Pipelines being laid for gas distribution
Laying of pipelines for gas distribution in Ramanathapuram and Keelakarai has begun and experts from the AG & P Pratham have launched 3 CNG (compressed natural gas) stations here. According to a press release issued here on Thursday, the company has proposed to supply 24×7 natural gas here by establishing gas grids in Pattinamkattan and Rameswaram, which would help achieve 15000 PNG (piped natural gas) registrations by March 2023. The work has started from the CGS plant at Valuthoor to Kumariyakovil. It would provide continuous CNG/PNG supply to domestic customers and company owned and company operated gas filling station to come up at Kuyavankudi. With regard to Ramanathapuram, the Regional Head E Poomari said that the CNG supply would reduce the expenditure at least by 50 % on the household expenditure. The project is safe, secure and help have a cleaner environment. The company has been authorised to develop CGD networks in six districts including Vellore, Ranipet, Tirupattur, Ramanathapuram, Kancheepuram and Chengalpattu. By December, they aimed to achieve around 10000 domestic registrations for PNG and 7 CNG stations in the region. The Petroleum Explosives Safety Organisation had issued licence for the steel pipeline work in Ramanathapuram and after laying work, the land would be restored to its original condition after the groundwork.
Asia LNG Prices Rise as Japan, Korea, India Boost Stocks
Asian spot liquefied natural gas (LNG) prices rose this week on as Japan, South Korea and India sought to replenish their stocks. The increased competition has accordingly narrowed the spread with European gas prices, which eased on less concerns over further Russian supply cuts. The average LNG price for July delivery into northeast Asia was estimated at $24.75 per metric million British thermal units (mmBtu), up $1.35 or 5.8% from the previous week, industry sources said. “The market has been a little more stable recently compared with the volatility of earlier months, although still at high prices,” Alex Froley, an LNG analyst at data intelligence firm ICIS said. In China, market players are waiting to see if Covid-19 lockdown easing will help demand. China LNG Imports Down China’s LNG imports until end-May were down by 6.5 million tonnes, or 20% from the previous year, equalling some 9 billion cubic metres of pipeline gas, Froley noted. Major purchases by large South Korean and Japanese utilities have occurred in the meantime, according to S&P Global Commodity Insights. LNG freight spot rates continued to rise as vessel availability tightens, with Pacific rates estimated at $85,000 per day and the Atlantic rates at $96,500 per day, according to Spark Commodities. Australia’s trade surplus widened more than expected in April thanks to rising exports of LNG as well as a return of tourists. The US exported 7.29 million tonnes of LNG last month, the second highest quantity on record, though virtually all were sales to Europe and South America, according to Refinitiv Eikon data. Separately, the Japanese government said it would not exit the Sakhalin 2 LNG project in Russia even if asked to leave. Land for the project belongs to Russia, but the plant is owned by the Japanese government and companies, Koichi Hagiuda, the Minister for the Economy, Trade and Industry, told a parliamentary committee.
Vedanta, ONGC, Oil India submit bids for discovered small field auctions
As many as 26 companies have submitted 106 bids in the third round of discovered small field (DSF) auctions for which the last date of submission of bids was May 31. The list of companies includes Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC), Oil India (OIL) and Anil Agarwal-led Vedanta Ltd, among others. The current round of DSF was launched for 32 contract areas, spread across nine sedimentary basins, covering an area of more than 13,000 square kilometres. Out of the 32 contract areas, 11 are onland, 18 are in shallow water and one is in deep-water. Vedanta has submitted 31 bids, while ONGC has around 13 bids during the current round. Other companies in the list of bidders include Invenire Energy, Sun Petrochemicals, Megha Engineering and Infrastructures, Oilmax Energy, Ganges Geo Resources, Joshi Technologies and Duganta Oil and Natural Gas. Out of the 26 companies – four were public sector undertakings and 22 private sector players. “This demonstrates the interest of public and private players in the Indian exploration and production sector. This time, blocks were awarded in clusters and hence it received so much interest,” said a source aware about the development. E-bids were received against all contract areas on offer. Out of the total 32 areas, 24 of them got multiple bids taking it to a total of 98 e-bids, while only eight of them got single bids. The government had announced DSF Policy in October 2015 and till now two rounds of DSF have been concluded for 54 Contract Areas. As many as 27 companies, including 12 new entrants had participated in the first two rounds of DSF. The current round of DSF is expected to have an in-place hydrocarbons of around 230 million metric tonne. According to the government, the salient features of DSF policy are revenue sharing model, single license for conventional and unconventional hydrocarbons, no upfront signature bonus, reduced royalty rate in line with HELP (Hydrocarbon Exploration and Licensing Policy), no cess, full marketing and pricing freedom for gas produced, exploration allowed during entire contract period, and 100 per cent participation from foreign companies and joint ventures. In the DSF Round – I launched in 2016, 134 bids were submitted for 34 contract areas by 47 companies. 30 Revenue Sharing Contracts were signed. In DSF Round – II launched in 2018, 145 bids were submitted for 24 contract areas. 24 Revenue Sharing Contracts were signed. The first round saw as many as 22 companies winning bids for 31 contract areas. The gross revenue from the first round was expected to be around Rs Rs 464 billion. The government’s share was expected to be around Rs 140 billion. However, production is yet to start from any of these blocks, majorly because of economic slowdown and the pandemic. During the second round in February 2019, a total of eight companies won 23 contract areas. The second round was also expected to start production during the current year.
