The past few days have served up multiple reminders of why armed conflict is almost never a good option, let alone the best one: war is dangerous, expensive, and unpredictable, making it the last resort for prudent leaders.

 

The entire region is on edge, with Iran seeking to internationalize the conflict so that other states will put pressure on the United States and Israel to halt their air and missile offensive. We are now on the precipice, however, of developments whose impacts will effect virtually everyone, everywhere.

 

I refer, or course, to the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow, shallow, and uniquely vital waterway that connects the Gulf to the open seas and haunts the dreams of risk analysts everywhere.

 

About a fifth of the world’s oil – worth more than half a trillion dollars annually – transits this passage, and while Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have pipelines that avoid the strait, they can’t handle nearly the same volumes. In addition, approximately the same share of the world’s liquefied natural gas passes through the same corridor, most of it Qatari LNG outbound for Asia. For good measure, Hormuz is also the route by which some 200 million people, including most of the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), receive most of their food and other imports.

For decades, the Iranian government has claimed the right, boasted the ability, and vowed the willingness to close this waterway in response to various forms of military or other pressure from the US. Then as now, its reasoning has been both subtle and brutal.

 

Outwardly, Iranian officials have denied targeting GCC and other states with missiles and drones, insisting that their forces were aiming instead at US military assets on their soil, even though most of these countries have not allowed their airspace to be used for the US/Israeli offensive. Even if it were true, the Iranian interpretation would certainly be a distinction without a difference for those mourning lost loved ones, but there have now been countless attacks drone and missile attacks on homes and residential buildings, port facilities, oil and gas infrastructure and other civilian targets in several GCC countries. Either way, the Iranians seem to have calculated that inflicting some degree of pain on their neighbors will cause more voices – in this case from within US-allied countries – to demand an end to the war.

 

A similar arithmetic makes Hormuz the world’s ultimate choke point. The mere possibility of lasting disruption there has caused energy prices to rise on countless occasions, including the current crisis, and an actual closure for any length of time would be highly corrosive to the global economy. And since energy prices get baked into virtually everything else, the pain would be felt virtually everywhere.

 

The number of countries that Iran can hit with missiles or drones is relatively limited. But close Hormuz and no country on earth would be immune to the consequences, causing many of them to demand a return to diplomacy.

 

The fact of the matter is that Iran administers only a small section of the strait, specifically a strip of the northern channel usually used for entering the Gulf, and international law gives it no legal authority to suspend shipping there for more than a few hours without compelling reasons. Article 44 of the 1982 Law of the Sea specifically mentions that innocent passage cannot be denied. This is one reason why Tehran has been so cagey about its intent, for instance by having its parliament pass and illegal legislation supposedly authorizing closure, but then leaving the activation to the executive branch.

 

In legal terms, then, it is difficult to conceive of circumstances in which Iran could justify closing the strait and imposing so much hardship on so many people around the world. Whatever its stated intentions, its actions would amount to little more than sabotage and extortion.

In reality, Iran is already getting some of what it wants. Information published by Navionics and other ship tracking services indicates that until the current interruption, increasing numbers of ships were avoiding Iranian waters altogether, sailing entirely or almost entirely in Omani waters. But several ships have already been damaged, putting instant upward pressure on insurance rates and convincing most shipping companies that the risk is too great. Dozens of hulls – carrying oil, LNG, and all manner of general cargo – are now waiting to leave the Gulf, and dozens more are piling up outside it. Prices are already starting to rise, and each day that passes makes energy scarcer and more expensive.

 

It won’t take long for the consequences of this kind of disruption to grow in size and severity. Traders and speculators may be able to stave off the full impact for a few days, and other oil producers can pump more to compensate, but eventually most of the GCC states will run out of storage and have to halt production. The situation for LNG could be even worse because there are so few producers, and Qatar has already halted production over safety concerns, idling almost a fifth of global output.

 

For all of these reasons, this war involves far more than the official belligerents. The region’s geography and geology mean that anyone who uses energy in any way has a direct stake in the outcome. Even countries that export oil and gas have a vested interest in a return to stability: rising prices might be tempting in the short term, but they inevitably damage economies and weaken demand over time. For this reason in particular, all responsible participants, willing or otherwise, need to be pushing for a negotiated solution.

