China has agreed to boost oil imports from Saudi Arabia by over a third next year.

The world’s big powers are in growing competition to buy oil from top exporters and develop projects in energy-producing states, eager to secure supplies to propel economic growth.
China has agreed to boost oil imports from Saudi Arabia by over a third next year, trade sources said. The deal comes days after confirmation that China will also boost imports from Iran by a third. The competition stems from rapidly rising fuel needs outside the US. That demand is likely to keep a strain on supply that this year helped send oil prices to a record high near $100 a barrel, Indiatimes.com wrote.
“Emerging markets are scrambling to get more oil because their economies are growing very fast,“ said Francisco Blanch, head of commodity research at Merrill Lynch, adding “There’s very little chance of supplying China with an extra half a million barrels per day for the next 10 years, without somebody else taking a hit.“ Oil demand in China, the world’s second-largest consumer, is set to rise by 5.7% next year to 7.9 million barrels per day, according to the International Energy Agency.
Consumption in India--which is also looking for higher crude supply from Iran and Saudi Arabia, according to an official at Indian refiner Bharat Petroleum--is expected to expand by 2.9%. By contrast, demand in top consumer the US is forecast to increase by only 0.9% and consumption in Europe to grow by 1.4%.
Saudi Arabia, the world’s top exporter and a US ally, has made clear it is counting on demand from Asian economies to justify the billions of dollars it is spending to increase output capacity.
China is also investing directly in oil projects in Iran, the world’s fourth-largest oil exporter. Sinopec, China’s top oil refiner, agreed earlier this month to invest $2 billion in Iran’s Yadavaran oilfield, which according to Iranian estimates holds recoverable oil reserves of 3.2 billion barrels.
Oil executives expect increasing amounts of Iranian crude to flow to China, in part because Beijing has been reluctant to back a US drive for further sanctions against Iran. The US has banned oil imports from the Islamic Republic since 1995.
“Politically, China will probably end up taking more Iranian crude,“ said an executive at Western oil company that buys oil from Iran.
China has also been aggressive in Africa’s energy sector in recent years, showing a higher appetite for risk than Western rivals, and already funds oil projects from Angola to Sudan, said Rosemary Hollis, director of research at British thinktank Chatham House.
Some analysts see growing competition as a good thing for the US, if less so for US companies, because the resulting increase in supplies will help relieve pressure on prices.
“I’m sure the US government would be delighted if the US companies had more of a share,“ said Patrick Clawson of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, adding “But frankly, the activities of Chinese companies serve US interests.“

The use of maize as a feedstock for biofuels will create opportunities for emerging farmers.

South Africa’s cabinet should reconsider its decision not to allow maize to be used as a feedstock for biofuels, the specialist chemical services company Omnia has said.
The company said it was disappointed at the government’s decision.
“There is a strong global consensus around the use of maize for biofuels, and an urgent need for local and international solutions in the continuous quest for sustainable development.“
According to Businessday.co.za, faced with such criticism, the government said recently it may reconsider its stance if maize producers increased their output.
The door is not closed for the production of bio-ethanol from maize, the agriculture department said. It is the responsibility of the industry to produce more maize in order to provide the minister with the necessary arguments to convince cabinet to include maize in the biofuels strategy, it added.
The statement followed a meeting between South African Agriculture Minister Lulu Xingwana and maize growers’ representatives, including Grain SA.
Omnia argued that the development of an entire new maize-driven biofuels industry would create manifold economic benefits. A knock-on effect would boost agriculture and associated industries--including seed, refining agri-chemicals and agricultural machinery.
Omnia and Grain SA shared the view that the entire maize industry would be strengthened and enlarged by the development of a biofuels industry.
The benefits to the economy are further enhanced by the fact that there is a global need for renewable sources of energy, brought on by high fuel prices, environmental concerns, and the goal of reducing dependence on oil. The use of maize as a feedstock for biofuels contributes to the reduction of carbon emissions, Omnia said.
The company’s Managing Director Rod Humphris, said the key stakeholders in the energy debate--the government, agriculture and commercial players--should explore other mechanisms for prioritizing supplies of maize for food before ruling out he use of maize as a feedstock for biofuels.
“The South African maize industry has the capacity to produce sufficient maize for food and bio-fuels. Maize is a vital part of energy planning across the globe, and as the chorus of opposition to global warming and carbon emissions grows louder, we should be cautious that SA is well positioned to deal with these challenges,“ Humphris said.
While Omnia was aware of particular sensitivities when decisions had to be made on grain for food versus grain for fuel, the use of maize as feedstock to the biofuels industry would increase rural economic development and food security.
As highlighted by Grain SA, the use of maize as a feedstock for biofuels will create opportunities for emerging farmers.
In addition, the development of a bio-energy market is widely viewed as a welcome relief for farmers as it will create an alternative market for maize.
This will create improved stability and the resulting confidence will maintain, and even increase, food security.
Xingwana said the cabinet did not intend to exclude maize from the biofuels policy as long as it was produced in surplus. She said a biofuels task team, charged with helping to develop SA’s biofuels strategy, would carry out further investigations into the viability of using maize, provided the country produced more maize than it used domestically.
Andrew Makenete, president of the Southern African Biofuels Association, who also attended the meeting, said the government was willing to negotiate.
Farmers have struggled to stay profitable as bumper harvests pushed maize prices to multiyear lows.

