TORONTO (ICIS)–Shipments in Canada’s chemistry sector are expected to grow between 1-4% in 2025 and in the plastic sector they are expected to grow 2-3%, David Cherniak, policy manager, Business and Transportation, at the Chemistry Industry Association of Canada (CIAC), said in a webinar. Trade disputes and tariffs Canadian elections bring political uncertainties Renewed labor disruptions CIAC’s projections assume a pick-up in the global economic growth in 2025, he said but also warned of downside risks, in particular from possible US tariffs and Canada’s elections next year. The Ottawa-based trade group speaks for both Canada’s chemical and plastic industries. In chemicals, the 2025 growth would come after projected growth of about 2% for 2024, which was weaker than CIAC initially expected as interest rates did not fall by as much as had been anticipated, Cherniak said. The higher rates affected demand for chemicals from interest-sensitive end markets, in particular housing and auto, “which take up a lot of chemicals”, he said. TAILWINDS IN 2025 For 2025, CIAC sees a number of tailwinds for the industry, Cherniak said: Interest rates coming down, driving up demand for chemicals and plastics from housing, autos and other interest-rate sensitive markets, probably more towards the second half of the year. Increased diversification as Canada ships chemicals from its West Coast ports to new markets. Shutdowns of older plants in the global chemical industry. Canada’s “structural advantage” in production costs, due to low natural gas and energy prices. A weak Canadian dollar, which is “definitely a tailwind” for Canada’s highly export-dependent chemicals sector. New investments, with CIAC tracking 26 projects that could move to final investment decisions. HEADWINDS However, the industry is also facing “high political uncertainties” as Canada is heading into an election year, Cherniak said. A change in government could affect programs and incentives for investments in low-emission chemical projects, he noted. Another major headwind for the chemical industry is trade tensions, Cherniak said and went on to note the threat earlier this week by US President-elect Donald Trump to put a 25% tariff on all imports from Canada and Mexico. The US is the largest market by far for Canada’s chemicals industry. CIAC, for its part, will be making the case that the US-Canada chemical industry is integrated and that both the Canadian and the US economies are relying on the industry to perform well, he said. If implemented, Trump’s tariffs would not just harm the chemical and plastics industries but would have broad impacts across the overall economy, he added. However, tariffs were not just a US issue, he said. Rather, trade tensions related to chemicals were increasing globally, he said. In the past year alone, countries such as China, India, South Korea or Brazil targeted chemical products in trade disputes, he said. Brazil plans an investigation into polyethylene (PE) arriving from Canada and the US. According to CIAC data, Canada exports about Canadian dollar (C$) 4 million/month (US$3 million/month) of PE resin products to Brazil. Domestically, labor disputes and disruptions at Canada’s freight railroads or ports could yet again pose challenges for chemical producers in 2025, following this year’s disruptions, he said. A labor union has already obtained a mandate for a strike at freight rail carrier Canadian National that could begin on 1 January, and it is planning a strike vote at Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC), it said this week. Taken together, trade tension and transport disruptions have made it harder to move chemicals around the world. Combined with weakness in key end markets, the entire global market could become unstable, he said. “A lot of different clouds are circling on the horizon, a lot of different things” could slow down what CIAC otherwise expects to be “a decent year”, he said. (source: CIAC) (US$1=C$1.40) Thumbnail image show logo of Ottawa-based Chemistry Industry Association of Canada/Association canadienne de l’industrie de la chimie

LONDON (ICIS)–The EU-Mercosur free trade deal is a geopolitical move to reduce Europe’s dependency on China, a German government official told participants at a webinar hosted by German chemical producers’ trade group VCI. EU needs Mercosur to diversify and counter China Trade deal nearly finalized, but ratification may take time EU wants to de-risk, US seeks to de-couple from China “The agreement has a geo-strategic and geo-political significance” because Germany and the EU do not want to depend on any one country or region,” said Christian Forwick, director general, External Economic Policy, at Germany’s federal economic affairs ministry “Our wake-up call was the Russia-Ukraine war”, Forwick said. In the wake of the war, Germany lost access to the cheap Russian natural gas, which had