 

Dialogue and diplomacy are never wasted efforts. Even when they fail to prevent or end a conflict, discussions carried out in good faith can leave behind the building blocks for a future understanding. The mere fact of direct or indirect contacts can also attenuate the intensity of operations – therefore limiting potential casualties and renewed impetus for more war – as planners start considering the repercussions for diplomacy.

 

As human beings, therefore, we should never give up on the possibility of peace. But nor can we sit and say nothing as Iran lashes out at peoples and countries who have nothing to do with this conflict, destabilizing the entire region and undermining standards of living the world over. This is especially true of Qatar and Oman, both of which have left no stone unturned in trying to keep Iran out of a war in the first place.

 

Roudi Baroudi is the author of several books about maritime boundaries and has worked in the international energy business since the 1970s. He currently serves as CEO of Energy and Environment Holding, an independent consultancy based in Doha.

March 2, 2026, DOHA, Qatar: In a televised interview with Al Jazeera’s main Arabic channel, international energy expert Roudi Baroudi said that no country had the right to close the Strait of Hormuz.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Baroudi told Al Jazeera, is clear on this matter, specifically Article 38, which explicitly guarantees the “right of transit passage, which shall not be impeded” for all foreign vessels transiting through the strait, and Article 44, which holds that states bordering straits “shall not hamper transit passage”.

Baroudi also warned that if traffic through Hormuz were halted, oil prices would quickly soar past $100 – and even $150 if the interruption persisted for any length of time.

While the strait is commonly described as being 30-45 kilometers wide, he explained, most of it is too shallow for large vessels, and the transit lane – designated for the passage of all types of shipping, from oil tankers and LNG tankers to container ships and bulk food and other commercial cargos – is only 3 kilometers wide. Even here the depth is just 200-300 meters, and many of the oil tankers that use the strait are more than 325 meters long, and Qatar’s Q-Max LNG carriers are 345 meters.

Baroudi also noted that while Iran and Oman have had a maritime border agreement in place since 1974, only Oman has fully ratified UNCLOS. Iran – like the UAE, whose coast also touches the strait – has signed but not fully implemented all of the provisions. Nonetheless, he said, UNCLOS’ principles have become part of customary international law, making them enforceable on all coastal states, so all civilian vessels enjoy the right of passage without obstruction, inspection, or arbitrary restrictions.

Regarding the impact of current tensions, Baroudi noted that LNG prices were already rising and that $100 or even $150 oil was a distinct possibility if the conflict continued beyond a week or two. Any prolongation of exorbitant energy costs, he added, would have a direct and deleterious impact on the global economy, increasing inflationary pressures and the cost of living worldwide.

 

Following criticism of the Lebanon-Cyprus Maritime Boundary Agreement (MBA) by the governments of Israel and Turkiye, LebTalks spoke with energy and policy expert Roudi Baroudi, who has authored several books and studies on sea borders in the Eastern Mediterranean. Baroudi praised the pact as “full of positives” for the interests of both parties and stressed the words of Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, who pledged after signing the MBA that “this agreement targets no one and excludes no one.”

LebTalks: How significant is the signing of the maritime boundary agreement between Lebanon and Cyprus?

RB: The official signing of the Lebanon-Cyprus deal is a major achievement, one that confers important advantages on both parties. This process was delayed for a very long time for no good reason, so President Joseph Aoun and the government deserve congratulations for having seized the initiative, and for having seen the job through to completion. So do Cypriot President Nikos Christodoulides and his team, because they did the same thing. What made this historic agreement possible – after an impasse lasting almost two decades – was that Lebanon finally had a president who both understood the need for an MBA and made achieving it a top priority.

LebTalks: What does Lebanon gain by signing this deal?

RB: The agreement, which was reached by the negotiating teams in September, provides several benefits for both countries in the short, medium, and long terms.

The new equidistance line between the two states, defined according to the rules and guidelines of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), provides a fair and largely uniform boundary between the two brotherly countries’ maritime zones. Most of the new turning points used to draw the line have moved in Lebanon’s favor compared to the earlier negotiation in 2011, giving it an extra 10,200 meters on its western front while Cyprus received 2,760 meters.

