-carbon electricity on a large scale. Yet it must constantly battle the headwinds of politics and public perception.

Global production: modest growth, disproportionately distributed. In 2024, global nuclear production reached 2,817 terawatt-hours. A modest increase from 2023, but enough to take out the previous all-time high of 2021.

Over the past decade, production has grown 2.6% annually. A slow but clear recovery from the post-Fukushima dip. That growth comes mostly from non-OECD countries building new capacity at a rate of 3% per year. Slightly higher than the flat to declining trend in OECD countries of 2.5%.

The latest Statistical Review of World Energy shows that although nuclear production is increasing worldwide with a new record in 2024, the trend is far from uniform. Some countries are leading the way while others are pulling back.

Asia-Pacific region: the new gravity center. The most dramatic shift is taking place in the Asia-Pacific region, now accounting for more than 28% of global nuclear output. More than twice the share of a decade ago.

• As with renewable, China is in a league of its own. With production increasing from 213 TWh in 2014 to more than 450 TWh in 2024. An annual growth rate of nearly 13%.
• India and South Korea also showed solid growth on a smaller scale.
• This marks a clear geopolitical shift. Nuclear power is no longer dominated by Western democracies, but by countries with state-driven, long-term infrastructure agendas.

North America: stable, but aging. America is still the world leader in nuclear output with roughly 850 TWh annually. That is 29.2% of global total nuclear output. But beneath this stability lies a slow attrition of older plants and a lack of new construction.

• America had its biggest nuclear milestone in decades in 2023 and 2024 with the startup of Vogtle Unit 3, followed by Unit 4. The Vogtle plant in Georgia is the first newly built nuclear power plant in America after 30 years. Its completion marks the end of a long, costly construction saga plagued by delays and budget overruns.
• Together, the two new reactors have added more than 2,200 megawatts of capacity. Enough to power more than a million homes. It provided a rare example of nuclear expansion in a country where most nuclear growth came from extending the life of existing plants.
• Canada’s production fell from 106 TWh in 2016 to 85 TWh in 2024. This reflected innovations and changing policies.
• Mexico, a small player, has seen large annual fluctuations. Possibly an indication of operational challenges.

Europe: a story of contrasts. Western Europe is drifting away from nuclear:

• France, long the gold standard for nuclear reliability, has seen production fall from 442 TWh in 2016 to just 338 TWh last year. Hampered by maintenance issues and political uncertainty.
• Germany is now at zero after completing its nuclear phase-out.
• Belgium, Switzerland and Sweden are split between retirement and life extension.
• In Eastern Europe , the picture is brighter. The Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia are increasing their production. Ukraine has maintained its annual 50 TWh, despite wartime disruptions.

Emerging regions: small stocks, big moves.

• Latin America, Brazil and Argentina are stable around 15-25 TWh, with Brazil moving cautiously higher.
• South Africa, Africa’s only nuclear producer, remains flat at about 13 TWh.
• The Middle East has a new entrant with the UAE, which grew from zero in 2019 to more than 40 TWh in 2024 thanks to its Barakah plant, an impressive expansion in such a short time.

The outliers

• Japan has restarted a number of reactors. However, its output remains well below pre-Fukushima levels. Output in 2024 was 84 TWh compared with more than 300 TWh in 2010.
• Taiwan is phasing out nuclear, producing from 42 TWh in 2016 to just 12 TWh in 2024.
• Pakistan and Iran show continuous stable, though modest, growth.

The global nuclear landscape is splitting. Some countries are doubling their capacity, driven by energy security and climate action, while others are walking away. The gravity center is moving away from traditional Western producers toward countries willing to support nuclear with long-term capital and policy support.

For investors, the next wave of growth is likely to come from Asia and the Middle East. Not from historic powerhouses Europe and North America. This shift certainly has positive environmental implications. Especially in China, the world’s largest emitter of unwanted greenhouse gases. Every gigawatt China shifts from coal to nuclear means a big win in the fight to reduce emissions.

Price Baseload Electricity supply year 2026 (eur/MWh) – week cloud candle, log scale

Europe’s new war economy: from green collapse to military Keynesianism.

“Ultimately, the European war economy has neither the resources nor the technology to realize the dream of a militarized EU. It is a tragic repeat of the Green Deal: driven by propaganda, fueled by debt and doomed to failure.” – Thomas Kolbe, German economist

While the green economy is dragging the broader economy toward the abyss, two-thirds of the German population say they are satisfied with renewable energy or even want to expand faster. Meanwhile, the creation of a European war economy marks the next stage in Europe’s ongoing impoverishment.

The most popular and also most destructive economic strategy remains the modern interpretation of Keynesianism. With his simplified view of economic activity, British economist John Maynard Keynes inadvertently handed postwar policymakers the tools that were then perverted into an all-purpose “solution” to every economic crisis. The condensed version reads as follows: almost every recession is caused by insufficient consumer demand. The government’s job, therefore, is to create artificial credit to fill this lack of demand.

Recipe for bureaucratic expansion. Lower interest rates, print credit and the economy gets off the ground. In reality, we are left with a mountain of national debt, a swelling bureaucracy, distorted financial markets and declining productivity. These are economic facts, verified even by non-economists. Prosperity results from an increasing capital stock that efficiently and precisely serves consumer demand with more goods and services.

Keynesian policies have led to a strong role for governments and European institutions in the economy in Europe, with policymakers structurally committed to public spending and regulation. Institutions such as the European Commission, most European parties and national governments use this policy framework as a starting point. The Green Deal was also created within this framework. This is presented as a transition toward sustainability and climate neutrality. Critics, however, argue that this approach has spawned a massive system of subsidies and regulations, affecting significant parts of the economy and thus impacting European energy independence.

In 2024, Germany invested between €90 and €100 billion in green programs and projects. Of that, about €58 billion came from the central government, while the European Investment Bank provided €8.6 billion in new loans, the InvestEU program contributed €9.1 billion and the EU’s Innovation & Environment Funds added about €20 billion. In addition, the German government provided an additional €100 billion through a so-called “special fund” to support the green transition.

Economic models that rely heavily on continuous capital injections and whose production does not match market demand risk building internal tensions that could eventually lead to instability. Critics say the Green Deal exhibits characteristics of this mechanism that could leave Europe in a vulnerable position.

The spillover. Germany is now in its third year of recession and is seeing a record number of bankruptcies. At the same time, the government has added half a million jobs to the public sector in 6 years, while 1.2 million private sector jobs have disappeared. Combined with uncontrolled migration, the result is extreme pressure on Germany’s welfare system. Politicians have retreated into a purely defensive posture: the welfare state as a safety net for the hundreds of thousands who lose their livelihoods while the private sector collapses under the burden of energy costs and subsidies.

Europe is facing a profound economic transformation in which the role of the state, energy policy and industrial strategy are being reshaped. Nuclear and renewable sources are part of the debate, as is the question of whether external suppliers such as Russia should be brought back into the energy mix. Public opinion remains overwhelmingly positive about renewable energy, although critics point to the economic impact of extensive subsidies.

So far, there are few signs of fundamental policy changes. Policymakers in Brussels and Berlin link economic challenges mainly to external factors, while opponents attribute them to structural choices in policy. The close relationship between governments and business is frequently pointed out in this regard.

After criticism of the Green Deal, attention is increasingly shifting to defense industrial policy. Recent figures show that traditional sectors are losing jobs while defense companies are expanding their workforces. This is part of the broader EU strategy to produce half of all defense products within Europe by 2035, which is estimated to create up to 660,000 jobs.

Funding for this policy relies largely on rising national defense budgets and European programs such as ReARM Europe and SAFE. Brussels wants to mobilize some €800 billion in additional defense spending by 2030, largely with newly raised debt. Analysts warn that this could lead to crowding out private investment and an economy heavily reliant on debt financing.

While building a defense-industrial complex could boost jobs and production, there are doubts about whether Europe has sufficient resources and technological capacity to fulfill these ambitions. For critics, this evokes comparisons to previous initiatives such as the Green Deal: large-scale, debt-driven and vulnerable to political and economic headwinds.

The gas price for delivery year 2026 has seen more volatility in recent months than the electricity price for the same delivery year. This year has already seen a trading range of €15 per MWh. Neither bullish nor bearish, but sideways. Also a trend.

Price TTF gas supply year 2026 (eur/MWh) – day cloud candle, log scale

International Energy Agency policy harms Africa.

“The answer to energy poverty in Africa is to develop the continent’s oil, gas and coal resources.” – Brenda Shaffer, international energy and foreign policy specialist

One of the most important developments of this century has been a great increase in energy access around the world. Billions of people have gained access to modern energy, a prerequisite for transcending poverty.

Sub-Saharan Africa is the only region in the world not benefiting from this transformation. Energy poverty is on the rise in Africa. For the first time since World War II, access to electricity in Africa is declining. Over the past year, the International Energy Agency (IEA) has been seeking solutions to Africa’s rising energy poverty, through organizing conferences and publishing reports.

In recent years, the International Energy Agency (IEA) has promoted policies and recommendations that limit access to fossil fuel financing and investment in Africa. This policy, inspired by goals around “Net Zero,” served as the basis for decisions by multilateral organizations such as the G7, the World Bank and the United Nations to scale back investment in fossil fuels and electricity production from fossil sources in Africa.