helped power its chemicals and other energy-intensive industrial production. The EU and the Mercosur nations – Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay – are on track to sign a free trade deal at next month’s Mercosur summit in Uruguay next month, the official said. The European Commission has been invited to the summit, scheduled for 4-5 December in Montevideo. Negotiations are close to being finalized, with only minor details to be sorted out, Forwick said. “We have a ‘time window’ to conclude a deal now”, he said. Forwick did not comment on recent protests against the free trade deal by farmers in France and elsewhere, who are worried about a surge of low-cost agricultural imports into the EU. Following signing, the Mercosur deal will need to be approved by the European Council, and it must be ratified by each of the 27 EU countries. Ratification can be a drawn-out process. For example, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the EU from 2017 has up to now only been applied provisionally because it has not yet been ratified by all of the EU member states. CHINA CHALLENGE Mathias Blum, head of external trade at VCI, said that for Germany’s chemical industry an EU-Mercosur trade deal would be an important building block in efforts to diversify markets. China is the world’s largest chemicals market and is therefore important for Germany’s chemical-pharmaceuticals industry, he said. However, China is not just a customer, but also a strong competitor, using “fair and unfair methods”, he said. Forwick noted that the US approach to China was more severe than the EU’s. Whereas the EU focuses on “de-risking”, the US is pursuing a “decoupling” from China in certain sectors such as autos, and with Donald Trump’s victory in the election the US is expected to continue imposing tariffs on products from China, he said. While Germany, for its part, has become more careful in its trading and investment relations with China, it continues to see the country as an important market, he said. “I would not advise any company to exit China because of the geopolitical situation”, he said. Germany continued to believe in a market economy and the advantages of globalization, he said. “We do not believe that we should or could produce everything in Europe”, an approach that contrasted with the US efforts to make everything domestically, he said. “The better, more innovative products are created through international cooperation”, including cooperation with China, which has technology advantages in certain sectors, he said. Europe was innovative and benefited from the integration into the “international research community”, but on the negative side it has high electricity prices and lacks a common capital market, among other weaknesses, he noted. Thumbnail photo of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and China’s President Xi Jinping; photo source: EU

SINGAPORE (ICIS)–Click here to see the latest blog post on Asian Chemical Connections by John Richardson: The US has gained an estimated $2.2 billion in linear low density polyethylene (LLDPE) sales turnover in China since the 1992-2021 Chemicals Supercycle came to an end. It has gained $859 million in high density PE (HDPE). And its exports in tonnes have also surged. This has occurred as Saudi Arabia, Iran and South Korea, etc have lost a lot of ground. The US gains are the result of a big drop in import tariffs in February 2020, thanks to a trade deal, and of course the strong US ethane-based cost position. In a deflationary or disinflationary Chinese economy, cost is the king. But Donald Trump’s election victory has pushed us into a world of uncertainty. Almost anything might now happen. This brings to my mind the fabulous science fiction series of books and TV and radio shows, “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”, and its Infinite Improbability Drive. This is defined as such: The infinite improbability drive is a wonderful new method of crossing interstellar distances in a mere second, without all that tedious mucking about in hyperspace. As soon as the ship’s drive reaches infinite improbability, it passes through every conceivable point in every conceivable universe simultaneously. In one of any number of scenarios, let’s assume that China responds to increased US tariffs with increased tariffs on imports of US PE, as it did in 2017. Then the US loss could be to the gain of South Korea, Iran, etc. But, as we saw in 2017, the US might not lose out as whole. Its export flows to southeast Asia, Europe and Latin America might increase as other countries fill the gap created in China. Here’s some advice: Put the ICIS data into something akin to an Infinite Improbability Drive and you might get the answers you need. Editor’s note: This blog post is an opinion piece. The views expressed are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent those of ICIS.