Crucially, the MBA wipes away all overlapping claims caused by previous uncertainty over the precise location of the border. Accordingly, this eliminates 108 km2 of (map attached) Lebanese offshore blocks that were actually in Cypriot waters, as well as 14 km2 of Cypriot blocks which were also on the wrong side of the line.

Apart from removing a key risk for would-be investors, the agreement also contributes to stability and security by providing clarity and thereby enabling easier cooperation, not just bilateral, but also, potentially, involving other states as well. It really is full of positives for both Lebanon and Cyprus, and therefore for the region as a whole.

LebTalks: What should Lebanon do to follow up on this agreement?

RB: To make the most of this clearer playing field, the logical next step is for Lebanon and Cyprus to immediately start drafting a joint development agreement, which would allow them to have a smooth partnership in place for any hydrocarbon reserves which are found to straddle their maritime boundary.

Perhaps the most important feature of the Lebanon-Cyprus MBA is that it provides a clear and stable starting point, putting Lebanon in ideal position to finish defining its maritime zones. The new line means that Lebanon’s existing maritime boundary arrangements with Israel, signed in 2022, should be tweaked a little, but it also makes it easier to do that – and to negotiate a similar agreement in the north with Syria when that country’s new leadership is ready to do so.

LebTalks: What about the objections voiced by Irael and Turkiye?

RB: With all due respect, these claims and complaints are completely baseless. As President Aoun has stressed from the very day it was signed, this accord targets no one, excludes no one, challenges no one else’s borders, and undermines no one else’s interests. I know there has been some negative commentary from both Israel and Turkiye, but there really is nothing here for anyone to be upset about. The line agreed to by Lebanon and Cyprus, which Turkiye has claimed is ‘unfair’ to residents of the self-styled ‘Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus’, is literally several kilometers away from any waters claimed by the TRNC. Beirut and Nicosia were very careful to make sure of this.

As for the Israelis, the only material change relating to the Lebanon-Cyprus line is that it pushes the Israel-Cyprus line in Cyprus’ favor. But that’s not Lebanon’s fault. Or Cyprus’ or anyone else’s. It’s just a fact of new mapping technologies, which today are far more precise and more accurate than those used when the Israel-Cyprus line was drawn in their 2011 treaty.

On that subject, I would also note for all stakeholders in the East Med that while Lebanon and Cyprus are the region’s only full-fledged members of UNCLOS, all states are subject to its rules and precedents, which have become part of Customary International Law. Since the Lebanon-Cyprus deal adheres strictly to those rules and the science behind them, the criticisms haven’t got a legal leg to stand on. This is especially true with regard to Israel, whose own treaty with Cyprus was negotiated on the basis of the very same laws, rules, and science.

I have to assume that a lot of this is posturing, that both Israel and Turkiye will settle down once they’ve had more time to analyze the deal and see that, far from damaging them in any way, it could help all concerned by contributing to regional stability and economic growth. And again, I would go back to Aoun’s words on signing day, when he declared that “this agreement should be a foundation for wider regional cooperation, replacing the language of violence, war, and ambitions of domination with stability and prosperity.”

المركزية- يُظهر الاكتشاف الأخير للغاز في حقل “كاريش” الواقع في جنوبي لبنان، بغاية الوضوح أن على لبنان فعل كل ما في وسعه ليمهّد الطريق أمام صناعة النفط والغاز البحرية الخاصة به، وعلى وجه التحديد من خلال تسوية الحدود البحرية مع قبرص وسوريا، وفقًا لأحد أهم الخبراء في المنطقة في مجال الطاقة.

وفي مقابلة عقب إعلان شركة إنرجيان اليونانية – الإسرائيلية عن اكتشاف ثانٍ في حقل “كاريش” المتاخم للمياه اللبنانية، يكشف خبير الطاقة الدولي رودي بارودي الذي يتمتع بخبرة تزيد عن أربعة عقود في مجال الطاقة، أن “هذه الأخبار جيّدة بالنسبة إلى لبنان”.

