{"word_count": 874, "character_count": 6001}
Gas Supply Changes in Turkey / Gulmira Rzayeva. Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, Jan. 2018, 19 p. (Energy insight ; 24.) https://www.oxfordenergy.org/publications/gas-supply-changes-turkey/The Turkish government is in the process of making significant structural changes in the country’s energy sector in attempts to lessen its dependence on current import and transmission infrastructure capacity which is constrained and cannot meet gas demand in peak periods. It intends to diversify supply sources and gas import types (both pipeline gas and LNG/FSRU) to ensure imports are available from a wider range of available sources on competitive terms, at the same time storing more gas in the country once downstream infrastructure capacity allows, to export the excess of gas in the future. Consequently, BOTAŞ expects its maximum daily gas supply capacity to almost double by 2023, from the current 252 mcm/d (including storage capacity) to 473 mcm/d as new projects come on stream. This will extend Turkey’s ability to import gas from various sources by eliminating technical constraints. By doing so, Turkey intends to ensure supply security during the peak demand seasons and to reduce its dependence on existing suppliers, allowing it room to manoeuvre between them and other new options. Turkey is also expanding capacity at its existing LNG receiving terminals and building new FSRUs, taking advantage of the fact that this method of importing natural gas is available in a flexible and near immediate manner. This will give BOTAŞ and private companies an advantage in meeting the growing demand in winter time, instead of having to increase annual pipeline contract quantities (ACQ) due to the application of “take or pay” clauses.What's Next for US Energy Policy?, Oxford Energy Forum, n° 111, November 2018, 44 p. https://www.oxfordenergy.org/publications/oxford-energy-forum-next-us-energy-policy-issue-111/This issue focuses on the potential outcomes and impact of US energy policy over the next four years, both for the US domestic economy and for international energy markets. The advent of the Trump Administration has marked a dramatic reversal of previous US energy policy, including on regulation, clean energy, and US commitments under the Paris Agreement. Despite this, the emerging consensus from the issue is that markets, rather than US domestic policy, will continue to play the dominant role in shaping outcomes. More difficult to predict, however, is the potential impact that trade protectionism and an inward-looking foreign policy may have on the functioning of international energy markets.Design the electricity market(s) of the future: proceedings from the Eurelectric-Florence School of Regulation Conference 7 June 2017 / Edited by Nicolò Rossetto. European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, 2017, 82 p. http://fsr.eui.eu/publications/design-electricity-markets-future/The profound transformation of the European electricity system is putting the design of the electricity markets that emerged during the restructuring of the 1990s and early 2000s into question. The need for decarbonisation and the wave of innovation in ICT are affecting the optimal functioning of those markets. New options, such as the ‘privatisation’ of service reliability, are becoming a reality, while some of the solutions adopted in the past, such as the reliance on day-ahead energy-only wholesale markets based on marginal pricing, are no longer sustainable. These changes call for a rethinking of the way markets are built within the EU. This is a fundamental step which academics, practitioners and policy-makers have to make together if they want to provide the conditions for long-term investments, integrate a growing amount of renewable energy sources efficiently and securely, and ensure the active participation of customers and communities at the local level.Why the unitization process is an important issue when dealing with the Brazilian Pre-salt Polygon / Braga, L. P. &#38; David, O. B., Journal of world energy law &#38; business, 11(1), pp. 17-33, March 2018 https://academic.oup.com/jwelb/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jwelb/jwx038/4792990?guestAccessKey=d2799e7e-f418-41d8-bd75-ea8b2b9d7c3fThe Pre-Salt Polygon1 is amongst the most important oil and natural gas discoveries of the last few years in Brazil and globally. In July 2017, its production represented 48.2 per cent of total Brazilian output.2 Due to the geological structure of the area, and the presence of fields already granted under concession agreements and onerous assignment agreements, this will probably result in the signing of many unitization agreements (UAs) in the next few years. The Brazilian National Petroleum Agency (ANP) is about to regulate ‘procedures and guidelines for the unitization agreement negotiation’, according to Article 34 of the Pre-salt Law. In compliance with this article, ANP published Resolution No 25 of 2013 on 9 July 2013, which regulates the unitization procedure in Brazil, covering onshore and offshore E&#38;P operations. These rules provided solutions to issues that the revoked Article 27 of Petroleum Law, the various E&#38;P concession agreements and other ANP Resolutions could not solve, although other issues, especially relating to open areas located in the Pre-salt Polygon, remain. The National Energy Policy Council (CNPE) has published Resolution No 8 of 2016, establishing unitization guidelines for the process of involving open areas. CNPE has also launched Resolution No 7 of 2017, which provides guidelines on local content in unitization areas. Following the new CNPE policies, ANP amended its Resolution No 25 of 2013, through Resolution No 698 of 2017. This article gives a brief update of the Brazilian regulatory framework for E&#38;P activities and discusses the unitization process, highlighting the main changes and observing what will be important to consider in all the forthcoming unitization activity.