India seeks to buy LNG from Azerbaijan
India is seeking to purchase liquefied natural gas (LNG) from Azerbaijan, said head of the LNG division of India’s Bharat Petroleum during an interview with The Hindu newspaper on the sidelines of India Energy Week held in Goa. The Bharat Petroleum executive noted that India’s state-owned oil refining company is holding talks with the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic (SOCAR) on the purchase of liquefied natural gas, News.Az reports. At the same time, the company plans to buy liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) from the United States at lower prices in order to diversify supplies and has announced a tender to that effect.
India’s Russian oil buy to dwindle
India is likely to begin scaling back its crude oil purchases from Russia under an agreement reached with the United States in exchange for lower trade tariffs, sources said, adding that these imports will continue for now, as refiners like Nayara Energy have limited alternatives. President Donald Trump on Friday signed an executive order rescinding a punitive 25 per cent duty on all imports from India, saying the move followed New Delhi’s commitment to stop imports of Russian oil. While Indian refiners, which process crude oil into fuels such as petrol and diesel, have not received any formal directive to halt Russian purchases, they have been informally advised to begin scaling back buys from Moscow, three sources with knowledge of the matter said. Most refiners will continue to honour purchase commitments made before the announcement – orders typically placed six to eight weeks in advance – but will not place new orders thereafter, they said. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL), Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd (MRPL) and HPCL-Mittal Energy Ltd (HMEL) had stopped buying oil from Russia soon after the US last year slapped sanctions on Moscow’s key exporters, while others like Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) will wind down their purchases, sources said. Reliance Industries Ltd, India’s biggest buyer, which late last year paused purchases after US sanctions on Rosneft and Lukoil, is also likely to cease purchases after its resumption cargo of 1,50,000 barrels is delivered in the next couple of weeks. The only exception to this rule is likely to be Nayara Energy. Nayara was first sanctioned by the European Union and then by the UK for its Russian links (Rosneft holds 49.13 per cent in Nayara). Because of these sanctions, no other major supplier is willing to do any commercial transaction with the company, resulting in it being forced to buy Russian oil from non-sanctioned entities. While the Oil Ministry has refused to comment on the issue, the Commerce Ministry and the Ministry of External Affairs have not directly commented on commitments made by India with regard to Russian oil purchases.
EU Escalates Oil Sanctions With Broad Ban on Shipping Services
The European Union is preparing to take a much bigger swing at Russia’s oil trade, and this time Brussels is aiming less at optics and more at the plumbing that actually keeps barrels moving. The European Commission has proposed what would be its broadest sanctions package yet against Russian crude exports, targeting not just ships or buyers but the services that make seaborne oil trade possible in the first place. The plan would ban European firms from providing shipping, insurance, financing, and other maritime services for Russian crude at any price, effectively sidelining the G7’s much-criticized oil price cap. If adopted, the move would cut directly into a system that still relies heavily on Western infrastructure. Russia exports more than a third of its crude using tankers and services linked to Greece, Cyprus, and Malta, supplying mainly India and China. The new proposal would shut that door, forcing Russian oil even deeper into the shadow fleet ecosystem. The package, the EU’s 20th since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, would also expand sanctions on Moscow’s maritime workarounds. Brussels wants to add 43 more vessels to its shadow fleet blacklist, bringing the total to around 640, while also hitting regional Russian banks and crypto firms accused of helping evade sanctions. New import bans on Russian metals, chemicals, and critical minerals are also included. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen framed the measures as necessary ones that will push Moscow toward serious peace talks. Pressure, she contends, is the only language the Kremlin understands. The intent is to make Russian oil harder, riskier, and more expensive to sell. It is part of a broader hardening by Western governments. Earlier in the day, the United States announced fresh sanctions targeting Iranian oil traders and shadow fleet vessels—a renewed focus on enforcement. The original price cap experiment was supposed to let oil flow while starving Russia of revenue. But as some predicted, the pressures proved easy to dodge and difficult to police. A services ban is blunter and harder to game. It is unilkely to stop Russian oil from flowing altogether, but it should push more barrels into discounted, high-friction channels where margins shrink as logistics get even more complicated. Unanimity among EU members is still required, and that is never guaranteed.
The U.S. LNG Boom Is Lowering Europe’s Energy Costs and Raising America’s
The United States has cemented its position as the world’s leading exporter of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) over the past couple of years, thanks to surging natural gas demand in Europe and Asia. U.S. LNG exports hit a record 111 million tons in 2025, surpassing 100 million metric tons for the first time, driven by high utilization and new capacity additions from projects like Plaquemines LNG. But this could be just the beginning of the U.S. LNG boom: the EIA has predicted that U.S. LNG export capacity will more than double by 2029, with an estimated 13.9 Bcf/d of new capacity added between 2025 and 2029 as projects like Plaquemines LNG Phase 1 and Corpus Christi Stage 3 reach full operations. Meanwhile, additional projects such as Delta LNG, CP2 LNG, and others are expected to further bolster capacity toward 2030. However, the energy experts are now warning that all this growth will come at cost, as does everything. According to Wood Mackenzie, European demand for industrial natural gas has declined by 21% since 2021 while industrial power demand has decreased by 4%, driven by soaring gas prices after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. However, WoodMac has projected that the ongoing massive wave of new global LNG supply, primarily from the U.S. and Qatar, is expected to nearly halve European traded gas prices by 2030 compared to 2025 levels, saving European industry roughly $46 billion annually by 2032. Conversely, surging LNG exports and soaring demand from AI data centers are projected to push domestic U.S. gas prices to an average of $4.90/MMBtu between 2030 and 2035, a nearly 50% increase from 2025 levels. This constitutes a narrowing competitive gap, with the large cost advantage that U.S. manufacturers have enjoyed for over a decade poised to shrink despite U.S. energy remaining cheaper than European energy in absolute terms. That doesn’t mean that European manufacturers will be complaining, though. The EU has become heavily reliant on the U.S., which supplied more than 57% of EU LNG imports by early 2026, up from 45% in 2024. Consequently, falling energy prices will benefit energy-intensive industries sectors such as petrochemicals, metals, and chemicals, which have been under severe cost pressure since the global energy crisis hit four years ago, with WoodMac reporting they are going through a “price reversal window” that will allow them to stabilize or recover. Lower European energy costs are expected to open up growth opportunities, with WoodMac predicting that the continent’s pharmaceuticals, food processing, and data center sectors are likely to capture a larger share of the international market. This could, however, prove to be a double-edged sword for the U.S. economy. Indeed, the U.S. LNG boom is poised to create a complex, often contradictory impact on the U.S. economy, acting as a major driver for GDP growth, job creation, and infrastructure investments while simultaneously raising domestic energy costs and complicating the energy transition. The LNG boom is expected to contribute up to $1.3 trillion to the U.S. GDP by 2040 and generate $166 billion in federal and state tax revenues, according to an S&P Global study. The industry is expected to create nearly 500,000 jobs, encompassing direct, indirect, and induced employment. Over $50 billion is projected to flow into new, massive infrastructure projects (e.g., Plaquemines, Golden Pass, Port Arthur). In contrast, experts warn that even relatively modest increases in gas and energy prices can lead to large increases in operating costs, potentially taking a toll on margins. An analysis by the Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA) found that every $1 increase in the Henry Hub price costs U.S. consumers and manufacturers ~$54 billion annually in combined gas and electricity expenses, including $20 billion more in electricity expenses as well as $34 billion increase in direct natural gas costs for consumers and manufacturers. For manufacturers, who often cannot pass on energy costs as easily as regulated utilities, a $1 increase in the Henry Hub price poses a direct threat to competitive advantage. Industries that rely heavily on natural gas, such as manufacturing, chemicals, and fertilizers, face increased operational costs, with estimates of up to $125 billion in added costs by 2050. But it’s not just large industries that could suffer the negative consequences of the ongoing AI and LNG boom. Increased exports connect the U.S. domestic natural gas market to higher global prices, driving higher electricity and heating bills for U.S. households. Meanwhile, analysts have warned that the U.S. could face a domestic energy crunch that could trigger spikes in energy prices if natural gas production growth fails to meet export demand growth. This could negatively impact the clean energy transition, with higher natural gas prices making coal power more competitive in the domestic electricity market.