ويقول بارودي، الذي يشغل حاليًا منصب الرئيس التنفيذي لشركة الطاقة والبيئة القابضة وهي شركة استشارية مستقلة مقرها في الدوحة – قطر، لـ”المركزية”: ليس مستغرباً أنهم وجدوا المزيد، فذلك يؤكد ما كنا نعرفه منذ سنوات عدة. ولم نتمكن من تحديد موقع جميع الموارد الموجودة في قاع بحر شرق المتوسط، بما في ذلك الرواسب النفطية التي تنتظر الاكتشاف قبالة سواحل لبنان. المشكلة أن المأزق السياسي المعقّد الذي يعيشه لبنان قد تسبّب بتأخيرٍ كبير في تطوير قطاع الهيدروكربونات البحرية الناشئ في البلاد”.

ويؤكد أن “الاكتشاف الجديد يقع بالقرب من خط الحدود البحري (MBL) الذي اتفق عليه لبنان وإسرائيل في تشرين الأول/ أكتوبر 2022″، ويوضح أن “هذا الاتفاق الذي تم التوصل إليه بعد وساطة استمرت سنوات من قِبَل الولايات المتحدة، كان “خطوة ضرورية”، لكنه لم يكن كافياً وحده لتنشيط صناعة النفط والغاز في لبنان وتفعيلها بشكل كامل”.

^[6]

ورداً على سؤال عن كيفية المضي قدماً في بيروت في هذه المرحلة، يشدد بارودي على “أهمية التقدّم في الجهود الرامية إلى وضع اللمسات النهائية على اتفاقات ترسيم الحدود البحرية بين لبنان وقبرص وبين لبنان وسوريا، والتي من شأنها أن تحقق اعترافاً دولياً كاملاً بالمنطقة الاقتصادية الخالصة للبنان، وبالتالي تقليل المخاطر التي تواجهها شركات النفط الكبرى التي يحتاج لبنان إلى خبرتها ومساعدتها للتمكن من إجراء عمليات استكشاف واستغلال موارده البحرية بشكل مفيد وكامل”.

ويُضيف: لقد تفاوضنا سابقاً على ترسيم الحدود البحرية مع قبرص، لكن المجلس النيابي اللبناني لم يصادق على الاتفاقية. وهذا يعني أنه يتعيّن علينا أن ننطلق من النقاط المتَّفق عليها في المباحثات السابقة وأن نُضيف إليها بعض الإحداثيات من أجل تحديد نقطة تقاطع ثلاثية حيث تتقاطع خطوط الحدود البحرية اللبنانية والقبرصية والإسرائيلية في البحر. وتحديد هذا المثلث في الجنوب سيبسّط تلقائياً عملية تحديد مثلث آخر في الشمال بين لبنان وقبرص وسوريا.

وفي السياق، يقلل بارودي من شأن المزاعم التي تتحدث عن وجود فجوة كبيرة بين الخط اللبناني – القبرصي والخط القبرصي – الإسرائيلي، مما يزيد من صعوبة تحديد الخط الثلاثي. ويقول: هناك فجوة بالطبع، لكنها في الحقيقة صغيرة جدًا. والدليل على ذلك هو ترسيم حدود المناطق البحرية التي أصدرها كل من لبنان وقبرص منذ حوالي عقد من الزمن. إضافة إلى أن جميع الخرائط الدولية للمنطقة، بما في ذلك تلك الصادرة عن شركات النفط والغاز والتي ترتكز في الأصل على تصوير دقيق للحدود والمساحة، لا تؤشر إلى أي تداخل بين لبنان وقبرص. في الواقع، إن الخط الفاصل بين الكتل اللبنانية والقبرصية يتبع بدقة خط ترسيم الحدود البحرية MBL المتفق عليه والذي وافقت عليه نيقوسيا وبيروت في الاتفاقية التي لم يتم المصادقة عليها. أما الفرق في الجانب الجنوبي من نقطة التقاطع فهو صغير جدًا.

ويُضيف: نظراً إلى أن الخطوط قريبة جداً، فإن تحديد تقاطع ثلاثي – النقطة التي تتقاطع فيها الحدود اللبنانية والقبرصية والإسرائيلية – يجب أن يكون سهلاً نسبياً. بالإضافة إلى ذلك، فإن الاتفاق على هذا التقاطع الثلاثي في الجنوب من شأنه أن يبسّط تلقائياً عملية تحديد تقاطع ثلاثي في الشمال بين لبنان وقبرص وسوريا. من دون أن ننسى أن لبنان يتمتع بعلاقات ودية وقوية مع كل من قبرص وسوريا، وبالتالي فإن  المفاوضات معهما ستكون أكثر وديّة من تلك التي جرت مع إسرائيل، والتي كان لا بد من متابعتها بشكل غير مباشر عبر وساطة أميركية.

