分类： business

Suriname’s leading business advocacy group, the Vereniging Surinaams Bedrijfsleven (VSB), has sounded the alarm over the growing risks that persistent planned power outages, known as loadshedding, pose to the stability of domestic business operations and the country’s ability to attract new foreign and local investment. The organization stressed that addressing the current energy shortage is only a short-term fix, arguing that policymakers and energy providers must prioritize expanding generation capacity to support long-term economic growth.

The concerns were formally raised during a high-level consultation held September 15 between VSB representatives, leadership from N.V. Energiebedrijven Suriname (EBS), the national energy utility, and delegates from other organized business sectors across the country. The talks were triggered by widespread feedback from local business owners reporting significant disruptions to daily operations caused by recurring power cuts.
VSB officials emphasized that for businesses of all sizes, a reliable and predictable energy supply is non-negotiable to plan production schedules and deliver consistent services to clients. While the association acknowledges that controlled loadshedding may be technically necessary to prevent total collapse of the national power grid, it says enterprises require clear, advance notification of when outages will occur and how long they will last to minimize productivity losses.
During the negotiations, particular focus was placed on the disproportionate impact of loadshedding on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), the tourism sector, and small-scale manufacturing operations. Alternative power solutions such as private backup generators carry high upfront investment costs that are out of reach for many smaller operators, the group noted. Attendees discussed a range of potential mitigation measures, including subsidized emergency power infrastructure, shifting non-critical business operations to off-peak hours when energy demand is lower, and adopting solar power paired with battery storage systems. Business representatives pushed for solution frameworks that prioritize affordable, accessible options for small and medium-sized businesses that cannot absorb large unexpected energy-related costs.
VSB also asked whether EBS could prioritize power access for economically critical operations when scheduling outages, sparing key business facilities from disconnections. In response, EBS explained that its current technical infrastructure only allows for disconnections on a per-feeder basis, rather than per individual customer connection. While the utility already works to avoid outages for hospitals and other critical public services, and attempts to account for the economic profile of local areas during outage planning, full separation of business and residential connections is not currently feasible as most share the same distribution infrastructure.
Beyond the immediate crisis, VSB highlighted that the larger, long-term challenge lies in meeting future energy demand as the Surinamese economy expands. New economic activities and incoming investment projects will only increase the country’s overall need for electricity, requiring timely development of new generation capacity and operational reserve infrastructure to avoid persistent shortages. EBS confirmed during the meeting that current available capacity is already insufficient to meet peak demand during certain periods, a problem rooted in a years-long backlog of investment in new energy infrastructure.
Participants also discussed the prospect of allowing independent third-party energy producers to enter the market to expand total capacity. EBS reported that the required legal framework to enable private power generation is mostly finalized, but still remains subject to a final regulatory review.
VSB has rejected framing the current energy shortage as a temporary supply-demand imbalance, arguing that investment in new generation capacity and energy infrastructure must grow in lockstep with broader national economic development. To that end, the association plans to continue holding regular structured consultations with EBS, the national government, and other business groups to push for long-term reform. VSB also called for full and timely implementation of existing prior agreements related to energy infrastructure investment, energy sector regulatory reform, and long-term demand planning.

As of mid-September 2025, China is grappling with an unprecedented energy market challenge triggered by escalating geopolitical conflict across the Middle East. Key oil supply arteries have been severely disrupted in recent months: ongoing regional tensions have led to a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s busiest chokepoint for crude oil shipments, while a major Saudi Arabian oil pipeline has been shut down following attacks by pro-Iranian militias. These disruptions have coincided with a broader escalation of tensions between the United States, Israel, and Iran, pushing domestic oil prices in China to all-time record highs. In the initial phase of the crisis, Beijing moved quickly to absorb market shocks by drawing down its national strategic petroleum reserve (SPR), which is estimated to hold roughly 1.4 billion barrels of crude. The government also cut crude import volumes from 12 million barrels per day to an average of 8.1 million barrels per day in the second quarter of 2025. However, as Chinese refineries have ramped up production to meet domestic demand and operators move to replenish depleted stockpiles, the initial SPR buffer is now running low, forcing China to return to competitive purchasing on global international markets.

China currently faces a daily crude import gap of approximately 9.6 million barrels to meet domestic refining and consumption needs, and policymakers have been scrambling to lock in alternative supply sources, but significant structural limitations persist. Russia has emerged as China’s most reliable alternative provider: in 2025, Russia accounted for 20% of China’s total crude imports, making it Beijing’s top single supplier. Deliveries via Siberian pipelines and Pacific Ocean ports reach Chinese borders within just seven days, bypassing the high-risk Strait of Hormuz chokepoint entirely. Despite sweeping U.S. sanctions targeting Russian energy exports, China’s seaborne imports of Russian crude climbed to 1.68 million barrels per day in August 2025, marking a steady uptick through the crisis. Iran, by contrast, was once a major source of low-cost crude for China, delivering as much as 1.4 million barrels per day before the latest conflict escalated. But tighter U.S. enforcement of sanctions and the regional shutdown of export infrastructure has all but halted Iranian crude shipments to China. Suppliers in Latin America and Africa, including Brazil, Venezuela, and Angola, have stepped in to offer partial alternative volumes, but long shipping transits from these regions drive up freight costs substantially. Additionally, the chemical density and grade of crude from these markets does not match the optimal processing configuration of most Chinese refineries, creating additional operational barriers.

Beyond immediate supply shortages, the crisis has exposed deep structural vulnerabilities in China’s energy security. While the rapid adoption of electric vehicles has cut domestic demand for gasoline, key sectors including heavy manufacturing, commercial aviation, and petrochemical production remain heavily dependent on crude oil imports. The gap between China’s domestic crude production, which stands at roughly 4.34 million barrels per day, and total refining demand of 13.91 million barrels per day underscores the nation’s persistent exposure to global energy market shocks. The ongoing energy crisis has also reshaped Beijing’s diplomatic priorities, with energy security now moving to the top of China’s international agenda. Following recent talks in Beijing between Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi, China has publicly pushed for the immediate reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and a resumption of diplomatic negotiations between Washington and Tehran. The upcoming bilateral summit between Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump, scheduled to take place on the sidelines of the APEC economic leaders’ meeting in Busan, South Korea on October 30, 2025, will center heavily on two core priorities: securing stable long-term energy supplies for China and preventing the ongoing energy crisis from triggering a broader global economic recession.

Dutch flag carrier KLM has outlined four distinct future scenarios to prepare for the evolving aviation landscape through 2030, with one option including a scaled-down operational model featuring a reduced fleet and significant job cuts. The scenarios are not final decisions, but exploratory frameworks designed to help the airline proactively adapt to industry shifts as it works to secure its long-term international competitiveness. According to aviation industry outlet Luchtvaartnieuws, carrier leadership has concluded that waiting for changes to unfold is not viable if KLM intends to retain its position as a major global airline.

The scenarios cover a range of core strategic priorities for the airline, including long-term financial stability, workforce structuring, sustainability progress, and KLM’s ongoing operational footprint in the Netherlands. One scenario explores deeper integration within the broader Air France-KLM group, while another maps out a transformative restructuring that would shrink KLM’s overall size through fleet reductions and workforce cuts. Company representatives emphasize that all four are still exploratory, and no final pathway has been selected.

KLM CEO Marjan Rintel argues that proactive planning is critical, given the speed of industry change that often leaves little room for reactive adjustments. The scenarios are not intended as concrete predictions, Rintel notes, but as a tool to identify potential opportunities, risks, and strategic tradeoffs before the company commits to a long-term direction.

The release of the future scenarios comes as KLM reports improving short-term financial results, but warns that progress to date has not been enough to build the structural financial strength the carrier needs. In its first half 2026 results published recently, KLM posted total revenue of €6.9 billion, an 8% increase compared to the same period in 2025. Its operating result hit €68 million, representing a €92 million improvement from the first half of 2025. These gains follow the carrier’s ongoing “Back on Track” improvement program, which delivered €315 million in cost savings during the first six months of the year.

Even with these positive short-term movements, KLM has sounded the alarm over persistent headwinds including rising operational costs, cutthroat global competition, and ongoing geopolitical uncertainty that creates widespread market instability. “One strong six-month period does not make KLM structurally strong,” Rintel said of the results, echoing the carrier’s view that more change is needed to secure long-term resilience.

Dutch trade union FNV has issued a critical response to the release of the exploratory scenarios, with aviation publication Up in the Sky reporting that the union says the four frameworks lack a clear overarching strategic direction for KLM. FNV’s primary concern centers on the potential impact of the downsizing scenario on employment across the Netherlands, with union leaders warning that widespread job cuts would have severe knock-on effects for Dutch aviation workers and local economies.

The planning process for these 2030 scenarios was first announced earlier in 2026, when KLM revealed during the release of first quarter results that it would co-develop future pathways alongside employees and key stakeholders. At that time, the airline framed the work as a necessary step to control costs and rebuild the structural resilience of the business.

Ultimately, the four scenarios are intended to help KLM leadership map out what strategic decisions are required to keep the airline financially healthy and globally competitive through the end of the decade. As of now, no final decision on which pathway the carrier will pursue has been made, and the full impacts on the company’s fleet and workforce remain undetermined.