PetroCairo

Industrial oils types and market shares

admin — Sat, 04 Jan 2020 10:41:44 +0000

[142 Pages Report] The industrial oils market is estimated to account for a value of USD 60.2 billion in 2019 and is projected to grow at a CAGR of 5.0% from 2019, to reach a value of USD 80.7 billion by 2025. The biodiesel industry is projected to be a major revenue generator for industrial oils manufacturers in the coming years due to its reduced environmental impact. In addition, the industrial sector in the emerging countries of the Asia Pacific region is growing with countries such as China and India, which are the hub of industrial oils, due to the expanding chemical, biodiesel, and cosmetics industries.

The palm segment is projected to dominate the industrial oils market during the forecast period.

The industrial oil market, on the basis of source, is segmented into soybean, corn, sunflower, cottonseed, rapeseed, palm, and others (olive, safflower, copra, groundnut, linseed/flaxseed, and grape seed). The palm segment is estimated to account for the largest share in the global market in 2019. The market in the Asia Pacific region witnesses high growth in Indonesia and Malaysia, which supply over 85% of the global palm oil. This offers growth opportunities to palm oil manufacturers in these countries as they can export as well as utilize for domestic usage in industries such as biofuels.

The grade I (light) segment is projected to dominate the industrial oils market during the forecast period.

The grade I (light) segment is estimated to account for the largest share in the industrial oils market in 2019. The cosmetics & personal care and pharmaceutical industries utilize grade I (light) industrial oil. The cosmetics & personal care industry is witnessing significant growth in countries such as Brazil and China. This is projected to create lucrative opportunities for industrial oil manufacturers in the coming years. In Europe, the cosmetics industry include leading players such as Louis Dreyfus Company (Netherlands), A&A Fratelli Parodi Spa (Italy), Soya Mills SA (Greece), and Henry Lamotte Oils GmbH (Germany), offering industrial oils that find applications in the cosmetics & personal care industry. These include cosmetics & personal care products include shampoos, soaps, and sunscreens. The region is also projected to be a major revenue generator for industrial oil manufacturers in the coming years.

Increasing demand from the biodiesel sector is projected to drive the industrial oils market in the Asia Pacific

Biodiesel is used as an alternative fuel for diesel engines. It attracts the attention of the users due to its renewability, purity, and low exhaust pollution. Biodiesel is produced from a variety of oilseeds. In the European region, rapeseed oil is mainly used for the production of biodiesel, whereas in the US, soybeans are dominant biodiesel feedstock.

Biodiesel has significantly lower emission levels than petroleum-based diesel when it is burned, whether used in its pure form or blended with petroleum diesel. It does not contribute to a net rise in the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and also minimizes the intensity of greenhouse effects. In developing countries, the demand for biodiesel is increasing due to the higher availability of land, favorable climatic conditions for agriculture, and lower labor costs. In addition, in these countries, there is a growing trend of adopting modern technologies and efficient bioenergy conversion using a range of biofuels, which are provided at affordable prices than fossil fuels.

Key Market Players

Key players in global industrial oils market include Cargill (US), Bunge Limited (Netherlands), Wilmar International (Singapore), Louis Dreyfus Company B.V. (Netherlands), Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) (US), Buhler Group (Switzerland), CHS Inc. (US), Ag Processing Inc (US), A&A Fratelli Parodi Spa (Italy), Gemtek Products (US), AAK Kamani (India), and Soya Mills SA (Greece). These companies have undertaken expansions as one of the key strategies to expand their presence in this market.

Scope of the Industrial Oils Market Report

Report Metric	Details
Market size available for years	2017-2025
Base year considered	2018
Forecast period	2019-2025
Forecast units	Value (USD and Tons)
Segments covered	Source, Type, End Use, and Region
Geographies covered	North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, and Rest of the World (RoW)
Companies covered	Cargill (US), Bunge Limited (Netherlands), Wilmar International (Singapore), Louis Dreyfus Company B.V. (Netherlands), Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) (US), Buhler Group (Switzerland), CHS Inc. (US), Ag Processing Inc (US), A&A Fratelli Parodi Spa (Italy), Gemtek Products (US), AAK Kamani (India), and Soya Mills SA (Greece).

This research report categorizes the industrial oils market based on source, product, type, and region.