ولدى سؤاله عن كيفية تأثر أي جهود ديبلوماسية جديدة لترسيم الحدود البحرية، بالشلل السياسي المستمر منذ فترة طويلة في بيروت، حيث يعاني لبنان من شغور في رئاسة الجمهورية منذ أواخر العام 2022 لأن البرلمان اللبناني لم يستطع انتخاب خلف للرئيس السابق ميشال عون، يُجيب بارودي: هذا المأزق يؤكد ضرورة اتخاذ إجراءات جديدة.

ويقول: صحيح أن لبنان لا يستطيع في الوقت الحالي، المصادقة رسميًا على اتفاقية ترسيم حدود بحرية MBL جديدة مع قبرص أو سوريا لأنها تتطلب توقيع رئيس الجمهورية عليها، لكن هذا لا يمنعنا من إجراء المحادثات التقنية اللازمة. في الواقع، يجب أن نسارع إلى تسوية كل هذه الأمور الآن، حتى عندما نملأ المنصب الشاغر في قصر بعبدا، يكون كل شيء جاهزاً لتوقيع الرئيس الجديد.

^[7]

وإلى جانب تسوية حدوده البحرية، يقول بارودي إن “لبنان لديه أيضًا سبب آخر لتفعيل المفاوضات مع الدول المجاورة”، ويذكر في هذا المجال: مرّ ما يقارب العشر سنوات منذ أن اقترحت قبرص اتفاقية تنمية مع لبنان للإنتاج المشترك من أي مخزونات موجودة على الحدود البحرية المشتركة. وهذا الأمر مهم جداً للبنان وللصناعة النفطية فيه، وللأسف فقد حال الشلل السياسي اللبناني دون حدوث ذلك. بالفعل نحن بحاجة إلى إحياء هذه العملية والتوصل إلى اتفاق في أسرع وقت ممكن.

…”في حال البدء بهذه العملية وبمجرد أن يكون لدينا رئيساً للجمهورية، نكون مستعدين للانطلاق بسرعة من دون مزيد من التأخير، والبدء بجَمع عائدات الغاز التي يحتاج إليها الاقتصاد اللبناني بشدة” يختم بارودي.

Aggravating concerns about global warming and its consequences, a new, comprehensive analysis of satellite data has found Greenland has lost more ice than previously estimated and that the majority of glaciers on the landmass have retreated significantly. The Greenland Ice Sheet has shed about one-fifth more ice mass in the past four decades than previously estimated, researchers at Nasa’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California reported in a new paper. Icebergs are falling into the ocean at an accelerating rate. Though this additional ice loss has had only an indirect impact on sea levels, it could hold implications for ocean circulation in the future.
Published in Nature on January 17, the analysis offers a comprehensive look at retreat around the edges of the entire ice sheet from 1985 to 2022, drawing from nearly a quarter million pieces of satellite data on glacier positions. Of the 207 glaciers in the study, 179 retreated significantly since 1985, 27 held steady, and one advanced slightly. Most of the ice loss came from below sea level, in fjords on Greenland’s periphery. Once occupied by ancient glacial ice, many of these deep coastal valleys have filled with seawater – meaning the ice that broke off made little net contribution to sea level. But the loss likely accelerated the movement of ice flowing down from higher elevations, which in turn added to sea level rise.
“When the ice at the end of a glacier calves and retreats, it’s like pulling the plug out of the fjord, which lets ice drain into the ocean faster,” said Chad Greene, a glacier scientist at JPL and the study’s lead author. For decades researchers have studied the Greenland Ice Sheet’s direct contributions to global sea level rise through ice flow and melting. Scientists participating in the international Ice sheet Mass Balance Inter-comparison Exercise (IMBIE) estimated that the ice sheet had lost 5,390 billion tonnes between 1992 and 2020, adding about 13.5 millimetres to global mean sea level, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But the IMBIE measurements do not account for ice lost due to the retreat of terminal glaciers along the edges of Greenland. (These glacier edges were already in the water, whether submerged or floating.) The new study quantifies this amount: For the 1985 to 2022 period in the new paper, the ice sheet was estimated to have lost about 1,140 billion tonnes – 21% more mass lost than in the IMBIE assessment.
Although it doesn’t add to sea levels, the additional ice represents a significant influx of fresh water to the ocean. Recent studies have suggested that changes in the salinity of the North Atlantic Ocean from melting icebergs could weaken the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, part of the global “conveyor belt” of currents that transport heat and salt around the ocean. This could influence weather patterns worldwide, as well as affect ecosystems, the authors said.
Icebergs have tumbled from Greenland’s glaciers for thousands of years as part of a natural cycle that typically balanced glacier growth in the winter with melting and retreat in the summer. The new study finds that ice retreat has far outpaced growth throughout the 21st century. The researchers also found that Greenland’s ice extent remained relatively steady from 1985 to 2000, then started a marked recession that continues to this day.
The data showed a glacier in northeast Greenland called Zachariae Isstrom lost the most ice, dropping 176 billion tonnes of mass due to retreat. It was followed by Jakobshavn Isbrae on the western coast, which lost an estimated 97 billion tonnes and Humboldt Gletscher in the northwest, which lost 96 billion tonnes. Only one glacier, Qajuuttap Sermia in southern Greenland, experienced any growth over the study period, but its gains were too small to offset the losses from other glaciers.
The researchers also found that glaciers with the largest seasonal fluctuations in the position of their ice front experienced the greatest overall retreat. The correlation suggests the glaciers that are most sensitive to warming each summer will be most impacted by climate change in the coming decades.