Centre puts oil pipeline monetisation on hold as PSUs resist: Report
Convincing the petroleum ministry by stating the plan as an expensive way to raise capital, state gas utility GAIL, Hindustan Petroleum, and Indian Oil Corporation may not go ahead with pipeline monetisation, a media report said on Wednesday. According to the Economic Times report, the government expected the companies to transfer some of their pipelines to separate infrastructure investment trusts (InvITs) and sell minority stakes in those to raise Rs 170 billion. The oil companies have told the government that their high credit ratings, among the best in the country, will allow them to raise capital easily and at a much lower cost than any return they would have to offer InvIT investors, the report added. The asset monetisation programme, announced in Budget 2021, is a pipeline of assets the government is looking to monetise to collect about Rs 6 trillion to partly fund its ambitious infrastructure projects over four years ending 2024-25. Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman while announcing the plan said it’s important that India recognises the time has come for making the most out of our assets. The plan includes petroleum product pipelines of 3,930 km to be monetised by Indian Oil Corporation, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation and the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas. “The pipeline monetisation plan is no more on the table,” Economic Times quoted a person in the know. As per report, the oil and gas companies had resisted the idea from the beginning as pipelines are core to their business and the InvIT model being not so attractive for them. For the oil companies, InvIT would have been a trade-off between current and future cash flows as the stake sale would yield capital but they would start paying an operating charge for using the assets. The government now is debating whether these pipelines can be managed by a third party or shared, it added.
GLOBAL LNG: Asian prices rise on demand growth; narrowing spread with Europe
The increased competition has accordingly narrowed the spread with European gas prices on the Dutch TTF hub, where prices went down after concerns over further Russian gas cuts eased. Asian spot liquefied natural gas (LNG) prices were up this week on continued demand growth from Japan, Korea and India as large utilities sought to replenish stocks. The increased competition has accordingly narrowed the spread with European gas prices on the Dutch TTF hub, where prices went down after concerns over further Russian gas cuts eased. The average LNG price for July delivery into north-east Asia was estimated at $24.75 per metric million British thermal units (mmBtu), up $1.35 or 5.8% from the previous week, industry sources said. “The market has been a little more stable recently compared with the volatility of earlier months, although still at high prices,” said Alex Froley, LNG analyst at data intelligence firm ICIS. “It looks set to continue in this mood in the near term, with Continental European prices strongest as storage injections continue, Asia a little lower as COVID lockdowns dent Chinese demand, and the UK lower again as it has constraints on its demand due to lack of storage capacity,” he said. In China, market players are waiting to see if COVID lockdown easing will help demand. China’s LNG imports until end-May were down by 6.5 million tonnes, or 20% from the previous year, equalling some 9 billion cubic metres of pipeline gas, Froley said. In Europe, S&P Global Commodity Insights assessed LNG prices for a delivered ex-ship (DES) basis into Northwest Europe at $24.375 per mmBtu on May 31, at a discount of $4.90/mmBtu to the July price on the Dutch gas TTF hub. “Discounts to the main European gas hub continued to narrow for spot LNG cargoes as increased competition from North Asia hiked up prices for LNG cargoes into Europe,” said Ciaran Roe, global director of LNG at S&P Global Commodity insights. “Major purchases by large Korean and Japanese utilities have occurred in the meantime, while within Europe discounts remain between hubs with high regasification capacity and those that are logistically constrained in terms of LNG imports relative to their gas demand.” Russia’s Gazprom on Wednesday cut off gas supplies to Denmark’s Orsted, and to Shell Energy for its contract to supply gas to Germany, citing the companies’ failure to make payments in roubles. It has already halted supplies to Dutch gas trader GasTerra, as well as to Bulgaria, Poland and Finland. However, all these clients said they can replace the gas cuts from elsewhere. LNG freight spot rates continued to rise as vessel availability tightens, with Pacific rates estimated at $85,000 per day and the Atlantic rates at $96,500 per day, according to Spark Commodities.
A Radical Plan To Halt The Oil Price Rally
The summer driving season is here again, and U.S. motorists are feeling real pain at the pump as gas prices continue taking out fresh highs. The national average for unleaded gas hit a new high of $4.67 per gallon on Wednesday, with the average price at $4 per gallon or above in all 50 states for the first time ever. President Biden is scrambling to lower gas prices ahead of the midterm elections, but is short of options after the historic release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve of 1 million barrels a day for six months did little to slow the oil price rally. The situation is not any better in Europe, with energy prices skyrocketing as the world contends with supply chain bottlenecks, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the lingering effects of Covid-19 lockdowns. OPEC has not been of much help, either, although the Wall Street Journal has reported that some OPEC members are exploring the idea of suspending Russia’s participation, which could pave the way for Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and other OPEC producers to pump significantly more crude. But Italy’s prime minister, Mario Draghi, has hatched an even more radical plan to contain the oil price rally. The former European Central Bank president has floated the idea of creating a “cartel” of oil consumers at a meeting with Joe Biden in order to increase their bargaining power, similar to how the biggest oil-producing nations came together through OPEC to agree on annual oil production quotas. The two met at the White House on Tuesday to coordinate their positions on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the economic fallout from the conflict. “We are both dissatisfied with the way things work, in terms of oil for the US and in terms of gas for Europe. Prices don’t have any relationship with supply and demand,” Draghi has said. According to Brussels think tank Bruegel, since September 2021, Germany, France, Italy, and Spain–four of the largest EU economies–have each spent €20bn-€30bn to artificially lower energy prices. However, these subsidies are viewed as less than ideal since they help to fund Moscow, drain public finances and harm the environment. Oil Price Cap Draghi and Biden have also discussed implementing a cap on wholesale gas prices, an idea pushed by Italy within the EU for the past three months. Indeed, Italy has managed to get many EU states on board for an oil price cap, but is facing strong opposition from the Netherlands and Germany, two of the largest importers of Russian oil. The EU executive is also not buying it. According to the European Commission, an oil price cap should only be a last resort for an emergency, such as in the event Russia cuts off all gas to the EU. The EC’s decision appears to have been swayed by a cross-section of analysts who have argued that caps could imperil the EU’s climate goals, by encouraging more consumption of fossil fuels. Roberto Cingolani, Italy’s minister for ecological transition, is not taking the opposition lightly: “Countries that oppose [the idea] defend the concept of a free market … this free market has allowed gas prices to increase five or six-fold without there being a real physical reason, for example a shortage, which has affected the cost of electricity. Citizens are unable to bear the costs, and businesses suffer the high energy costs of manufacturing,” he has told the Guardian. But it appears European leaders are more receptive to the idea of creating a natural gas buyers’ cartel after the EU agreed in March to use the union’s considerable heft to get better gas prices. “We have important leverage. So instead of outbidding each other and driving prices up, we should pull our common weight,” the European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, has declared. This probably makes more sense, considering that more than 40% of EU gas and 25% of its oil came from Russia before the Ukraine invasion. On Monday, the European Union agreed on a partial ban on Russian oil imports, which immediately covers more than 2/3 of oil imports from Russia, according to European Council chief Charles Michel. That said, other plans to curb the price of crude could end up gaining traction and becoming a reality considering that some high-powered figures in Germany are open to the idea. Last week, Germany’s economy minister, Robert Habeck, revealed that the commission and the U.S. were working on a proposal to cap global oil prices. Meanwhile, Michael Bloss, a German Green MEP, has suggested that the EU should create an oil consumers’ cartel with other developed countries, including the U.S., UK, Japan, and South Korea, which represent “a huge share of oil consumption” on the global market. “If they together say this is the price we are going to pay, but not more, the sellers, they will have to abide by it … This special time needs special action.”
High energy prices, Asian markets could blunt EU ban on Russian oil
The European Union’s groundbreaking decision to ban nearly all oil from Russia to punish the country for its invasion of Ukraine is a blow to Moscow’s economy, but its effects may be blunted by rising energy prices and other countries willing to buy some of the petroleum, industry experts say. European Union leaders agreed late Monday to cut Russian oil imports by about 90% over the next six months, a dramatic move that was considered unthinkable just months ago. The 27-country bloc relies on Russia for 25% of its oil and 40% of its natural gas, and European countries that are even more heavily dependent on Russia had been especially reluctant to act. European heads of state hailed the decision as a watershed, but analysts were more circumspect. The EU ban applies to all Russian oil delivered by sea. At Hungary’s insistence, it contains a temporary exemption for oil delivered by the Russian Druzhba pipeline to certain landlocked countries in Central Europe. In addition to retaining some European markets, Russia could sell some of the oil previously bound to Europe to China, India and other customers in Asia, even though it will have to offer discounts, said Chris Weafer, CEO at consulting firm Macro-Advisory. Now, for the moment, that’s not financially too painful for Russia because global prices are elevated. They’re much higher than last year, he said. So even Russia offering a discount means that it’s probably selling its oil for roughly what it sold for last year also. He noted that India has been a willing buyer and China’s certainly been keen to buy more oil because they’re both countries who are getting big discounts on global market prices. Still, Moscow has traditionally viewed Europe as its main energy market, making Monday’s decision the most significant effort yet to punish Russia for its war in Ukraine. The sanctions have one clear aim: to prompt Russia to end this war and withdraw its troops and to agree with Ukraine on a sensible and fair peace, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said. Ukraine estimated the ban could cost Russia tens of billions of dollars. The oil embargo will speed up the countdown to the collapse of the Russian economy and war machine, Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in a video address that Ukraine will be pressing for more sanctions, adding that there should be no significant economic ties left between the free world and the terrorist state. Simone Tagliapietra, an energy expert and research fellow at the Brussels-based think tank Bruegel, called the embargo a major blow. Matteo Villa, an analyst at the ISPI think tank in Milan, said Russia will take a pretty significant hit now but cautioned that the move could eventually backfire. The risk is that the price of oil in general goes up because of the European sanctions. And if the price goes up a lot, the risk is that Russia starts to earn more, and Europe loses the bet, he said. Like previous rounds of sanctions, the oil ban is unlikely to persuade the Kremlin to end the war. Moscow seized on the new sanctions to try to rally public support against the West, describing it as bent on destroying Russia. Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy head of Russia’s Security Council who served as the country’s president, said the oil ban aims to reduce the country’s export earnings and force the government to scale down social benefits. They hate us all! Medvedev said on his messaging app channel. Those decisions stem from hatred against Russia and against all of its people. Russia has not shied away from withholding energy to get its way. Russian state energy giant Gazprom said it is cutting off natural gas to Dutch trader GasTerra and Denmark’s Oersted company and is also stopping shipments to Shell Energy Europe that were bound for Germany. Germany has other suppliers, and GasTerra and Oersted said they were prepared for a shutoff. Gazprom previously stopped the flow to Bulgaria, Poland and Finland. Meanwhile, the EU is urging other countries to avoid placing trade barriers on farm products as Russia’s war increases the risks of a global food crisis. Zelenskyy has said Russia has prevented the export of 22 million tons of Ukrainian grain, much of it meant for people across the Middle East and Africa. He accused Moscow of deliberately creating this problem. Russian oil delivered by sea accounts for two-thirds of the EU’s oil imports from Moscow. In addition to the EU cutoff of such imports, Germany and Poland have agreed to stop using oil from the northern branch of the Druzhba pipeline. Agreeing on sanctions against Russian natural gas is likely to prove much tougher because it represents a larger percentage of Europe’s energy mix. “The very loud and clear message that Moscow will hear is that it will be near impossible for the European Union to get any agreement on blocking gas because gas will not be as easily replicated from other sources in Europe as oil will be, Weafer said.
Rising Energy Prices Could Tip World Into 1980s-Style Recession
Rising energy prices and boxing Russian crude oil out of the global market risks a global recession, Bank of America’s head of global commodities and derivatives research Francisco Blanch warned in a recent research note. “Can the global economy continue to expand with tightening oil supplies? Our estimates suggest that the world can handle a total disruption of just about 2mn b/d of Russian oil without risking a global recession,” the note cautioned. In 2023, BoA sees oil demand approaching pre-Covid levels—but only if Russia’s crude oil and condensate production stays at 10 million bpd and OPEC+’s crude oil output increases. “With our $120/bbl Brent target now insight, we believe that a sharp contraction in Russian oil exports could trigger a full-blown 1980s style oil crisis and push Brent well past $150/bbl,” Blanch added. Blanch stressed that while recession risks were elevated, it was not the base case. Blanch’s prediction, however, was made prior to the EU’s deal that it recently struck to embargo 90% of the crude oil that it currently gets from Russia starting the end of this year. Some industry experts expect the partial EU ban on Russian imports to send oil prices to above $130 a barrel in the short term. GDP has typically been measured by looking at the number of cars sold or air travel. But, Blanch says, “No major economy can expand without energy. Whether the source of this energy is thermal or renewable matters less, in our view, as long as it is available.” Blanch also said that while the U.S. is unlikely to fall into a recession due to high energy prices, other countries may be more at risk.
Where Are Oil Prices Headed?
Energy prices are top of mind for most people now. From a couple of years ago when fuel prices were low, the rapid rise has helped put a crimp on the economy and raised driving costs for retail consumers. The signs of this rise are everywhere as service station operators adjust prices higher on an almost daily basis. The national average for 87 octane gasoline has reached $4.50 a gallon for the first time ever. Diesel is nearing $6.00 per gallon and raising shipping costs for everyone. In an OilPrice article a couple of weeks ago, I discussed why we were seeing these steep rises in retail prices for refined products. At the core of the problem lies inflation caused by massive increases in liquidity by the Federal Reserve, to pay for the trillions of dollars spent by the government, during and post Covid-19. This article will discuss some likely next steps for the economy with potential knock-on effects on crude prices globally. Inflation and excess liquidity will create a deep recession Since 2008 interest rates have remained near zero, as the Federal Reserve injected liquidity into the economy by keeping the institutional rate low, and pumping its balance sheet, buying corporate bonds. This never-ending reserve of liquidity had the knock-on effect of inflating the value of real property and stocks in particular. There is a fair amount of evidence tying these two actions together. We all know what has happened with house prices, gaining each year since, and rallying by double-digits the last couple. The stock market-DOW 30, has nearly sextupled in that time rising from around 6,000 in early 2009 to just over 36,000 this year. Obviously, there have been fits and starts along the way but the chart shows an inexorable path higher in this time frame. Inflation that should have been attendant to this liquidity was kept at bay largely through increases in productivity and a global supply chain that hummed like the well-oiled machine that it was, until the global Covid shut-in, in March of 2020. Since that time the world has injected trillions in liquidity into the marketplace at a time when supply is still restricted from its default manufacturing center-China. Accordingly, the “dogs” of inflation have been let loose upon the world and in response, Central Banks are beginning to tighten the reins to relieve the demand pressure. This is a textbook case for recession. Or perhaps the first step toward a depression. Most of the conversation around the effects of tightening monetary policy has shifted away from “if” and toward will the landing be Hard, or Soft. Economist-speak for a deep, prolonged recession in the hard case, or a shallower, shorter downtrend, with a sharp spike higher in a few months, in the soft case. A “V” shaped recovery that has enabled the world economy to rebound with few lasting effects in the past couple of times. The notion that we can avoid a “hard fall” as the current Fed Chm, Jerome Powell seems to think possible is the subject of much debate. And, he has recently moderated this tone as noted in the linked article. I would call your attention to the tightening cycle of 2004-2007, which precipitated the recession of 2008-2010, and the tightening cycle of 2015-16, which was interrupted by the Covid crash of 2020. My takeaway from this chart is that we had a false crash in 2020 led by a dramatic reduction in demand due to the world shutting down for three months. You can see the slope of the rebound since then is very similar to the years of 2009-2011 when the Fed was rapidly adding liquidity, as happened in 2020 to early 2022. That suggests to me that as a function of Fed tightening, we may have seen the cycle peak, and the oil price could be in a plateau for the next several years, as in 2011-2014, or until an inflection in the market similar to what Saudi did in 2014 occurs. That is certainly one outcome that we could see, but there are other forces at play in this equation. What’s different this time? As I noted in a recent OilPrice article on problems in the Shale-Patch, supply, and the expectation of the market that oil will be readily available, is out of sync with the demand picture. A look at the EIA-STEO for that time period shows you the beginning of the U.S. inventory build that culminated in mid-2017. From a peak in mid-17 of ~550 mm bbl, thanks to growing U.S. production, and bountiful Saudi exports in that era, the oil market was over-supplied and prices suffered. Drilling in the U.S. had been on the decline starting in 2019, dropping about 300 rigs over the course of that year, when the Saudis and the Russians formed OPEC+ and began to withdraw crude from the market to raise prices. Thanks to a surge of production from newly completed wells, we reached another near peak capacity level in 2019, as this SP Global article notes. Flash forward to today, and as of the most recent EIA-WPSR, we are bumping around 420 mm bbl currently. Hence the case can be made that as a combination of fiscal restraint in the post-2019 era, and OPEC+’s voluntary withdrawals, the strategy to raise prices, by reducing supply has been pretty successful. This decline in supply meets rapidly rising estimates for demand, as noted in this OilPrice article. The article also notes that OPEC+ is unlikely to raise production beyond its stated goal of 432K per month. As they are currently ~2-mm BOPD under quota, it is questionable whether they have the capacity do if they were inclined. Supporting that notion is their commentary in this OilPrice article. The article notes that the cartel is in significant arrears of its agreed production targets. “While OPEC+ is sticking to its policy of modest monthly increases, many of its members are not pumping to their quotas and the group
Gas prices: as cooking fuels become more expensive, people are turning to dirtier alternatives
One consequence of the meteoric rise in the price of fossil gas has been that cooking meals is now much more expensive. In the UK, food bank users declined potatoes as they couldn’t afford to boil them. In Germany, increased heating and petrol costs have even forced some food banks to suspend their services. In low and middle-income countries, over 2.5 billion people cook with liquefied petroleum gas (often abbreviated to LPG). This is a byproduct of fossil gas extraction that is compressed into cylinders for distribution. The price of LPG has also increased sharply in recent months, which has led to fewer people using it for cooking. Sudden price changes in LPG typically see households revert to cooking with more polluting alternatives, such as wood and charcoal, which can be gathered for free or bought in small amounts. A Nigerian news article published in December 2021 described a woman who started cooking with gas two years ago but has since returned to using charcoal as LPG prices have soared. In India, rising LPG prices coupled with the scaling back of a government programme to subsidise cooking gas are forcing people to use firewood. This has also been documented in Rwanda, Brazil, Vietnam and Kenya. COVID-19 lockdowns at the start of 2020 had already pushed many poorer households around the world into using wood or charcoal due to fuel shortages and a loss of income as businesses were closed and people were urged to stay home. Women and girls tend to suffer the most when LPG becomes unattainable, as they are usually responsible for gathering firewood. The task can take up to several hours a week and it prevents many from attending school or work. Burning wood and charcoal for cooking also exposes people to dangerous levels of indoor air pollution in kitchens. It is estimated that this causes four million premature deaths each year, out of the more than three billion people exposed. Cooking with wood and charcoal is also a problem for the climate, as it emits potent greenhouse gases like black carbon. But the consequences of high cooking fuel prices don’t end there. Food and energy are closely linked People in the poorest parts of the world tend to consume very few processed foods and lots of staple foods, such as dried beans in East Africa, which cannot be eaten raw. Because they must cook most of their meals to eat, people in low-income countries typically require more energy to prepare a meal and face a difficult choice between paying for food or fuel when LPG becomes more expensive. It has been reported that a combination of rising gas and food prices has forced families to eat fewer, lower-quality meals in Sri Lanka and Vietnam. This same pattern emerged when COVID-19 restrictions were implemented in 2020, and an inability to afford cooking fuels restricted access to adequate food in both high and low-income countries, including Kenya and the US. Having to skip meals because of unaffordable fuel not only leads to malnutrition but also worsens physical and mental wellbeing.