On the basis of source, the market has been segmented as follows:

Soybean
Corn
Sunflower
Cottonseed
Rapeseed
Palm
Others (Olive, Safflower, Copra, Groundnut, Linseed/Flaxseed, and Grape Seed)

On the basis of type, the market has been segmented as follows

Grade I (Light)
Grade II (Medium)
Grade III (Heavy)

On the basis of end-use, the market has been segmented as follows

Biofuel
Paints & coatings
Cosmetics & personal care
Pharmaceuticals
Others (Polymers, thermal, rubbers, agriculture, fillers, adhesives, and chemicals)

On the basis of region, the market has been segmented as follows:

North America
Europe
Asia Pacific
Rest of World (RoW)

Key questions addressed by the report

What are the new product areas for industrial oils that the companies are exploring?
Which are the key players in the industrial oils market and how intense is the competition?
What kind of competitors and stakeholders would industrial oils companies be interested in? What will be their go-to-market strategy for this market, and which emerging market will be of significant interest?
How are the current R&D activities and M&A’s in the industrial oils market projected to create a disrupting environment in the coming years?
What will be the level of impact on the revenues of stakeholders due to the benefits of industrial oils compared to different stakeholders, in terms of, rising revenue, environmental regulatory compliance, and sustainable profits for the suppliers?

Importance of GPS tracking for trucks

admin — Fri, 03 Jan 2020 10:41:46 +0000

As customers continue to expect faster service, quicker delivery times, shipment tracking, and a whole range of customized delivery needs, it has become more difficult for fleets of all sizes stay ahead of the game. However, a simple solution for every business is becoming readily available with constantly evolving fleet management tools like global positioning satellite (GPS) tracking systems.

The benefits of GPS tracking are invaluable to any fleet owner. By implementing a fleet tracking system, managers get an unprecedented level of access and control to their entire fleet. And being able to track every vehicle is just the beginning of all the benefits you can expect when you use a GPS tracking system.

Improve Safety

Not only will drivers be more responsible because they are aware of the GPS monitoring, but fleet managers will know exactly where a vehicle is if it requires any assistance. Whether it’s a broken down engine or any emergency situation, fleet managers can send roadside assistance to help their driver.

Minimize Fuel Costs

No one can control the price of gas, but one of the best benefits of GPS tracking systems is the ability to observe a vehicle’s fuel consumption. The monitoring software will cut down on the amount of money spent on fuel by eliminating vehicle idling, driver speeding, any unauthorized usage, and gives fleet managers the ability to optimize driving routes.

Theft Recovery

In the case of a vehicle theft, a GPS tracking system is the best tool for any fleet company. Be notified with alerts and mapping data to help you identify whether the vehicle has been stolen and inform the authorities of its location to enable a quick recovery.

Lower Operational Costs

Using GPS tracking software allows fleet managers to see who is taking inefficient routes or using a vehicle for unauthorized purposes. Not only will it solve on the road issues, but it provides an accurate readout of the hours that drivers claim to have worked.

Increase Productivity

Because of the ability to track drivers’ hours worked, this also allows fleet managers to make better use of an employee’s time. The GPS tracking software shows exactly where your drivers are at all times and keeps record of what work they are doing at that time.

The benefits of GPS tracking are endless. Get a better grasp of how employees are performing and find better ways to manage workloads with a comprehensive fleet tracking system. Not only will you save time and money, but your drivers will be safer and perform to their full potential. All of which adds up to a smoother business operation and improved customer service that each of your customer’s will love.

PROPER STORAGE OF LUBRICANT

admin — Wed, 01 Jan 2020 10:41:48 +0000

All lubricants should be stored inside a weatherproof structure which minimizes the temperature changes that occur from day to night. These temperature changes cause excessive “breathing” associated with moisture contamination in drums.

When a lubricant drum is warmed by sunlight or higher daytime temperatures, the fresh oil and air space inside the drum expands and creates enough pressure to force some of the air out through the bungs even though they may be sealed. Nighttime temperatures allow cooling, the product inside contracts, and a vacuum is created. Humid air, or free water itself, whichever is outside the bung at the time of the vacuum, can be sucked into the drum past the bung seals. The water that was brought into the drum or the condensation from the humidity, settles out to the bottom of the drum and the lubricant is “wet.” This process continues as long as the storage conditions are not improved.

If it is impossible to store the drum indoors, the drum should be stored on its side with the bungs parallel to the ground. If it is not possible to store the drum on its side, place a block under one side to tilt the drum and at least keep water away from the bungs. These circumstances will minimize the “breathing” action that may lead to contamination.

Fuel usage in Egypt per year

admin — Wed, 01 Jan 2020 10:41:41 +0000

Egypt is the largest non-OPEC oil producer in Africa and the third-largest dry natural gas producer on the continent. The country also serves as a major transit route for oil shipped from the Persian Gulf to Europe and to the United States.

Egypt is the largest oil producer in Africa outside of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and the third-largest natural gas producer on the continent following Algeria and Nigeria. Egypt plays a vital role in international energy markets through its operation of the Suez Canal and the Suez-Mediterranean (SUMED) Pipeline.