• Deadline to place bids: 2 July 2024
• Blocks on offer: All unlicensed blocks
• Block 9 is currently the only licensed block
• The bids previously submitted by Total, ENI & QatarEnergy for Blocks 8 & 10 are still being evaluated. Decision expected by 5 Jan unless the deadline is extended again
• Total-ENI-QatarEnergy relinquished their rights in Block 4

While the world population reached 8bn on November 15, 2022 according to the United Nations, nearly 3.6bn people are now climate vulnerable. It is in this context that one should analyse the news that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Synthesis Report under the Sixth Assessment Cycle will be released on March 20 following negotiations this week by governments on the ‘Summary for Policymakers’.
The report will gather and distil scientific evidence from the IPCC working group reports and special reports published between 2018 and 2022. It will be the last such report from the IPCC in this cycle until further reports are published under the next assessment cycle, which could be only in 2027 or 2028.
Culminating with this Synthesis Report, the science from the IPCC is crucial evidence to governments for this decade on the current state of the climate crisis. It must serve as a warning to polluters that their time is up. The window of time to keep global temperatures below 1.5ºC is fast closing in. Current climate targets put the world on a 2.8ºC pathway by 2100. A rapid equitable fossil fuel phase out must be top priority for all governments while scaling up investments in renewables and energy efficiency measures. Wealthy nations must substantially increase their international climate finance based on their fair share, the Climate Action Network (CAN) has urged in a statement last Friday.
Past reports under this assessment cycle have underlined the dire situation and stated unequivocally that greenhouse gases – from the reliance on fossil fuels, industrialisation and land-use – is driving up emissions and causing unprecedented levels of global heating. Human actions have caused the last decade to be the warmest decade in the last 125,000 years. Sharpening inequities show that the richest 10% of households contribute about 36%-45% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Communities in many vulnerable regions will experience the limits of adaptation even before 1.5ºC warming and sea-level rise poses an existential threat to some small islands and low-lying coastal areas.
“The forthcoming IPCC report should mobilise governments to envision and act towards transitioning into a fully renewable-energy powered society supported by strong energy efficiency measures, based on principles of justice and the protection of human rights,” stated Stephan Singer, senior global specialist on climate science and energy, CAN International, and head of delegation for CAN at IPCC. Investing in renewables means rapidly divesting from fossil fuels and nuclear energies and phasing them out by mid-century to ensure the least damaging pathway towards climate stability. The IPCC Synthesis Report must reiterate its recent findings that renewable energy, particularly solar and wind, are technologically, financially and economically the key means to fight climate change, he said.
Dr Stephen Cornelius, Global Deputy Lead for Climate and Energy, World Wide Fund for Nature, stated that leaders must heed the science and act immediately with the pace and scale necessary to decarbonise the economies in time. An accelerated phase-out of fossil fuels is needed to limit global warming to below 1.5ºC and avoid the worst climate change risks. As he explained, nature is our secret ally in the fight against climate change. Natural systems have absorbed 54% of human-related carbon dioxide emissions over the past decade and have slowed global warming and helped protect humanity from much more severe climate change risks. We can’t hope to limit warming to 1.5°C, adapt to climate change and save lives and livelihoods, unless we also act urgently to safeguard and restore nature, a non-negotiable part of the solution to the climate crisis, as Dr Cornelius said.

