Oil demand: OPEC bets on energy security — NRG-IA

Energy security reshapes global priorities: OPEC projections and fractures within the cartel OPEC projects robust sustained global oil demand over the medium and long term as international energy policies prioritize supply security over immediate climate targets. This strategic shift, documented in recent cartel analyses in June 2026, marks a deep departure from ideal accelerated decarbonization scenarios. While the International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that renewables and nuclear power will supply 50% of global electricity by 2030, the reality in fossil fuel markets shows a major gap between power generation and hard-to-abate industrial needs. Against a backdrop of geopolitical tensions and instability at key transit chokepoints, the physical security of resources has once again become the top priority for governments worldwide. Market data shows that energy security and affordability have fundamentally altered the global agenda. According to OPEC, crude oil demand is far from peaking, benefiting from systemic support from emerging economies and industrial sectors that are difficult to electrify. In parallel, the supply structure is undergoing dramatic shifts. In April 2026, the United Arab Emirates' (UAE) historic decision to leave OPEC shook Saudi Arabia's hegemony and questioned the OPEC+ group's ability to dictate global prices. This move freed Abu Dhabi from strict production quotas, allowing it to leverage its spare capacity, while other member states face severe limitations. For instance, in March 2026, Kuwait was forced to cut production due to logistical bottlenecks caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a channel through which a fifth of global oil consumption passes daily. Despite these supply disruptions, demand remains inelastic, forcing markets to absorb rising logistical costs and risk premiums. The transmission mechanism: How high energy costs sabotage industrial competitiveness and the AI race in Europe The mechanism sustaining this high demand is closely linked to the opportunity cost of a rapid transition. When public policies force a premature shift to unproven commercial-scale technologies, grid vulnerabilities and costs rise exponentially. A critical example of this mechanism is visible in Europe, which is losing the global artificial intelligence race directly due to soaring energy costs. The data centers required to train and run AI models are massive consumers of stable baseload electricity—a resource that European grids, reliant on intermittent renewables and deprived of cheap gas, cannot deliver at competitive prices. Consequently, while Europe faces record-high energy prices, the US and other regions with access to cheap hydrocarbons and nuclear energy are capturing tech capital flows. The correlation is direct: energy security does not just mean the existence of an energy source, but its uninterrupted availability at a cost that does not destroy industrial competitiveness. When physical security is threatened—as seen with the Strait of Hormuz closure—states are forced to fall back on traditional fossil fuels, which are easier to store and transport, even if it means missing short-term climate goals. This "security-first" paradigm explains why upstream investment has begun to rise again, despite ESG directives from previous years. Governments have realized that an economy without secure energy cannot finance the green transition, turning sustainability into a luxury that only a few states can afford during geopolitical crises. Winners and losers of the new energetic pragmatism In terms of winners, non-OPEC states with large production capacities and logistical flexibility—such as the United States, Canada, and recently the UAE as an independent actor—are consolidating their market share and profitability. Abu Dhabi can now export freely without cartel constraints, attracting global strategic partners looking for long-term contracts. Integrated oil and gas companies (Supermajors) also continue to report massive cash flows, remaining attractive assets for investors even during temporary price corrections. Conversely, the big losers are heavily industrialized but import-dependent economies, particularly the European Union. Europe's inability to secure cheap energy not only penalizes its chemical and metallurgical industries but also blocks its transition to the high-performance digital economy (AI, supercomputing). European households also pay disproportionately high bills compared to those in North America or Asia. Another loser is OPEC+ cohesion; the UAE's departure represents a structural fracture that reduces the group's bargaining power against major consumers and limits Riyadh's ability to stabilize the market through voluntary cuts. Future scenarios: Between a fragmented cartel and maritime trade bottlenecks Looking ahead, the dynamics of the global energy market will lie between two extremes. In an optimistic scenario, the accelerated diversification of power…