Global investment in alternative energy technologies reached some $74 billion last year, according to New Energy Finance analysts.
The rapidly rising sums poured into wind turbines, solar power, energy efficiency and other low-carbon forms of energy reflect a combination of factors.
According to Financial Times, these include concerns over climate change, high energy prices, and a desire by many governments to diversify their energy supply in the interests of security.
Interest in alternative energy investment has been growing among all classes of investors.
The sector is diverse, populated by a wide variety of small specialists, start-ups and other young companies, with a sprinkling of large established energy and engineering companies that have branched out into low-carbon technology.
For this reason, many investors have put money into the increasing number of alternative energy or environmental funds that invest in a portfolio of companies.
Nick Pople of Ludgate Environmental Fund says that pooled investments offer smaller investors, family offices and high net worth individuals the best opportunities.
“They may not have the in-house skills to look at and analyze all the companies, and by going for funds, they can increase their exposure [to various alternative energy and environmental technologies].“
In addition, he says, the portfolio investment that a fund offers helps spread the risk.
Mr Pople says environmental investment need not be based on a desire to be “socially responsible“. Many people are drawn by potential returns rather than a desire to help the planet, though this is a bonus.
Edward Guinness of Guinness Atkinson Alternative Energy Fund says there were “very strong flows of investment“ over the summer. Though his $150m fund is based in London, most investors are from the US, investing an average of $20,000 each.
“These are savvy investors looking for a growth area,“ he says. “We also have investors who want to spice up their portfolio and have some assets in a volatile, but high-potential industry.“
Mr Guinness says his fund has achieved an annualized return of 27 percent since 1998, investing in wind turbine manufacturers, hydroelectricity and geothermal energy.
He warns that investors must be prepared for share price swings: the alternative energy industry is full of small and early-stage companies whose fortunes often depend on government decisions.
Despite the volatility, the sector is attractive in times of market turmoil, says Ian Simm, chief executive of Impax Group, which operates a 360 million euro environmental fund started in February 2002 and specializing in alternative energies, water and waste assets.
“Everyone expects a global slowdown, so there is quite a lot of risk aversion, and there is evidence that money is being taken out of equities into less risky assets,“ he says. “But we are seeing investors willing to leave their money or increase their exposure to environmental markets.“
In Mr Simm’s view, this is because the drivers of growth in the sector are unlikely to disappear, and in fact offer some long-term security.
These drivers include high energy prices that make alternative energy more economic and more attractive; government regulations on waste disposal; the need to safeguard water infrastructure amid rising demand; and concerns over climate change.
Mr Simm says: “Investors see the drivers behind this market as robust enough to protect against an economic downturn. This is seen as a safer haven than equities.“
International efforts to tame climate change have even resulted in a new class of investments: carbon finance.
Under the Kyoto protocol, developed countries must cut greenhouse gas emissions by an average of about five percent by 2012, and may do so not only by cutting their domestic emissions, but by funding projects that cut emissions in poor countries.
These projects, such as wind farms or solar power, are granted carbon credits by the United Nations.
These credits are then bought by financial institutions, which sell them on to governments, companies covered by the European Union’s emissions trading scheme, or companies and individuals who “retire“ the credits to balance out the negative effects of their own emissions.
Hence not all the credits are issued by the UN--there is also a flourishing market in buying and selling credits outside the constraints of the UN procedures, which some companies have criticized as bureaucratic and slow.
Mitchell Feierstein, head of emissions products at Cheyne Capital Management, says the carbon markets offer opportunities for private investors.
They can offer sophisticated investors the opportunity to “diversify their portfolios in a non-correlated asset class offering potential for superior returns“.
Investors in carbon finance, just as those in alternative energy and other green technologies, can also feel satisfied they are helping to combat some of the world’s most pressing environmental problems.