The premise behind limiting these investments is that this would encourage African countries to adopt renewable energy. In practice, however, reduced access to stable and affordable electricity has led to increased use of traditional biomass sources such as wood, feces and residual coal for cooking and other basic energy needs. According to the IEA report Universal Access to Clean Cooking in Africa, burning traditional biomass causes even higher carbon emissions than using fossil fuels.

While the report acknowledges that access to fossil fuels can contribute to lower emissions, improved air quality and health outcomes, the IEA continues to make no explicit recommendations for local fossil fuel development in Africa. Instead, imported energy sources such as LPG and natural gas are presented as a solution, with financing through carbon credits, while limiting local energy development. Critics point out that revenues from carbon credits are likely to be insufficient to finance a broad transition and may increase reliance on external financing.

The report compares Africa to countries such as China, India and Indonesia, which were able to develop their energy infrastructure in recent decades with access to coal and public funding. South Africa is cited as an exception within Africa, where the expansion of modern energy supply is possible thanks to the exploitation of domestic coal reserves. Coal currently supplies 69% of energy consumption and 82% of electricity production in South Africa.

Critics say the IEA does not offer a viable path for improving energy access in Africa. Developing local oil, gas and coal resources would generate revenues that could be used for wider access to electricity and LPG, while reducing emissions and air pollution. U.S. policymakers, such as former Secretary of State Chris Wright, are therefore considering IEA membership review or reform, focusing on the organization’s role in limiting energy access in Africa and using public funding for projects that do not directly benefit local populations.

The price of coal, delivery year 2026, also does not move much off its spot on the weekly chart. The price is trading above the lows of late 2023 and early 2024. The range is in the shape of a triangle. This can have either a bullish or bearish continuation. The market will decide

Price ICE Coal delivery year 2026 (usd/t) – week cloud candle, log scale

Chinese EV company bets big on battery switching over battery charging.

“Improving battery technology is [more important] than developing battery swapping capabilities. That is the path we have chosen.” – He Xiaopeng, CEO EV manufacturer Xpeng

Challenging the EV orthodoxy, American-listed Chinese EV startup Nio is leading the way with a different approach to re-energizing cars. It lets motorists replace dead batteries instead of recharging. With swapping stations already operating in 285 Chinese cities, Nio is betting this will appeal to consumers because of the time savings and cost advantages of battery swapping.

The technology is well past its pilot phase: in July, Nio celebrated its 80 millionth battery swap in China. The swap is simpler than filling a petrol car or recharging a typical EV. Stopped at an exchange station, the motorist gives a command via voice or input screen from the car. The car then drives itself into the station, stopping above the retractable metal floor. Robotic arms remove the dead battery and insert a new one. After a quick software and hardware check, the motorist is back on the road. The entire exchange process takes about 3 minutes.

Faster “refueling” is a benefit. Battery swaps can also lower the price of a car by thousands of dollars because the owner does not have to own the battery reports Financial Times. That also eliminates a potentially large expense if the battery is damaged or no longer does anything. It also makes sense for people in densely populated cities where dedicated charging stations at apartment complexes are not abundant.

China could reach a major EV milestone this year with EV sales exceeding sales of internal combustion engine (ICE) cars for the first time. Chinese battery manufacturer CATL, the world’s largest manufacturer, has plans to build 1,000 swap stations for passenger vehicles in China by 2025. Target is 10,000 stations by 2028 with capacity for 1 million battery swaps per day. China offers subsidies that cover swap station construction costs of up to 40%.

Nio has a modest battery-swapping bridgehead in Europe, with 60 stations centered in Norway and Germany. Their charging map also shows stations in Sweden, Denmark, Belgium and the Netherlands. Recently, Nio celebrated its 200,000th European battery swap. The company says 74% of European users choose the speed and convenience of swapping batteries. The pace at which the company is installing new swap stations has slowed. Only 10 stations were opened last year. It was reported in April that Nio has significantly scaled back its investments in European expansion. Managing battery compatibility, being able to offer the various batteries used by different EV brands, seems to be one of the challenges of rolling out new European stations.

Some in the industry don’t think battery swapping is the best way forward due to high infrastructure costs, among other reasons. Last month, China’s National Development and Reform Commission announced next two years to set up 100,000 fast-charging stations.

In the EV industry, the emphasis is on fast charge times. He Xiaopeng, CEO of EV manufacturer Xpeng, reports that his company has looked at this alternative process extensively and decided to abandon it completely. Improving battery technology is more important than developing battery swaps.

On the daily chart of the carbon price a sideways to slightly rising trend within a narrow range.

Price Emission Rights – Dec-25 contract EEX (eur/t) – day cloud candle, log scale

You can read more about these renewable topics below:

• Europe’s transition to renewable energy.
• Headwinds for Ørsted, former darling of the renewable energy sector.
• Silver price rises, what is the impact of energy transition

Europe’s transition to renewable energy.

Europe’s transition to clean energy is in full swing, with renewables accounting for an increasing share of electricity generation in many countries.

The European Union has an average of 42% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2024. Countries such as Albania and Norway are approaching nearly 100% renewable energy production, followed by others with significant renewable energy contributions.

Source: Visual Capitalist. The share of renewable electricity in net electricity generation is shown by European country, based on Eurostat data. The figures include electricity generated from wind, solar, hydro, geothermal and biofuels.

The share by country shows the difference and variation in reliance on renewable energy sources. Some countries have a significant share of renewable energy in their electricity production, while others still rely heavily on fossil fuels. These variations can be attributed to several factors, including national energy policies, available natural resources and technological developments.

Headwinds for Ørsted, former darling of the renewable energy sector.

Wind company Ørsted A/S, the Danish multinational, debuted in the European stock market 9 years ago. With the renewable energy industry under pressure from the Trump administration, Orsted’s share price has seen its biggest ever declines.

In mid-August announced Ørsted to raise fresh capital of up to $9.4 billion from investors. As a result, the company’s share price crashed and ended up with a 33% price loss by the end of that week. The share price is now trading below the IPO price. The acronym IPO stands for Initial Public Offering, or a stock offering, when a company’s shares are publicly offered on the market for the first time.

The share price was under further pressure Monday, August 25, with a loss of 19%. The reason was the US government’ s unexpected order to halt work on the nearly completed Revolution Wind project, worth $1.5 billion. This wind farm, 80% complete, was to provide power to 350,000 homes in Rhode Island and Connecticut starting next year.

Ørsted is at a critical stage: the company needs to raise new funds to complete its major U.S. wind projects. The sudden intervention of the U.S. government has greatly affected investor confidence. While the support of the Danish government provides some assurance, as long as political and diplomatic tensions with America continue, the future remains highly uncertain for Ørsted’s U.S. ambitions. Dependence on the U.S. market is becoming a strategic problem for Ørsted that could significantly undermine its financial stability and growth plans.

The collapse of market values, the downward adjustment of credit ratings and the need for fresh capital reflect the implosion of the wind industry.

Silver rises: breakout from triangle pattern.

“Silver’s crucial role in green technologies, especially solar panels and electric vehicles (EVs), is a key driver.” – A.J. Monte, graduate market technician(CMT)

The energy transition is a solid driver of global silver demand. Silver is indispensable in renewable technologies such as solar panels and batteries for EVs. The recent breakout of the silver price from a triangular price pattern is seen by technical analysts as a signal that the price is likely to rise further. This pattern usually indicates that a period of relative stability is over and the market is entering a phase of stronger movement.

In addition to technical factors, there are several fundamental drivers supporting the price of silver in 2025:

1. Industrial demand growth: Silver plays an essential role in green technologies, such as solar panels and electric vehicles. About 232 million ounces are used annually for solar panels and 80 million ounces for EVs (1 troy ounce = 31.1 grams). The Silver Institute projects that demand from the solar industry could consume much of today’s silver reserves by 2050. The growth of renewable energy and vehicle electrification continues to increase supply pressures and support price increases.
2. Persistent supply shortages: The global silver market has been facing a shortage for five years. A gap of 149 million ounces is expected for 2025, following 182 million ounces in 2024. Inventory levels have fallen from 400 million ounces in 2021 to 291 million ounces by mid-2024. Reduced mine production in countries such as Mexico and Russia (accounting for 21% of global production) reinforces this imbalance.
3. Safe haven function: Geopolitical tensions, such as U.S. trade measures and conflicts in the Middle East, encourage investors to seek safe havens such as silver. Economic uncertainty, including recession and inflation expectations, also increases silver’s appeal. The current gold-to-silver ratio of about 90:1 suggests that silver is relatively undervalued relative to gold, which trades above $3,000 per ounce.
4. Monetary policy and inflation expectations: Expectations of interest rate cuts by the U.S. central bank lower the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets such as silver. At the same time, rising inflation expectations and a weaker dollar support international demand for silver.
5. Speculative and investment demand: Interest from both institutional and retail investors is growing. Silver ETFs and social media movements such as “Silver Squeeze 2.0” are stimulating both physical purchases and market sentiment. Central banks, such as Russia’s, are also increasing their silver reserves.
6. Influence of gold: Silver often follows the price trend of gold, but with greater volatility. Gold’s record rally above $3,000 per ounce increases demand for silver as an affordable alternative in the safe-haven segment. Historically, a decline in the gold/silver ratio can further amplify silver’s price appreciation.
7. Price Outlook: Technical analysts point to the “cup & handle” pattern, which is decades in the making. The “cup” covers the period from the peak in the 1980s to the top in 2011, followed by a smaller decline (“handle”) after which a possible rise above previous peaks may occur. This pattern is interpreted as an indication of positive market sentiment and the potential for further price increases.