Egypt to import LNG to cover demand from July 2025 to June 2026, cabinet says
DUBAI, June 25 (Reuters) - Egypt plans to import liquefied natural gas to cover demand from July 2025 to June 2026, the Egyptian cabinet said in a statement on Wednesday, as it ramps up purchases to meet power demand despite strained government finances.
Reuters reported on June 12 that Egypt has reached agreements with several energy firms and trading houses to buy 150 to 160 cargoes of liquefied natural gas to complement its domestic production and pipeline imports from Israel, according to industry sources.
Egypt's gas production has been on a downward trend in the past few years, reaching as low as 3,485 million standard cubic metres in April 2025, compared to a peak of 6,133 million standard cubic meters in March 2021, according to data from the Joint Organisations Data Initiative (JODI).
The North African nation has had to resort to load shedding, raising imports from Israel, and seeking foreign funding for LNG shipments.
Israeli gas currently accounts for about 15-20% of Egypt's consumption, JODI data shows.
When two of Israel's three gas fields, Leviathan and Karish, were shut down nearly two weeks ago due to the Iran-Israel conflict, Egypt was forced to stop supplying gas to petrochemical and fertilizer factories.
More imports come in the form of liquefied natural gas for regasification in Egypt. But while Egypt currently has three floating storage and regasification units (FSRUs) to carry out that process, only one is operational.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Republican who pushed to ban lawmaker stock trading bought Lockheed shares ahead of Iran strikes
Numerous members of Congress had investments in key defense firms on the line before the war between Israel and Iran reignited, only to see momentum fizzle with Monday's announcement of a ceasefire. Among them is the primary sponsor of a ban on congressional stock trading, drawing into question how serious Congress really is about separating its members from the appearance of profiting off of the office. Stock trading among members of Congress has long been a controversial practice. As the Covid pandemic raged across the U.S. in 2020, lawmakers fell under renewed scrutiny for their trades after it was revealed that some members of Congress dumped millions of dollars' worth of stock ahead of the coinciding economic crash. The effort to ban or restrict the trading of individual stocks by members or their spouses was renewed in May when Rep. Rob Bresnahan, a Pennsylvania Republican, re-introduced the TRUST Act — a piece of legislation that would bar sales of stock for members or their spouses unless those assets were held in a qualified blind trust. Originally introduced in January, the legislation has dozens of bipartisan co-sponsors. At the time, the swing-district congressman proclaimed that 'the public should never have to question whether their elected officials are serving the public or their own portfolios,' a clear reference to the suspicion under which his colleagues have fallen for stock trading in office. Speaker Mike Johnson and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries both publicly back a ban, but the TRUST Act has yet to get a vote. Bresnahan, meanwhile, continues to own a sizable stock portfolio, containing millions in assets and making more than 600 trades since coming to office this year. Less than halfway through his first full term, the congressman is now facing the same kind of suspicion from voters regarding his financial activity outside of Congress. Recent trades have included a purchase of Lockheed Martin stock reported on May 15, less than a month before Israel's war with Iran broke out and eventually drew the U.S. into launching strikes against three targets associated with Iran's nuclear program. Lockheed is a major defense partner of the Israeli government, and is under contract to provide the Israeli Air Force with 75 of its F-35 strike fighters. He took a question from a woman at a tele-town hall earlier this month on the issue, and his portfolio's prolific trading was highlighted by the Twitter account Unusual Whales in early June. The popular account monitors trading by members of Congress and often highlights instances where lawmakers' portfolios vastly outperform the market. The congressman said in response that his portfolio is managed by a financial adviser, explaining: 'I honestly have no idea what's inside of the portfolio that I own...I do not have any dialogues with my financial advisers,' according to local NPR affiliate WHYY. Bresnahan's re-election campaign was the recipient of a $1,000 donation from a PAC representing Lockheed Martin Corporation two weeks after reporting the trade. The donation was one of dozens the PAC made at the end of May to centrist members of both parties, an early investment in the 2026 cycle. In a statement in May, Bresnahan claimed that he was in the process of setting up a blind trust that would meet the act's requirements in conversations with the House Ethics Committee. His office told The Independent on Wednesday: 'Rep. Bresnahan does not trade his own stocks – a point he has made repeatedly. All stock trades are and have been made by a financial advisor without his involvement, and he does not know what is traded or when. He believes Members of Congress should not be allowed to profit off the information they are entrusted with, which is why he introduced legislation to ban Congressional stock trading, restoring the integrity Americans expect and deserve from their government.' Two Democrats co-sponsoring the TRUST Act both made similar trades. Josh Gottheimer, a New Jersey Democrat (and another hawkish figure in foreign policy circles) purchased Raytheon stock in late April, while Jared Moskowitz of Florida purchased Qualcomm and Lockheed stock at the beginning of the same month. Moskowitz has never taken a donation from Lockheed Martin's PAC, and Gottheimer took a donation of the same amount ($1,000) earlier this year (though he never purchased the company's stock). Moskowitz's office said in a statement in May that his trades are "managed by an outside third-party financial advisor.' Gottheimer said in 2022 that he would put his investments in a blind trust, but blamed the House Ethics Committee for procedural delays in that process when questioned by the Washington Examiner earlier this year. 