Oil shock 'largest supply disruption' in history, says International Energy Agency (www.lemonde.fr)
from throws_lemy@reddthat.com to world@lemmy.world on 13 Mar 12:04
https://reddthat.com/post/61846299

The Middle East war “is creating the largest supply disruption in the history of the global oil market,” as Iran’s chokehold on regional supplies forces Gulf oil producers to slash production, the International Energy Agency said Thursday, March 12.

In its latest market report, the IEA said crude oil production was currently down by at least 8.0 million bpd (barrels per day), with an additional 2.0 million related to petroleum products including condensates shut off.

#world

threaded - newest

whyrat@lemmy.world on 13 Mar 12:22 next collapse

… COVID wasn’t even that long ago? Is everyone’s memory really that bad?!?

Edit: guess they’re talking about the oil markets in isolation. But I still would want numbers, COVID was probably a larger shock, just in the other direction.

panda_abyss@lemmy.ca on 13 Mar 13:16 collapse

I think you could argue that was a demand shock not a supply shock.

At the start of Covid demand for oil dropped so much they couldn’t find places to store it.

Now 15% of oil and 20% of LNG can’t be produced because it can’t be transported, and despite Trump saying it’s basically over, there’s no end in sight to this situation.

Regime change is now impossible. If Iran collapses into civil war the Strait isn’t safe indefinitely (weapons will fall into extremist IRGC fragment cells). The US and Israel sure as shit won’t walk this back, so the closest solution would be Dems winning the midterms and forcing Trump to end the war. That’s 8 months away minimum, with low certainty.

There’s going to be famines from the lack of fertilizer production, prices for everything will be up, all manufacturing will be affected significantly, pharmaceuticals will spike in price.

This is going to be awful, and we have never experienced this type of shock.

Meanwhile, we all could have used the last 30 years to diversify, let oil and gas be used for the specialized things they do, and muted this type of shock. But we didn’t, that would have been bad for the economy seeking infinite returns at minimum cost indefinitely.

——

Here’s an economist article to this effect: economist.com/…/an-attack-on-the-world-economy from The Economist

whyrat@lemmy.world on 13 Mar 15:09 collapse

Agree on most of this.

I’d emphasize that while “we” (the USA) didn’t diversify, many others have. China keeps looking like it’s coming away a winner from all of trump’s missteps. They’re already a leader in battery and solar; benefiting from having ramped up renewables so much; and while the US is distracted in the Middle East can probably get away some shenanigans in their part of the world with far less blowback than would have happened a year or two ago.

Republican policies would be comically self-defeating… except it’s hard to laugh when they make so many people worse off :(

And somehow their own failures don’t lead to their defeat at the polls, I still struggle coming to terms with that.

VoiHyvaLuojaMitaNyt@lemmy.world on 13 Mar 13:59 next collapse

Excellent.

Would be absolutely excellent and awesome if we had spent the past few decades building renewables like our life depended on it. But I guess more smarter people than me knew better.

cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca on 13 Mar 14:21 collapse

So I should go buy a small EV right away.

CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de on 13 Mar 15:31 collapse

A younger end of elderly relative was consulting with me this week about intended “small” SUV purchase because I’m the family car guy and just couldn’t comprehend that I recommend an EV because they hate “car stuff”. So they ordered a 28mpg “truck” to get groceries. Oil lobby is so strong.

cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca on 13 Mar 16:11 collapse

Ew. My only gripe with EVs is it seems the manufacturer mentality has got it in their heads that they need even more control over the vehicle. I wish I could buy a vehicle that isn’t married to a manufacturer.