The $6bn proposed ethane cracker at Ras Laffan, which is QatarEnergy’s largest investment ever in country’s petrochemical sector, marks an important milestone in its downstream expansion strategy.
The petrochemical complex will not only facilitate further expansion in Qatar’s downstream and petrochemical sectors, but will also reinforce the country’s integrated position as a major global player in the upstream, LNG and downstream sectors.
The Ras Laffan Petrochemicals complex, expected to begin production in 2026, consists of an ethane cracker with a capacity of 2.1mn tonnes of ethylene per year.
The 435-acre project site also includes two polyethylene trains with a combined output of 1.7mn tonnes per year (mtpy) of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) polymer products.
This will raise Qatar’s overall petrochemical production capacity to almost 14mn tonnes per year, HE the Minister of State for Energy Affairs, Saad bin Sherida al-Kaabi, told Gulf Times.
QatarEnergy has joined hands with Chevron Phillips Chemical Company (CPChem) on the projected and created a joint venture,
in which QatarEnergy will own a 70% equity share, and CPChem 30% stake.
Together their large and diverse portfolio will not just help meet the world’s growing needs for advanced plastics and petrochemicals, but will also enable balanced growth and facilitate human development in a responsible and sustainable manner.
QatarEnergy and Chevron Phillips Chemical Company (CPChem) have taken a Final Investment Decision (FID) on the Golden Triangle Polymers Plant, an $8.5bn world-scale integrated polymers facility in the Texas Gulf Coast area in the US.
The Ras Laffan petrochemicals complex will help meet the rising global demand for high-density polyethylene from 2026, when the largest ethane cracker in the Middle East and one of the largest in the world begins production.
Polyethylene is used in the production of durable goods like pipe for natural gas and water delivery and recreational products such as kayaks and coolers. It is also used in packaging applications to protect and preserve food and keep medical supplies sterile.
The facility will be constructed with modern, energy-saving technology and use ethane for feedstock, which along with other measures, is expected to result in lower greenhouse gas emissions than similar global facilities.
The integrated olefins and polyethylene facility will be utilising “state-of-the-art design and technology” during its construction and operation to promote energy efficiency.
It is important to stress the unique environmental attributes of this world-scale complex. It will have lower waste and greenhouse gas emissions, when compared with similar global facilities.
Already, QatarEnergy made significant strides in realising the North Field Expansion by choosing partners this year for both North Field South (NFS) and North Field East (NFE) expansion, which is the global industry’s largest ever LNG project.
This unique project is characterised by the highest health, safety, and environmental standards, including carbon capture and sequestration, to reduce the project’s overall carbon footprint to the lowest levels possible.
The North Field expansion plan includes six LNG trains that will ramp up Qatar’s liquefaction capacity from 77 mtpy to 126 mtpy by 2027.
Four trains will be part of the North Field East and two trains will be part of North Field South project.

الراعي تسلّم من رودي بارودي أول دراسة من نوعها حول ترسيم الحدود

ومجسم “الفيفا” لكأس العالم في كرة القدم للعام 2022

استقبل البطريرك الماروني مار بشارة بطرس الراعي خبير الطاقة الدولي الدكتور رودي بارودي، وإستبقاه الى مائدة الغداء. وكان عرض الاوضاع الراهنة، وقدم بارودي للراعي اول دراسة من نوعها حول ترسيم الحدود البحرية بين لبنان وإسرائيل والتي كان عرضها في ندوته الأخيرة في جامعة سيدة اللويزة، كما قدم له مجسم “الفيفا” لكأس العالم في كرة القدم التي إنطلقت اليوم في دولة قطر.