'Prior to taking office, Josh turned over management of his retirement savings and investments to a third party, who has full investment discretion,' his spokesman said. 'Throughout his time in Congress, decisions related to his managed investments have been made at the direction of that third party. Josh is also awaiting approval from Congress of a blind trust. In the meantime, he has taken the extra step of setting up an independent trust.' The Independent has reached out to Gottheimer and Moskowitz's offices for further comment. Several members of Congress bought defense stocks within the last two months, including such well-known figures as Marjorie Taylor Greene — who repeatedly condemned the prospect of war with Iran after purchasing Palantir stock twice in April, then Boeing and Qualcomm stock in May. Rep. Jefferson Shreve, another freshman, bought Lockheed stock in April. Florida's newly-appointed Senator Ashley Moody purchased Howmet Aerospace stock in early April. The Independent has reached out for comment. But none are co-sponsors of restrictions on stock trading under the current Congress. Greene, in particular, has already been publicly dinged by one of her own Republican colleagues, Mike Lawler, for a lucrative trade she made in May. 'After many successful years of running my own business, I ran for Congress to bring that mindset to Washington. Now that I'm proudly serving the people of Northwest Georgia, I have signed a fiduciary agreement to allow my financial advisor to control my investments,' Greene told The Independent in a statement. 'All of my investments are reported with full transparency. I refuse to hide my stock trades in a blind trust like many others do. Since my portfolio manager makes my trades for me, I usually find out about them when the media asks.' If any members of Congress were looking to defense stocks for a quick profit after Israel began its assault on Iran earlier this month, they may already have been disappointed. A ceasefire hammered into place by Trump on Monday evening appeared shaky at first, but nevertheless appears to be holding — sending stocks including Lockheed tumbling. As the president delivered a public tongue-lashing aimed at both sides of the conflict on Tuesday, the message from Washington was clear: the outbreak of further violence would be unacceptable. Two Democratic senators, Mark Kelly and Jon Ossoff, introduced another version of a stock trading ban in the Senate near the end of May. John Thune, the Senate Majority Leader, has expressed skepticism about the need for stronger protections.
Auto Blog
2 hours ago
- Auto Blog
Iran-Israel Conflict Raises Specter of Global Gas Crisis
A Global Chokepoint The ceasefire between Israel and Iran announced by President Donald Trump on Monday lasted only hours before both sides were accused of violations. While Trump demanded the two sides not 'drop those bombs' on his social media site, Truth, the latest development raised new worries that things actually could get worse, potentially triggering the sort of global energy crisis last seen in the 1970s. Trump's signed executive order for a 25% auto tariff — Source: Getty For their part, Iran's leaders have vowed to retaliate against not only Israel but the United States after the president approved a massive bombing raid on three Iranian nuclear sites on Saturday. The big concern: an Iranian threat to shut down the vital Strait of Hormuz. Just 104 miles long and as little as 24 miles wide, it links the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and is a chokepoint through which about 20% of the world's petroleum passes through. The Backstory The latest crisis was touched off by Israel's attack on Iran last week, targeting the capital city of Tehran and other locations linked to that country's ongoing nuclear program. While the U.S. national security chief, Tulsi Gabbard, recently said she didn't see signs Iran was developing nuclear weapons, that position was dismissed by Trump who approved a bombing raid on Saturday combining submarine-launched cruise missiles, as well as 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs dropped by B-2 Spirit bombers. The Persian state quickly retaliated, lobbing ballistic missiles at the large U.S. military base in Qatar. Iranian State TV declared the move 'a mighty and successful response by the armed forces of Iran to America's aggression.' Qatar's air defense system reportedly knocked down all the rockets, with no injuries reported. But the fact that the ceasefire announced by Trump was quickly ignored raises concerns of future retaliation, including Iranian threats to close the Strait of Hormuz. Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. Memories of the Past The battle between Iran and Israel – and, now, the involvement of the U.S. – adds to already existing turmoil in the Middle East, including Houthi rebels lobbing rockets at commercial shipping in the Red Sea and the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza. For many observers, it brings back memories of the twin oil shocks of the 1970s when a large portion of the oil supply fueling the United States was choked off. Gas prices quickly doubled and tripled and millions of motorists were left waiting in long lines, often discovering that filling stations had run out. A repeat of that experience is a 'key worry for the market,' Ewa Manthey, commodities strategist at ING Financial Service, said during an interview on Fox News. At worst, it could create shortages and lead to gas prices in the U.S. surging to $4.50 a