The Suez Canal is an important transit route for oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipments traveling northbound from the Persian Gulf to Europe and to North America and for shipments traveling southbound from North Africa and from countries along the Mediterranean Sea to Asia. Fees collected from these two transit points are significant sources of revenue for the Egyptian government.

The 2011 revolution led to an economic downturn, and the country experienced a sharp decline in tourism revenue and foreign direct investment, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF). However, economic conditions have improved over the past few years, and financial support from the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait has helped Egypt address its increasing domestic demand for energy[1].

As part of the conditions outlined by the IMF’s economic reform package, the Egyptian government is implementing a reform program that will eliminate energy subsidies to reduce spending and strengthen its fiscal position. Energy subsidies are expected to decline to 2.4% of GDP in fiscal year (FY) 2017 – 18 (ending June 30, 2018), from a peak of 5.9% of GDP in FY 2013 – 14[2]. Energy subsidies have contributed to Egypt’s large budget deficit and to financial challenges for its national oil company, the Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation (EGPC). Subsidies have also deterred foreign operators from investing in the sector. However, quicker-than-expected progress on implementing reforms and recent natural gas discoveries have led to renewed interest among foreign investors in Egypt’s energy sector.

The oil industry says it might support a carbon tax

admin — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:41:38 +0000

here’s why that could be good for producers and the public alike:

The oil industry’s lobbying arm, the American Petroleum Institute, suggested in a new draft statement that it might support Congress putting a price on carbon emissions to combat climate change, even though oil and gas are major sources of those greenhouse gas emissions.

An industry calling for a tax on the use of its products sounds as bizarre as “man bites dog.” Yet, there’s a reason for the oil industry to consider that shift.

With the election of President Joe Biden and rising public concern about climate change, Washington seems increasingly likely to act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The industry and many economists and regulatory experts, ourselves included, believe it would be better for the oil industry – and for consumers – if that action were taxation rather than regulation.

The American Petroleum Institute emphasized that trade-off in its draft statement, first reported in the Wall Street Journal on March 1. The statement says “API supports economy-wide carbon pricing as the primary government climate policy instrument to reduce CO2 emissions while helping keep energy affordable, instead of mandates or prescriptive regulatory action.”

Regulations versus taxation

There are a few ways to set a price on carbon. The most straightforward is a carbon tax. The price is designed to reflect all the harm done by greenhouse gas emissions, such as the impact of heat waves on public health.

A tax on carbon emissions would likely be imposed on firms that produce oil, gas, coal and anything else whose use results in carbon emissions. While companies would be taxed, they would pass those costs on to consumers.

The tax gives everyone incentives to reduce their contributions to carbon emissions by, for instance, fixing leaky windows, buying an electric vehicle or making a factory more efficient. In addition, the revenue from the carbon tax could be rebated to consumers in a variety of ways. Thus, if the tax is high enough, everyone from the biggest corporation to the most modest homeowner would have a strong incentive to search out the most cost-effective ways to cut carbon emissions.

In contrast, regulations put federal agencies in charge of deciding how best to reduce emissions. Regulators in Washington often know far less than individual factory owners, homeowners and others how to cut those factories’ and homes’ emissions most cost-effectively and thus reduce the cost of the tax for those people. Regulation comes with procedural requirements that impose paperwork expenses and delays on businesses, too.

Regulators can also be subject to pressure from members of Congress and lobbyists to do favors for campaign contributors such as, for example, not regulating emissions of favored industries stringently or regulating in ways that protect favored industries from competition. In the 1970s, one of us, David Schoenbrod, was a Natural Resources Defense Council attorney who sued under the Clean Air Act to get the EPA to stop the oil industry from adding lead to gasoline. That experience laid bare the accountability problem: The statute allowed Congress to take credit for protecting health, but lawmakers from both parties lobbied the agency to leave the lead in, and then Congress blamed the agency for failing to protect health.

The upshot, in our view, is that regulation could produce less environmental protection bang for the buck than a carbon tax.

As then-presidential candidate Barack Obama stated in 2008, with regulation, agencies dictate “every single rule that a company has to abide by, which creates a lot of bureaucracy and red tape and oftentimes is less efficient.”

What will Congress do?

On March 2, a new major climate bill was introduced in Congress. It reflects many of Biden’s climate strategies, but it sticks to regulation rather than considering a carbon price.

The CLEAN Future Act, introduced by the ranking Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, directs regulators to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2050. The centerpiece of the bill is a national clean electricity standard, which focuses narrowly on electricity generation and, we believe, misdefines the climate problem as too little clean electricity rather than too much carbon being emitted from all sources.

The bill’s 981 pages are jam-packed with regulatory mandates and leave plenty of opportunity for legislators to blame regulators for both the failure to achieve the act’s goal and the burdens of trying to do so. Besides, most of the legislators who would vote for such a bill will be out of office long before 2050.

A carbon tax could be passed decades before 2050. Whether it will be set high enough to do the job remains to be seen, but we will know exactly which elected officials to blame or applaud for their attempt to tackle climate change. Government will be transparent, as it and a clean atmosphere should be.

What’s at stake in the choice between taxing carbon and regulating it is not how much we will cut emissions – Congress can set the tax, and thus the reduction in emissions, as high as it wishes. What is at stake is whether the choice of how to cut carbon will be made by the businesses and people who emit it or by regulators, legislators, and lawyers and lobbyists working for business and advocacy organizations.

[You’re smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation’s authors and editors. You can get our highlights each weekend.]

IEA report: world’s leading energy adviser was founded to protect oil supplies

admin — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:06:34 +0000

Established in the wake of the 1973 oil crisis, the International Energy Agency (IEA) was created to maintain the stability of the international oil supply. As an independent adviser to many governments on energy policy, the IEA has the authority to make member states release reserve oil stocks to stabilise prices. The agency has used that power on three occasions, most recently in response to the disruption to oil production in the US gulf caused by Hurricane Katrina.

In a recent report, the IEA modelled how governments, energy companies and banks could meet the Paris agreement’s goal of halting global warming at 1.5°C. By sketching a road map of policy recommendations, the agency also revealed how energy generation globally could reach net zero emissions by 2050.

The IEA is no one’s idea of a radical voice on climate change. In fact, its ideas on reforming energy policy to meet this challenge have often erred on the side of caution and favoured incremental change. So it came as a surprise when the recent report called for an immediate ban on new oil, coal and gas development.

With relatively conservative institutions like the IEA now calling time on new fossil fuel exploration, it’s safe to assume something big is underway in energy policy worldwide.

Net zero emissions

In the report’s most ambitious scenario for the transformation of energy, which details an overhaul of supply and demand and an unprecedented level of international cooperation, coal would be phased out completely by 2050. Demand for oil would reduce to 72 million barrels a day by 2030 – well below the nadir reached during the lockdowns of 2020.

In the IEA’s net zero roadmap, demand for oil would fall drastically post-pandemic. EPA/Bagus Indahono

Since the report claimed that “no new oil and gas fields are required”, oil majors like ExxonMobil can no longer refer to the IEA to project demand. It also spells the end for a “golden age of gas” which the IEA had enthused about only a decade ago. Oil prices would be expected to fall steeply, from US$35 (£25) a barrel in 2035 to US$24 in 2050. Per capita income in already vulnerable producer economies such as Nigeria could plunge by as much as 75%.

To compensate, the report says that huge international investment will be needed to add 1,020 gigawatts of solar and wind power a year by 2030 – four times the 261 gigawatts installed in 2020. The battery capacity installed in electric vehicles would need to rise to 6,600 gigawatt hours in 2030, up from around 160 gigawatt hours today. Newly added nuclear energy capacity would hit 17 gigawatts a year up to 2030, and afterwards, 24 gigawatts a year – far more than even the World Nuclear Association – an international advocate for the industry – expects.

All this depends on rapid innovation to create technologies “not yet available on the market to be demonstrated very quickly at scale”, according to the IEA report. More than half of the emissions reductions the report foresees will depend on behavioural changes among the general public, including support for new cycle lanes and high-speed rail.

A global energy transition

The report indicates that the world is on the cusp of unprecedented change in national and international energy policy. This would represent much more than each state doing its duty under the Paris agreement to submit increasingly more ambitious emissions reductions pledges.

The IEA was conceived for the hydrocarbon age when energy was primarily subject to sovereignty. This has made the energy sector, more than many others, resistant to any centralising tendency. But if the agency’s founding mission was to coordinate government responses to oil supply instability, its conclusion that new oil and gas fields are surplus to requirement suggests the economists advising world leaders on the transition to sustainable energy may have found a new appetite for cooperation.

The days of centralised energy reserves may be over. C12/Shutterstock

While fossil fuels exist in highly centralised reserves, renewable generation, like wind and solar, is everywhere. Exploiting these sources globally will depend on countries developing and sharing green technology, operating electricity grids across borders and coordinating transnational energy markets. With this model, the IEA is redefining itself as a clean energy hub, capable of governing the process.

Some countries have already pushed back against the IEA’s analysis and its call for cooperation. But each has its own obligations under international law to meet the 2015 Paris agreement’s demands. The report merely spells out a feasible pathway for all states to comply with them.