LONDON (ICIS)–Denmark’s Dan Jorgensen will prioritise ending Russian LNG imports and lowering energy prices when he takes up the post of EU energy commissioner on 1 December, Ursula von der Leyen confirmed on 27 November. The European Parliament narrowly approved Von der Leyen’s new college of commissioners in a vote on 27 November, and the European Council of EU leaders formally endorsed the new Commission on 28 November, clearing it to start work. Von der Leyen told the European Parliament the that the outgoing Commission had done much to respond to surging energy prices that followed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but that “the price of energy is structurally still too high and has to go down”. She said Jorgensen’s previous experience – he was Denmark’s energy and climate minister from 2019 to 2022 – would help in this work. However, industry players have questioned whether the stated goal of ceasing all Russian gas imports is compatible with lowering prices. Torben Brabo, former international director at Danish gas and power transmission system operator Energinet and former president of Gas Infrastructure Europe, told ICIS it was key that Jorgensen used the word ‘independent’ when asked about the subject in his confirmation hearing. “For me, there are huge differences between being independent of Russian gas and [having] no Russian gas,” Brabo said. While over-reliance on Russian supply had been naïve, Brabo said, the molecules remained the cheapest available, while ending all supply also required the added costs of maintaining overcapacity to import other sources. “Let’s say we have 5-10% of our gas supply coming from Russia, with the option of more. Then we would have cheaper gas – and cheaper energy costs for end-users. We could probably use the bargaining [chip] on all the other imports, and thereby get even cheaper gas from them, and we could probably rely on a slightly smaller gas system in total or repurpose for hydrogen or other green gasses,” Brabo said. The European Commission has a stated aim of ending Russian gas imports by 2027, but Jorgensen said in his hearing he aimed to accelerate this process. WELL-QUALIFIED FOR COMMISSIONER Brabo was positive about Jorgensen’s prospects for the commissioner role, citing success in Denmark with industrial climate partnerships and Denmark’s first of its kind binding climate law. The partnerships forced stakeholders in 13 different sectors into implementation mode. “Instead of just being pro the government or in opposition, they were actually put in the driver’s seat, because they should make a recipe for how the government could help them,” he explained. Jorgensen’s time as minister also required ideological flexibility to support the end goal of decarbonisation, with the Baltic Pipe between Norway and Poland a good example. While the massive fossil infrastructure was not on the government’s agenda, Energinet was asked to make a plan and Poland bought 80% of the capacity for 15 years, helping Poland shift from coal to a more stable, secure gas supply. “Even though that [Jorgensen] would rather have seen money go for green investments, he was supportive on this objective mechanism, respecting the neighbouring countries and their needs,” Brabo said. NUCLEAR VIEWS Jorgensen was also drawn repeatedly on the topic of nuclear power during his hearing. He said he supported countries right to choose their power mix but also didn’t believe it was for the EU to fund construction of nuclear plants. Teresa Ribera, who as the Commission’s executive vice-president for a clean, just and competitive transition will oversee Jorgensen’s work, broadly sidestepped questions about support for nuclear during her own confirmation hearing on 12 November. “I think he has mainly been playing on his own half of the sports arena in the past … It will be interesting to see how he needs to not only stand in the very green Danish goal, but he needs to stand in the middle of the arena, looking at all possibilities,” said Brabo. FOLLOW THROUGH NEEDED Jorgensen’s ability to implement is a question mark. Alongside the affordable energy plan, part of the clean industrial deal due, as well as a plan to exit Russia gas within the Commission’s first 100 days. An electrification action plan will follow in due course, and he needs to help ensure the large volume of Green Deal legislation for the previous five years is implemented. Jorgensen’s successor in Denmark was told to focus on implementation, Brabo said, with fewer new targets. “And now [Jorgensen’s] come to the Commission in a larger scale, invited to do this second stage, which will be interesting,” he said.

SINGAPORE (ICIS)–South Korea’s central bank on Thursday made a surprise cut to its key interest rate, following a similar move in the previous month, amid concerns over economic implications of the US’ impending tariffs on all foreign goods. The Bank of Korea (BoK) reduced its benchmark interest rate by 25 basis points to 3.00% as the country grapples with global economic uncertainties and a strengthening of the US dollar, it said on Thursday. “In the future, the global economy and international financial markets are expected to be affected by the new US administration’s economic policy implementation, changes in major countries’ monetary policies, and geopolitical risks,” the BoK said in a statement. As of 02:30 GMT, the South Korean won (W) was trading at W1,394 against the US dollar. South Korea is heavily reliant on trade, with China and the US as its biggest trade partners. Korea’s domestic economy has also weakened amid slowing export growth, although demand is recovering gradually, it added. The country’s Q3 GDP growth stood at 1.5%, continuing its deceleration from a 2.3% pace set in Q2. Accordingly, the BoK has revised down its growth forecast for 2024 to 2.2% from 2.4%, and for 2025, to 1.9% from 2.1%. The country’s inflation rate of 1.3% in October was well below the 2.0% target and is expected to remain stable amid a decline in international oil prices and low demand pressure, but a volatile exchange rate might push inflation up if the US dollar continues to strengthen. A stronger US dollar also raises import costs, which would cause domestic prices to increase. The BoK will conduct its next meeting on 16 January 2025. ($1 = W1,394) Thumbnail image: South Korea’s capital city, logged a record November snowfall, with more than 16 cm of snow blanketing Seoul – 27 November 2024.(Xinhua/Shutterstock)

HOUSTON (ICIS)–The tariffs proposed by President-Elect Donald Trump on imports from Mexico, Canada and China would raise costs for the heavier grades of oil needed by US refineries as well as rare-earth elements used to make catalysts for downstream refining units. Trump said he intends to issue an executive order that would impose tariffs of 25% on imports from Mexico and Canada on January 20, his first day of office. He also announced intentions to impose a tariff of 10% on imports from China. This would be on top of the existing duties that the US already imposes on Chinese imports. Trump could decide to modify or even withdraw the proposals – especially if the US can reach a deal that addresses illegal immigration and drugs, the impetus behind the proposed tariffs. However, the tariffs as they are proposed by Trump would raise costs for key inputs used by US refiners. Outside of fuels, it could rise costs for fluoromaterials, since Mexico is the source of most of the imported feedstock. US REFINERIES DESIGNED FOR IMPORTS OF HEAVIER CRUDESUS refineries are generally designed to process grades of crude that are heavier than the oil it produces domestically from shale, said Michael Connolly, principal refining analyst for ICIS. As a result, the US exports its surplus of light oil and imports the heavier grades needed by its refineries. Those imports help fill out refining units that process heavier crude fractions, such as hydrocrackers, cokers, base oil units and fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) units, Connolly said. In 2023, the majority of those imports came from Canada and Mexico, as shown in the following table showing the top five sources of foreign crude. Figures are listed in thousands of barrels/day. COUNTRY IMPORTS % Canada 3,885 59.9 Mexico 733 11.3 Saudi Arabia 349 5.4 Iraq 213 3.3 Colombia 202 3.1 Total US imports 6,489 100 Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA) “If this tariff was to apply to crude, it would be damaging to the US refining industry and thus the US economy,” Connolly said. The damage would stem from the nation’s position as the world’s largest exporter of refined products. In 2023, the US was the world’s largest exporter of gasoline, with shipments of 900,000 bbl/day, according to the EIA. More than 500,000 bbl/day of those exports went to Mexico. The US is also a major exporter of distillate fuel oil, with shipments reaching 1.12 million bbl/day in 2023, according to the EIA. For petrochemicals, FCC units are important sources of propylene, so tariffs could have an effect on margins for propylene derivatives. FCC operations could receive another blow from the additional tariffs that the US could impose on imports of rare-earth materials from China. RARE EARTHS AND FCC CATALYSTSFCC catalysts are made with lanthanum and cerium. For most categories, China was the main source of these rare earths in 2023, as shown in the following table. Figures are in kilograms. HTS Code Product Imports from China Total imports  % 2846.10.0050 Cerium compounds other than cerium oxides 1,121,069 1,958,581 57.2 2846.90.2005 Rare-earth oxides except cerium oxides containing lanthanum as the predominant metal 52,045 479,885 10.8 2805.30.0005 Lanthanum, not intermixed or interalloyed 144,182 144,242 100.0 2846.90.8070 Mixtures of rare-earth carbonates containing lanthanum as the predominant metal 102,423 119,626 85.6 2805.30.0010 Cerium, not intermixed or interalloyed 3,262 3,466 94.1 Source: US International Trade Commission (ITC) Lanthanum and cerium are byproducts of the production of neodymium and dysprosium, two rare earth materials that are used to make magnets. TARIFFS ON MEXICAN HYDROFLUORIC ACIDIf the tariffs go through, they could raise costs for US producers of fluoromaterials. Hydrofluoric acid is the feedstock for almost all fluorochemicals and fluoropolymers, and Mexico accounted for all of the 87 million kg of acid that the US imported in 2023, according to the ITC. Fluorochemicals are used to make refrigerants as well as blowing agents used to make polyurethane foams. Another fluorochemical, lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6), is used as an electrolyte in lithium-ion batteries. For fluoropolymers, demand is growing because of their use in semiconductor fabrication plants (fabs), 5G telecommunication equipment and membranes used in fuel cells and green-hydrogen electrolysers. Hydrofluoric acid is also used as a catalyst in many alkylation units at refineries. Insight article by Al Greenwood Thumbnail shows a pump used to dispense fuel produced from refineries. Image by Shutterstock.

SINGAPORE (ICIS)–Click here to see the latest blog post on Asian Chemical Connections by John Richardson. As you do your budget planning for 2025, don’t lose sight of what the ICIS data consistently tell us. Any recovery in demand next year is unlikely to make much of dent in the record levels of global oversupply up and down all the chemical values chains. Today’s blog is a reminder of why where are where we are today – Regular readers of the blog will have been prepared for these events. I of course get things wrong as we all do, but I have been warning about the China risks for more than a decade. I also identified the Evergrande Turning Point shortly after it happened in late 2021. Beyond 2025, this is what we can learn from the events in China: The problem during the Chemicals Supercycle was not enough people asked hard questions about the nature of demand growth in China. Instead, too much analysis focused on feedstock advantage only while assuming demand would take care of itself. We thus need to set up demand teams that build much more nuanced and in-depth scenarios about what could happen next in China and elsewhere. How will demographics, climate change, geopolitics and the energy and chemicals transitions shape future global consumption growth? Artificial intelligence is potentially a fantastic tool to help us model this complexity, provided we ask it the right questions and use a commodity in much shorter supply than chemicals: Commonsense. Good luck out there. Here’s to managing our way through these challenging times together. Editor’s note: This blog post is an opinion piece. The views expressed are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent those of ICIS.

TORONTO (ICIS)–New US tariffs on US-Canada trade would have a devastating impact on manufacturers, workers and consumers on both sides of the border, trade group Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters (CME) said on Tuesday. “This is truly a lose-lose proposition,” the group said in reacting to news on Monday that President-elect Donald Trump plans to impose a 25% tariff on all imports from Canada and Mexico. “On January 20th, as one of my many first executive orders, I will sign all necessary documents to charge Mexico and Canada a 25% tariff on ALL products coming into the United States, and its ridiculous open borders,” Trump said on social media. The tariffs would remain in place until Canada and Mexico took action on drugs and immigrants entering the US, Trump said. Notably, he did not mention an exemption for US-Canadian energy trade. Trump previously proposed to raise tariffs by 10-20% on all imports, and by 60% on imports from China. CME said that Canada’s exports to the US were primarily materials and inputs used by US businesses to manufacture other products. As such, imposing tariffs would not just harm Canada’s economy – it would also hurt US manufacturers by increasing their costs and disrupting the deeply integrated supply chains that made North American manufacturing globally competitive, the group said. The economic relationship between Canada and the US is “enormous”, with Canadian dollar (C$) 2.5 billion (US$1.8 billion) in goods crossing the border every day in 2023, it said. Of that trade, 75% consists of manufactured goods, the group said. Trump claims that he wants US manufacturing to grow and thrive, but “these tariffs would have the opposite effect,” CME said. The group added that it was working closely with the federal government in Canada and partners at the US National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) to ensure the new Trump administration and other decision-makers “fully understand the consequences of this proposal”. “We believe Canada and the US must work together on policies that support the growth of manufacturing while strengthening our shared economic and national security and not pursuing policies that will undoubtedly harm US manufacturers, in addition to Canadian businesses and workers,” it added. CME represents all of Canada’s manufacturers. Among many others, its members include NOVA Chemicals and other chemical producers. The Chemistry Industry Association of Canada (CIAC), which speaks for Canada’s chemicals and plastics industries, said that companies on both sides of the border were still digesting the news of Trump’s tariffs, as was CIAC. The group expects to be able to provide comment soon. According to previous CIAC data, about 80% of Canada’s chemicals production goes into export, with about 80% of those exports going to the US. CANADIAN POLITICIANS REACT Canadian government officials said that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spoke with Trump shortly after Trump announced the tariffs. The details of the conversation were not disclosed. Trudeau also spoke with the premiers (governors) of Canada’s Ontario and Quebec provinces, who warned of the risks the US tariffs pose to their respective economies. The premier of Ontario urged Trudeau to call a meeting with all premiers. The premier of oil-rich Alberta province, Danielle Smith, said on social media that the incoming Trump administration had “valid concerns related to illegal activities at our shared border”. Canada’s federal government needed to work with the US “to resolve these issues immediately, thereby avoiding any unnecessary tariffs on Canadian exports to the US”, she said. “As the largest exporter of oil and gas to the US, we look forward to working with the new administration to strengthen energy security for both the US and Canada,” she added. Last week, Canada’s finance minister and deputy prime minister Chrystia Freeland said that unlike Mexico, Canada was “more aligned today than ever” with the US with regard to concerns about China’s trade practices. Canada had followed the US tariffs on electric vehicles (EVs), steel and aluminum from China, meaning it was not a back door for Chinese goods into the US, she said. Meanwhile, some Canadian politicians have called for a US-Canada trade deal that would exclude Mexico. The current US-Mexico-Canada (USMCA) trade deal will be renegotiated in 2026. Last week, experts at Oxford Economics said that new US tariffs, and Canada’s retaliatory tariffs, would raise inflation. Oxford, in its models, assumes that US-Canada energy trade will be exempted from the tariffs. (U$1 = C$1.41) Thumbnail of photo Trudeau (left) meeting Trump in Washington in 2019 during Trump’s first presidency; photo source: Government of Canada

BARCELONA (ICIS)–Two liquids-to-chemicals project announcements by Saudi Aramco highlight a new source of rapid capacity growth which will add to global overcapacity. Middle East oil and gas companies want to push crude-oil-to-chemicals (COTC) as demand for transport fuels declines Saudi Aramco aims to convert around 4 million barrels/day of crude oil into chemicals by 2030 versus about 1 million barrels/day currently Demand growth will not be sufficient to meet rising supply More closures will be needed to balance the market In this Think Tank podcast, Will Beacham interviews ICIS market development executive John Richardson and Paul Hodges, chairman of New Normal Consulting. Editor’s note: This podcast is an opinion piece. The views expressed are those of the presenter and interviewees, and do not necessarily represent those of ICIS. ICIS is organising regular updates to help the industry understand current market trends. Register here . Read the latest issue of ICIS Chemical Business. Read Paul Hodges and John Richardson’s ICIS blogs.