gallon or more. Riding the Rollercoaster Crude oil prices have been rising since early May, according to tracking service fueled largely by mounting tensions in the Mideast. The numbers peaked in the hours leading up to the U.S. bombing raid on Iran – various benchmarks, such as Brent and West Texas approaching $75 a barrel. The figures have fallen since then, traders hoping the U.S. can help broker a peace deal. But it's clear Trump himself is worried, the president on Tuesday morning declaring on his social media site, 'All planes will turn around and head home, while doing a friendly 'Plane Wave' to Iran. Nobody will be hurt, the Ceasefire is in effect! Thank you for your attention to this matter!' How High is Up U.S. gas prices had been relatively stable this year, but began surging last week. As of Wednesday morning, AAA reported, they've reached $3.226 for a gallon of self-service regular, up more than $0.08. For his part, Patrick De Haan, the head of petroleum analysis at expects more pain at the pump. 'For now, motorists should anticipate a continued steady climb in prices.' In turn, commodities strategist Manthey warned $120 a barrel, even $150, is not out of the question should oil supplies be disrupted by Iran. That could push gas prices to $4.50 a gallon in the U.S., and possibly even higher. There is always the question of whether other supplies from the Mideast could be disrupted should the shooting match between Iran, Israel and the U.S. spread. And while that currently seems unlikely, observers warned that yet could create a '70s-era scenario. About the Author Paul Eisenstein View Profile
Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Telegraph
Trump's Iran gamble is already backfiring disastrously
In the grand scheme of things, all of this is just drama. The US intelligence community, including the DIA, will continue working to provide a fuller assessment as more technical information comes in. The simple fact is that none of us, not even Trump, has enough information to go on yet. But the extent of the damage is just one piece of the puzzle. The other is whether Trump's decision to bomb Tehran's nuclear sites will help or hinder efforts to stop Iran from ever seeking a nuclear weapon again. Trump clearly thinks it will bring Iran to the negotiating table, and there's some logic to the idea that kicking the Iranians in the teeth will compel them to take the US position more seriously. Trump's announcement at Wednesday's Nato summit that US and Iranian officials will be sitting down next week suggests that Tehran isn't adverse to exploring whether there's a second bite of the diplomatic apple, either. If only it were that easy. There are several obstacles standing in the way of a new deal. The most significant is that none of the bottom-line positions have changed after the so-called ' 12-Day War '. Washington is still pressing Tehran to rip up its entire nuclear programme as if it was a tomato plant in the dead of winter. Tehran, in turn, insists that its nuclear work will continue no matter what circumstances the Americans throw up. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Iranian Supreme Leader's, red-line remains clear: nobody – and certainly not the United States – can deprive the Iranian nation of its right to nuclear energy. Iran is as committed to maintaining an indigenous enrichment capability now as it was before Israel dropped its first payload of bombs. If anything, Khamenei's resistance to zero enrichment is likely to be even stronger, if only because caving to US pressure after Washington took military action would paint him as feckless at best, and impotent at worst. The Iranians also have a bad history of negotiating with Trump. In 2018, he pulled the United States out of a nuclear deal that Tehran spent three years negotiating with the Obama administration. Sanctions were then re-imposed on the Iranian economy. On June 19 this year, meanwhile, Trump said he would give Iran another two weeks to come to its senses, only to authorise US airstrikes less than two days later in what administration officials have described as an elaborate ruse to keep the Iranians off-balance. Trump, of course, didn't do much to stop Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, from attacking Iran in the first place – this despite the fact that Steve Witkoff, his chief envoy, was scheduled to talk to the Iranian foreign minister two days later (the meeting was cancelled). All of this is to say that Iran has more than enough reason to keep the United States at arm's length and view US calls for renewed diplomacy with deep scepticism. While past behaviour isn't necessarily predictive of future results, it's hard to envision Khamenei looking at US diplomatic entreaties as a serious endeavour on the part of Washington. Tehran may still test the waters, but the Iranians will be on guard and extremely suspicious about whatever proposal Washington puts on the table. Finally, there's always the possibility that the Iranians refuse to negotiate. Even before the US and Israeli bombing campaign, hardliners within the Iranian establishment were making the case that a nuclear warhead was the only thing standing between regime survival and collapse. Khamenei, a relatively cautious man on the nuclear issue, seems to have been reluctant to move in this direction for fear of how the United States and Israel would react. Well, the two countries have reacted forcefully regardless, so it's plausible that the Supreme Leader will take the views of the hardliners more fully into account. There's still a chance the 12-day war will lead to a new nuclear arrangement. We better hope so, because the alternative is Iran concluding definitively that its survival depends on urgently acquiring a nuclear weapon – and a 'mowing the grass' strategy, whereby the United States and Israel attack Iran in perpetuity to stop it, with all the risks that follow. Daniel DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities
