We're not talking about your local Walmart burning down. We're talking about the supply warehouse that feeds every product to Walmart burning down. Also, warehouses and Walmart stock are cheap to rebuild and replace. These oil/gas production facilities are wicked expensive to rebuild and restock.
You’ll never see $70 oil again.
- Thread starter Snagglefoot
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2024
- Messages
- 1,593
Not every product. And the warehouse is not burnt to the ground, it's damaged (for the time being).
Again - not minimizing the pain, but I disagree with the bombastic doom and gloom.
You need to remember that everyone talking has an incentive to spin the damage as large as possible.
LNG facilities are a problem - there highly technical.
Oil it depends. Fires happen on occasion and are sometimes bad and sometimes not. Civilians see them and freak but if its burning oil spewing out of a pipe, and not the pipe - then it just needs to be put out. A couple years ago the Houthis hit the largest Saudi field and everyone freaked, and they put it out and it was a nothing event.
We won't know until we know.
It doesn't matter where the product we use is sourced.
Take any amount off the table and prices go up everywhere.
Like counting misses as hits. News is nuts.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2024
- Messages
- 1,593
Fair, but the table shouldn't forget that the whole Venezuela oil factor has entered the building but is not on the table yet.
I'm no geopolitical guru but I doubt anything would have happened in the middle East now without getting the Venezuela ball rolling a few months back.
Maybe after years of investment in the infrastructure there it will mean something.
After being burned multiple times, nobody is rushing in with billions to help out, everybody except chevron (who is already there) laughed at the " offer".
True but oil was $60 then.
The IEA says the war has cut Gulf production by at least 10 million barrels per day (this was BEFORE yesterday's destruction). By contrast, reporting this month puts Venezuela’s total output around 1.05 mb/d. Even if every added Venezuelan barrel made it to market, the scale is nowhere near enough to offset a 10 mb/d shock.
As far as crude quality, