Norway Re-Starts Production at Once Marginal Eirin Field, Showing That Commodity Prices Determine Value: However, There is Environmentalist Opposition to Re-Opening Old Fields

  

     Norway’s state oil & gas giant Equinor has recently restarted natural gas production at its Eirin Field. Once considered to be marginal and uneconomic in times of low energy prices, at present, with high natural gas prices in Europe, it is now profitable as long as prices remain high. The recoverable reserves at the Eirin Field are estimated at 27.6 million barrels of oil equivalent, not a large amount, but producible now. Eirin will extend production from the Gina Krog platform by seven years, from 2029 to 2036. The field is mostly gas with some liquids.

     According to Linda Kåda Høiland, senior vice president for late-life fields in Equinor:

"The project has given us important learnings on how to develop marginal discoveries quickly and profitably. Such subsea developments will be important for maintaining production and value creation from the Norwegian shelf in the future. Early collaboration, efficient decision-making processes and standardized solutions have been crucial to realizing Eirin in a short time. From the establishment of the project to the start of production, we have only spent three years," says Høiland.

     As noted below, the field was discovered in 1978 and then shelved. It was reactivated in 2023 after gas became a stronger need due to the discontinuation of planned EU imports of Russian pipelined gas. FID was made the same year.  

     The oilprice.com article by Jan-Thore Bergsagel notes that Eorin is emblematic of how geopolitics can reinvigorate resources once considered stranded due to low product pricing.

     The Gina Krog platform, through which Eirin production will be processed, is powered by electricity from shore, which makes its emissions much lower than those of other platforms.

“The bottom line: Eirin will not reshape global gas markets on its own, but it captures today’s energy reality perfectly—speed matters, infrastructure beats ideology, and Norway keeps quietly doing what Europe still needs most: delivering gas when it counts.”

     The success and speed of reviving the Eirin field likely influenced new plans to revive other old oil & gas fields in Norway’s North Sea fields. 

     In response to the current geopolitical turmoil in the Middle East, the Norwegian government has given its approval for oil and gas companies to explore in 70 new locations in the North Sea, Barents Sea and Norwegian Sea.

     The Guardian reports:

“The Albuskjell, Vest Ekofisk and Tommeliten Gamma gasfields in the North Sea were closed in 1998. The government plans to spend 19bn kroner (£1.5bn) on restarting them by the end of 2028 with production to continue until 2048.”

     Meanwhile, environmentalists and those on the political left have predictably slammed the plans to reopen old fields:

“The deputy leader and environment spokesperson for the Socialist Left party, Lars Haltbrekken, said the decision was madness and accused the government of greenwashing.”

“It shows that the government is once again blatantly ignoring environmental advice from its own experts,” he said. “All the talk about responsible oil extraction is nothing but nonsense. It’s greenwashing through and through, with vulnerable and important natural areas being put at risk with full awareness.”

     I have written previously about the debates to approve and resume exploration and development at the UK North Sea Roseband and Jackdaw fields, arguing that they should be developed. Equinor is a part of those projects as well.

     Below, the Guardian article notes that due to soaring natural gas and oil prices in Europe, old fields are becoming economic and oil & gas company profits, including Equinor’s, are up, so they can invest in revitalizing some of these fields as well as exploring for more.

“The company’s record fossil fuel production combined with surging market prices helped it to its highest quarterly profits since 2023, when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine caused a gas supply shock across Europe. Equinor expects the current disruption to last well beyond any end to hostilities.”

“Norway’s energy minister, Terje Aasland, said: “Norwegian production of oil and gas is an important contribution to energy security in Europe. Development of new gasfields helps Norway maintain high deliveries in the long term.”

“This has become more important after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and the conflict in the Middle East.”

  

 

 

References:

 

Norway just switched on another gas lifeline for Europe. Jan-Thore Bergsagel. OilPrice.com. May 5, 2026. Norway just switched on another gas lifeline for Europe

Norwegian government attacked over decision to reopen North Sea gasfields. Miranda Bryant and Jillian Ambrose. The Guardian. May 6, 2026. Norwegian government attacked over decision to reopen North Sea gasfields | Oil | The Guardian

The Eirin field in production - more gas to Europe. Equinor. May 5, 2026. The Eirin field in production - more gas to Europe - Equinor

 

Fermi’s Seemingly Impending Downfall: Can the Project Be Revived or Sold? Exploits of the Filthy-Rich?

 

  

      I have written two posts on this blog about Fermi America’s ambitious projects to develop a massive AI data center campus near Amarillo, Texas, expected to include the deployment of 11 GW of power via natural gas, solar, nuclear, and batteries. The first post was about the announcement for the huge project in June 2025. The second post was about the possible hybrid cooling technology to be used at the site. Now, the project is facing some serious issues that may render it unable to be developed as planned.

     Fermi Inc., the startup co-founded by former Texas governor and Energy Secretary Rick Perry, went public in a transaction that allowed the company to raise nearly $746 million. By mid-April, things were looking different as Fermi’s stock price plunged about 84%, peaking at about $37 but trading at more than $5 a share this week. That is a huge loss. Energy writer Robert Bryce referred to Fermi’s fate as going from “sizzle to fizzle.” He explained that the losses reported by the company were not a good sign:

“On March 30, the company reported its 2025 financial results, and they were ugly. Fermi reported a full-year loss of $486.4 million, which included some $177.8 million in general and administrative expenses, $173.8 million in charitable expenses, $132.7 million in share-based compensation, and $111.6 million in losses related to financing,”

     Fermi is also being sued by at least one prospective tenant.

     In Mid-April, just six months or so after going public in the U.S. and London, the company announced that Toby Neugebauer, the co-founder and CEO, “departed his role as Chief Executive Officer.” The IPO valued Fermi at nearly $12.5 billion. However, since March 30, when the loss was announced, Fermi insiders have sold $68 million worth of the company’s stock. Bryce asks - If they are selling, why should others buy? He also notes that those stock sales raise other questions. He wonders whether they knew the CEO was leaving, which would not bode well for the stock price. In fact, the stock price dropped considerably after the CEO’s departure was announced. Since then, the company’s CFO, Miles Everson, resigned. He had also sold about $4 million in stock.

     In an April 24 Substack post, Bryce reports on the expensive private jetting of CEO Neugebauer, which he compares to Enron before that company imploded. On April 21, as Bryce reports:

“Neugebauer issued a press release in which he said the company’s board fired him “without cause.” The release said that Neugebauer “ultimately cares about making money for all shareholders more than finishing” what he started. Toward that end, he called on the Fermi board to “conduct an immediate process, led by an independent investment bank, for the sale of the Company to a third party.”

“Why would Neugebauer want a sale? I’m speculating here, but a quick sale might, repeat, might, allow Neugebauer and his family, who own about 40% of the company’s stock worth some $1.4 billion, to cash out without collapsing Fermi’s market capitalization. A few hours after Neugebauer’s press release was published, the company’s board issued its own press release confirming that Neugebauer had been fired. It rejected his call for a quick sale, saying it “firmly believes a sale is not in the best interest of its continued momentum on Project Matador.”

“While those events are noteworthy, the real bombshell dropped on Monday, when Fuzzy Panda Research, a short-seller, issued a savage takedown of Fermi that contains several allegations of misconduct by Neugebauer. The real blockbuster, though, is about Neugebauer and — you guessed it — a very expensive private jet.”

     He gave more details, but those were behind a paywall. In any case, it looks generally bad for the company and the project. While it may be revived, it seems unlikely that it will be developed fully and in a timely manner.

     According to a May 5 article in Barron’s, also behind a paywall, Fermi’s apparent “showdown with its former CEO took another twist after the ousted co-founder called for a shareholder meeting to decide whether to put the data-center developer up for sale.”

     Reuters reports that shareholders have rejected Neugebauer’s call for a special shareholders' meeting. The article summarizes recent events below.

      While I am not sure of all the details, this seems to be a case of high-flying, wealth-saturated, power-hungry individuals simply trying to get richer, and as Bryce suggests, reminiscent of Enron. 

     Electric power analyst Bill Peackock writes that if the project fails or is scaled down, it could affect power grid planning in Texas, where demand for power is very high, and the quest to ensure reliability in both winter and summer is often challenging. 

 

References:

 

Fermi Stock Slides as Ex-CEO Calls a Special Meeting. Will Shareholders Vote to Sell? Nate Wolf. Barron’s. May 05, 2026. Fermi Stock Slides as Ex-CEO Calls Special Meeting. Will Shareholders Vote to Sell? - Barron's

Are Fermi and Rick Perry in trouble in Amarillo? Oklahoma Energy Today. April 15, 2026. Are Fermi and Rick Perry in trouble in Amarillo? - Oklahoma Energy Today

Fermi Air: The high-flying hijinks of former Fermi CEO Toby Neugebauer. Robert Bryce. Substack, April 24, 2026. Fermi Air - Robert Bryce

Fermi Isn’t Faltering, It’s Imploding: Friday's departure of CEO Toby Neugebauer shows Fermi is in deep trouble. Robert Bryce. Substack. April 19, 2026. Fermi Isn’t Faltering, It’s Imploding - Robert Bryce

Fermi Troubles: A Warning for the Texas Grid. Bill Peacock. Master Resource. April 23, 2026. Fermi Troubles: A Warning for the Texas Grid - Master Resource

Fermi rejects ousted CEO's call for special shareholder meeting. Reuters. May 5, 2026. Fermi rejects ousted CEO's call for special shareholder meeting

Nigeria Leads Africa’s Growing Independent Upstream Oil & Gas Producers: Wood MacKenzie

     Nigeria is dominating the development of local independent upstream oil & gas companies in Africa. This is capitalism at work. Nigeria’s independents are helping to increase the country’s oil & gas production. They now contribute 27% of the county’s production, up from 12% a decade ago.       

     WoodMac noted in a March post that major multinational oil & gas companies were scaling back their non-core and mature assets, which presented opportunities for local independent companies to grab those assets. This has happened. Indigenous African companies now own 8% of overall African production, up from just 1% in 2020. In the post, they give six reasons why Nigerian companies are at the epicentre of homegrown African production:

1)        Nigeria has the right resource opportunities for independents – with over 500 small and medium oil & gas fields onshore or in shallow water, and over 100 local independent companies, there are ample opportunities.

2)        Local firms are better placed to deal with high country risk – there are regulatory and operational risks for foreign companies, which is likely why there are few smaller foreign independents operating in the country. This has created more space for local indigenous companies, better positioned to navigate Nigeria’s complexities.

3)        Nigerian government policies favour local companies – it is an expected benefit to prioritize local domestic companies.

4)        The country has a strong domestic skills base – withdrawal of the majors has left a viable skilled workforce, and there are initiatives in place to further train and build up that workforce.

5)        Mature assets have been available as Majors withdraw – since the 2014 crash, oil majors have let more mature assets become available on the market. The revenue from the purchased assets has allowed the indigenous companies to build up their portfolios and obtain better financing for other projects.

6)        Indigenous companies were able to raise finance – before 2015, obtaining financing was easier, so that the companies could build up their asset values and revenue.

          In a May 5 article, WoodMac’s Simon Flowers and Gavin Thompson summarized the growth of Nigerian independents:

“Ambitious and entrepreneurial local companies leapt upon a unique set of circumstances, not least the Majors’ divestment of their non-core onshore and shallow-water portfolios. Supportive government policies and a strong domestic skills base – often acquired from the leading international oil companies – have helped underpin growth. With over 100 local players active across its upstream sector, Nigeria boasts Africa’s most diverse corporate landscape.”  

     Less investment has resulted in Nigeria’s liquids production dropping from 2 million barrels per day to 1.6 million barrels per day. The country has a very ambitious goal of increasing that production to 3 million barrels per day by 2030. They note that increased output from marginal fields, nimbler operating models, higher risk tolerance, and close relationships with government have led to significant competitive advantages for local independents. As the graph below shows, Nigerian independents make up 8 out of the 10 top independents on the continent.

“With a combined value of US$12 billion, Nigerian companies represent around 75% of the African independents peer group value.”

     Nigerian independents hold about one-third of the country’s natural gas reserves, and gas development is currently being pursued along with gas-to-power projects. These independent companies are planning to spend billions.

     Barriers to the success of these Nigerian companies include the age of the assets. Most are pre-2000. This makes the economics marginal, and financing is currently one of the biggest obstacles since these companies don’t have the large balance sheets of multinationals. The government has helped a lot in promoting these local independents, but there remain significant risks, and three key needs are: 1) increasing facility uptime, 2) accelerating project approvals, and 3) ensuring security. Some of these companies are looking beyond Nigeria for growth as well.

     They note that the majors are nearly done divesting in Nigeria. Their future focus will be on deepwater offshore projects and LNG exports with higher investment returns.

“Shell’s announcement of the development of its deepwater Bonga North project in late 2024 was Nigeria’s first deepwater final investment decision in more than a decade. That is likely a taste of things to come. Backed by supportive fiscal policies, Bonga South West Aparo (Shell-operated), Usan West and Owowo West (ExxonMobil-operated), Etan Zabazaba (Eni-operated) and the shallow-water Ima Gas Field (TotalEnergies 40% participation) are expected to follow.”

    

 

References:

 

Nigeria’s oil and gas independents come of age: Realising ambitious plans for production growth. Simon Flowers and Gavin Thompson. Wood MacKenzie. May 5. 2026. Nigeria’s oil and gas independents come of age | Wood Mackenzie

The unstoppable rise of Africa’s upstream independents: Six key factors are making Nigeria the epicentre of operations for the continent’s indigenous oil & gas firms. Martijn Murphy, Ian Thom, and Babawale Scott. Wood MacKenzie. March 16, 2026. The unstoppable rise of Africa’s upstream independents | Wood Mackenzie

Pielke Jr. - Good Riddance to RCP8.5 Extreme Climate Scenario and Why the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) is the World’s Most Consequential Scientific Advisory Committee

       This post summarizes two related posts by climate impact scientist Roger Pielke Jr. He first notes that the international committee that determines the climate scenarios for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports has just put out a new list of scenarios, and the RCP8.5 scenario has now been eliminated. In the past, it had often been referred to as the ‘business as usual’ scenario. In fact, they have eliminated the three most extreme scenarios. He explains:

“The new scenarios come from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) — a project of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP), co-sponsored by the World Meteorological Organization, the International Science Council, and UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission.”

“Under CMIP, now in its seventh iteration, sits another little-known committee with responsibility for developing the scenarios necessary for earth system models to project future climate. That committee — called ScenarioMIP — just published the new scenario framework that will underpin the IPCC’s Seventh Assessment Report (AR7) and much of the research that it will draw upon.”

     Apparently, it has become widely acknowledged that those scenarios are no longer plausible (not that they ever really were). Pielke Jr. does not agree that these scenarios became implausible due to lower-cost renewables or the emergence of climate policy, as some have stated. He mentions there are tens of thousands of papers that continue to be published that use those implausible scenarios. The new scenarios, the CMIP7, are shown below, compared to the past extreme ones that have now been removed due to implausibility. The two highest dotted line scenarios will now be gone. Note that the new maximum emissions for the year 2100 are now projected at 71 Gt CO₂/yr, far below the SSP5-8.5 maximum of 128 Gt CO₂/yr.

     He also notes that the 2100 projections made the unlikely assumptions that the 2100 global population would be near 13 billion, well above any contemporary demographic projection (the highest are typically around 11 billion), and a five-fold expansion of global coal use, which is very unlikely. He does think that the new CMIP high scenario is still likely implausible, though less so than the eliminated ones. As he says, “the plausibility vacuum remains.”

“All this means that users of climate models and model output based on legacy scenarios will now face decisions about if and how they’d like to realign with the latest scientific understandings versus continuing to rely on outdated research.”

“Furthermore, there are no doubt many — hundreds if not thousands — of studies in the publication pipeline that depend upon the upper end scenarios. Editors and reviewers should ensure that they are properly characterized as exploratory and are not intended to be interpreted as projective.”

“Science is self-correcting. What matters now is what happens next.”

     In his next post, Pielke Jr. talks about the importance of the committee of the World Climate Research Program that determines the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) scenarios. Those scenarios are used by many countries in their national climate assessments. He emphasizes the importance of these scenarios:

“It is no exaggeration that the CMIP climate projections influence trillions of dollars in investment and regulation. They are, in functional terms, among the most consequential 21st century scientific products designed to inform policymaking, economics, and regulation. They are not just about science, but about science advice to policymakers in government, business, and civil society.”

     Below, he notes some of the main sources of the scientists on the committee:

“The CMIP scenarios are developed by a community of integrated assessment modellers numbering perhaps two hundred people worldwide, working in roughly fifteen institutions, and concentrated heavily in two: the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) outside Vienna, and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) in Germany.”

     The PIK is led in part by earth-system scientist Johan Rockström, whom I have criticized for his planetary boundaries assumptions, which I found to be too catastrophist, not realistic enough, and perhaps too ideological. Pielke Jr. notes that:

“Rockström has explicitly connected the “planetary boundaries” concept to the neo-Malthusian ideas of Dennis and Donella Meadows of the Club of Rome (Limits to Growth).”

     Thus, as he seems to suggest, PIK could have strong biases to produce results consistent with their ideological orientation. He also says that the scientists on the committee are too heavily from Europe and North America.

“The same individuals who lead the institutions that sit at the center of the production of CMIP7 marker scenarios are also among the leading public proponents of a very particular policy-relevant framing of what those scenarios should imply in policy.”

     Below, he explains that typical scientific advisory groups have stated procedures and expectations, but CMIP7 does not seem to adhere to any similar structure. He does note that recently, they seemed to have acknowledged the gap in good governance.

     In contrast, the U.S. has specific formats and rules for scientific advisory boards enshrined in the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA). Under FACA, each scientific advisory committee must publish its mission and membership rules. In the EU, such committees are required to submit an annual Declaration of Interests covering financial holdings, employment, consultancies, and research funding. The World Health Organization has similar rules for members of its advisory committees.

“The contrast between the governance of these important science advisory organizations with how CMIP scenarios are produced — without a public charter, without published Terms of Reference for the body that selects them, without standardized declarations of interest, with no transparency on how participating experts are selected, and with no opportunity for public input to proposed products — indicates that institutions of climate research created to inform policymakers needs to significantly improvements in their governance.”

 

 

References:

 

                   

The World's Most Important Science Advisory Committee: Climate research has a serious governance gap. Roger Pielke Jr. The Honest Broker. May 4, 2026. The World's Most Important Science Advisory Committee

RCP8.5 is Officially Dead: The most significant development in climate research in decades. Roger Pielke Jr. The Honest Broker. April 29, 2026. 🚨RCP8.5 is Officially Dead - by Roger Pielke Jr.

 

Romania’s Neptun Deep Black Sea Natural Gas Project, Expected to Recover 100BCM (about 3.5TCF), Begins Laying Pipeline in Anticipation of 2027 Production Startup

      In 2027, Romania is poised to become the top natural gas producer in the EU when its Neptun Deep Black Sea gas project comes online. The new gas volumes are expected to double the current combined offshore and onshore Romanian gas production. Reuters reported on May 4 that the pipeline was being laid to the field. The project is expected to contain 100 BCM (about 3.5 TCF) of recoverable gas. It is also expected to be a key resource to replace lost Russian gas volumes for Eastern Europe.

     When production gets going, Romania is expected to become a net exporter of gas and to play a greater role in the EU.

“The project is a joint venture between OMV Petrom, majority-controlled by Austria's OMV, and Romania's state-owned Romgaz.”

"It gives Romania a much bigger stage in the European Union, and this is what these big energy projects can do," OMV Petrom CEO Christina Verchere said at a ceremony on Monday to mark the official start of the pipeline work.

"I think it's a reminder to us that when you have access to indigenous natural gas here in Europe, that we should develop it and make sure that we can bring it into the market."

     Italy's Saipem supplied the two ships laying the pipeline. A total of 160km, or about 99 miles, of pipeline will be laid. This is expected to take about two months to complete. The metering plant onshore is expected to be completed by summer. There are still six wells remaining to be drilled on the project. Production platforms are now being assembled in Indonesia and Italy and are expected to be delivered later this year.

     The FID for the project was announced in June 2023, and the project appears to be on schedule. Exxon exited the project in 2019 due to Romanian regulations and low prices. In August 2022, Romgaz, an oil and gas company based in Romania, acquired ExxonMobil Exploration and Production Romania, and OMV Petrom became the operator of the project. Total investment for the project was calculated at $4.37 billion. The field has been modeled to produce 8BCM annually, or about 767MMCF/day for about 10 years. 

     The water depths in the deepwater field vary between 100 and 1000 meters. The first exploration well, the Domino-1, was drilled in 2012. Seven test wells were drilled through 2017. The Domino field will produce from six wells, and the South Pelican Field, which will tie back to the Domino Field, will produce from four wells. Drilling for the ten production wells began in March 2025, and as noted, there are six wells left to drill.

     Black Sea offshore exploration is considered to be at an early stage. Prospective areas offshore Crimea and Ukraine are not expected to be developed until after the resolution of the Russia-Ukraine War. OMV recently drilled a couple of wells offshore Bulgaria. The second well, the Krum-1, did not encounter commercial hydrocarbons, but the company plans to continue exploring offshore Bulgaria and increase its knowledge in the region. As can be seen from the maps below, the Neptun project butts up against the Han Asparuh project, which OMV is exploring in Bulgarian waters.

     The Neptun project is also expected to have some cutting-edge emissions reduction features. According to OMV:

“Neptun Deep is among the first in the industry to use continuously direct electrically heated flowlines, ensuring reliable gas transport and reducing operational costs through cutting-edge thermal management.”

“The innovative design and process technologies deliver gas with significantly lower direct carbon emissions than industry averages. At plateau production, the carbon footprint of Neptun Deep operations is expected to be around 2.2 kilograms of CO2 per barrel of oil equivalent, almost 8 times lower than the industry average.”      

     The offshore and onshore pipes will be connected through an already built state-of-the-art micro tunnel. As noted, the project is expected to have a positive economic impact for Romania, and more exploration of that region of the Black Sea is expected as well. Gas is expected to be bought by Germany, Moldova, possibly Slovakia, and likely several other Eastern European countries.

References:

 

Pipeline work starts on Romania's biggest Black Sea offshore gas project. Luiza Ilie. Reuters. May 4, 2026. Pipeline work starts on Romania's biggest Black Sea offshore gas project

Neptun Deep Gas Field Project, Black Sea: The Neptun Deep gas project located in the Black Sea, Romania, is expected to start production in 2027. July 7, 2023. Neptun Deep Gas Field Project, Black Sea, Romania

Update on Krum-1 exploration well on Han Asparuh Block, offshore Bulgaria. OMV Petroleum. April 1, 2026. Update on Krum-1 exploration well on Han Asparuh Block, offshore Bulgaria | OMVPetrom.com

 

The Middle Corridor Offers a Much Faster Overland Trade Route from China to Europe: Is Russia Stalling It Through the Georgian Government, and Are Proposed Alternate Routes Feasible?

     

      This article about the Middle Corridor trade route from China to Europe reminded me of Mechanical Engineer Adrian Bejan’s Constructal Law, a first principle in physics that involves flow systems. According to the Constructal Law, flow systems naturally evolve to prioritize better access to flow. Faster routes achieve better access to flow, so there is a natural evolution towards faster routes. Faster routes also optimize energy use and reduce costs and emissions of pollution and greenhouse gases.

     The current disruption in the Strait of Hormuz is triggering more scrutiny of trade routes and potential chokepoints, both at sea and on land. Overland routes are replacing some of the flow through Hormuz, but only a small amount.

     Most of the trade between China and Europe passes through Russia along the Northern Corridor. Russia would, of course, like to keep it that way. However, efficiency is against that happening, and eventually, efficiency always wins. It’s cheaper, shorter, and takes less time, so there is a big incentive. According to the map below, it takes 15-20 days to complete the Northern Corridor but only 10-15 days to complete the Middle Corridor, also known as the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (TITR). Really, it’s a no-brainer to favor this new route.

     The article in IntelliNews asks:

“Is Russia, leaning on Georgia, quietly blocking the development of the Middle Corridor?”

     Currently, the Middle Corridor is only taking up 6% of what is moving through the Northern Corridor.

“The Middle Corridor is around 4,000 kilometres (2,485 miles) in length. A multimodal transport network, it links western China to Eastern Europe via Central Asia, the Caspian Sea, the South Caucasus, the Black Sea and Turkey. Importantly, it cuts an in-between path that entirely avoids sanctioned and war-impacted Russia and Iran.”

     In order to avoid both Russia and Iran, the route must make it to Turkey. It is currently planned to make it through Azerbaijan and Georgia, but that could change in the future to avoid Georgia in favor of Armenia. It was supposed to go through the Republic of Georgia, but it requires significant port upgrades, and Georgia has slow-walked these upgrades even though it would economically benefit the country. It has been suggested that Russian influence in Georgia is the reason for the delay snafu. The Georgia deep sea port project in the Black Sea, known as Anaklia, has seen its budget slashed by two-thirds in 2026.

“The planned deep-sea port, designed to handle vessels that Georgia’s other ports cannot accommodate, has been identified by the World Bank and the EU’s Trans-European Transport Network plan as a central corridor priority – yet Tbilisi seems uninterested in building it. The government has also shown little willingness to meaningfully expand the ports of Poti or Batumi.”

“In Georgia, explanations for this change of course vary widely, ranging from the government realizing that while demand might exceed the capacity of Poti and Batumi, it is far from sufficient to justify a project of Anaklia’s magnitude, to Russia putting pressure on Tbilisi to try to prevent the Middle Corridor from permanently replacing traffic on its own Northern Route.”

     The delay in Georgia is stifling the whole project to the point where workarounds are being developed. Countries along the Middle Corridor, such as Kazakhstan, are endowed with important critical minerals and other resources, and the delivery of these would also be supported by the route. Thus, even the U.S. is working on an alternative route around Georgia, namely the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity, or TRIPP. The recent peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan, brokered by the U.S., has opened up possibilities for increasing trade through the countries of the Caucasus Mountains region. These two countries, along with Georgia, are sandwiched between Russia and Iran, two nefarious countries that are geopolitically unstable. Even the proposed TRIPP route, as shown below, runs along the Northern Iranian border, which could subject it to Iranian interference. It is risky to put Western infrastructure so close to Iran, as we now know.

“Billions of dollars are being spent on building new transit capacities on Middle Corridor segments either side of the South Caucasian trio of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia.”

“Only two weeks ago, looking to address roadblocks, the World Bank and partners committed $3.3bn, with $1.9bn earmarked for Turkey's Istanbul North Rail Crossing to boost rail cargo transit across the Bosporus strait, and $1.4bn approved for the reconstruction of Kazakhstan's Karagandy-Zhezkazgan highway.

“On the day the funds were announced, Turkish Vice President Cevdet Yilmaz, speaking during a visit to Kazakh capital Astana, said: 'The Northern Corridor [through Russia] has become unpredictable due to geopolitical tensions. The southern route is pushing the limits of its capacity.”

“This situation has made the Middle Corridor not an alternative but a mandatory choice.”

     The Middle Corridor, the TRIPP route, and other possible alternative routes through the Caucasus require continued peace and economic cooperation between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which now seems plausible.

     Eventually, the practicality of a shorter, faster, cheaper trade route will win out as all sensible countries realize the benefits of the Middle Corridor. It will be another way to break Russia from leveraging a less practical route that benefits only them at the expense of the rest of the region. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan are seeking better ties with Europe and less influence from Russia, which is good for all. As in most travel choices and generally in accordance with the Constructal Law, if the route is viable in terms of security, the shortcut wins.

 

 

References:

 

Is Russia quietly blocking the development of the Middle Corridor? IntelliNews. May 3, 2026. Is Russia quietly blocking the development of the Middle Corridor?

Why the Middle Corridor matters amid a geopolitical resorting. Karel Valansi. The Atlantic Council. June 2, 2025. Why the Middle Corridor matters amid a geopolitical resorting - Atlantic Council

Rewiring the South Caucasus: TRIPP and the New Geopolitics of Connectivity. Thomas de Waal, Areg Kochinyan, and Zaur Shiriyev. Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center. April 1, 2026. Rewiring the South Caucasus: TRIPP and the New Geopolitics of Connectivity | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. Gasoline Types: Conventional, Reformulated, Regional, and Seasonal Blends, Octane Grades, Reid Vapor Pressure Limits, and State Differences

     

      The Energy Information Administration (EIA) has long done a good job explaining the details of gasoline types and differences. They explain that in the U.S., motor gasoline is a blend of different hydrocarbons and chemicals. The exact blends vary by season and by region. The EPA requires different blends in regions with air quality concerns.

“Key differences between formulations include octane rating, volatility—commonly measured as Reid vapor pressure (RVP)—and emissions. “This year, the EPA will relax federal enforcement of summer RVP standards to help reduce gasoline prices.”

     There are two main types of American gasoline formulations: conventional and reformulated (RFG). Most of the U.S. uses conventional gasoline, which meets air quality standards in those areas. RFG is required where conventional gasoline would exceed smog air pollution limits in accordance with the Clean Air Act. RFG burns cleaner but costs more to produce. The EPA notes that about 25% of U.S. gasoline is RFG. The first phase of the RFG program began in 1995, and the second (current) phase began in 2000. RFG is currently used in 17 states and in the District of Columbia. California requires a blend called Phase 3 RFG. RFG requirements have helped to reduce summer smog in vulnerable cities. The EPA explains some other important aspects of the RFG program below:

“Building on the success of the RFG program, EPA has harmonized requirements that apply to both conventional gasoline (the typical gasoline used in non-RFG areas) and RFG. For example, CG and RFG must both comply with same standards for benzene and sulfur content. This ensures that both CG and RFG provide similar substantial reductions in emissions of toxic pollutants and emissions of nitrogen oxides, which react in the atmosphere to form smog. In addition, RFG continues to provide reductions in emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from onroad and nonroad sources during the summer due to its lower vapor pressure, which is a measure of how easily gasoline evaporates. VOC emissions also contribute to the formation of smog.”

 

Octane Ratings

     Both kinds of gasoline are available in different grades, the familiar regular, midgrade, and premium varieties, which vary by octane. Ethanol may be blended with both types.

“The octane rating is the measure of fuel stability. The rating is based on the pressure at which a fuel spontaneously combusts (auto-ignite) in a testing engine. The octane number is the simple average of two different octane rating methods—motor octane rating (MOR) and research octane rating (RON)—that differ primarily in the specifics of the operating conditions. The higher an octane number, the more stable the fuel.”

     The familiar grades and their octane numbers are shown below.

     Octane is C8H18. It has 18 isomers, or different molecular configurations.

“Of the 18 isomers of normal octane (C8H18), octane gets its name from the 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane compound, which is highly resistant to auto-ignition. This iso-octane has been assigned the reference value of 100 for testing purposes. The extremely unstable normal heptane (C7H16) molecule is the 0 octane reference fuel.”

     Below, they explain how octane levels affect how the engine runs and burns fuel, potentially producing knocking and pre-ignition.

     Modern engine computers can minimize knocking and pre-ignition by reacting to them quickly when they occur. Octane is measured with an octane testing engine.

 

Seasonal and Regional Blends Vary by Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) Limits

     Seasonal changes to gasoline blends are mainly changes in volatility as measured by Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP).

“…the lower the RVP, the less volatile the gasoline and the less evaporative the emissions. To reduce smog-forming emissions, the EPA mandates that summer grade gasoline has a lower RVP (less volatility) to control evaporation, which would normally increase in warm weather. In cold weather, higher volatility helps engines start more easily.”

     The EPA regulates different regions according to different RVP limits. Below, the EIA explains how RVP limits change by region and through the year.

     Lowering RVP for summer blends requires the addition of more expensive components such as alkylate. In winter, it is OK to use less expensive butane to raise octane values, but it also raises RVP, so alkylate is used instead to raise octane values in summer. 

     Below is a map of the U.S. showing summer blends in different states and regions.

     State blends include State Implementation Plan (SIP), Arizona Cleaner Burning Gasoline (AZ-CBG), and California Reformulated Gasoline (CA RFG). California has a summer RVP limit of 7.0 psi and extends the summer blend time periods in different regions as shown below.

References:

 

What’s in your gasoline? Understanding U.S. motor gasoline formulations. Energy Information Administration. April 15, 2026. What’s in your gasoline? Understanding U.S. motor gasoline formulations - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Gasoline explained. What is octane? Energy Information Administration. Gasoline explained - octane in depth - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

EPA Fortifies Domestic Fuel Supply, Provides Americans with Relief at the Pump by Approving Nationwide E15 and Removing Boutique Fuel Markets for E10. U.S. EPA. March 25, 2026. EPA Fortifies Domestic Fuel Supply, Provides Americans with Relief at the Pump by Approving Nationwide E15 and Removing Boutique Fuel Markets for E10 | US EPA

Reformulated Gasoline. U.S. EPA. Reformulated Gasoline | US EPA

Gasoline Reid Vapor Pressure. U.S. EPA. Gasoline Reid Vapor Pressure | US EPA

Alkylation is an important source for octane in gasoline. Energy Information Administration. February 13, 2013. Alkylation is an important source for octane in gasoline - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)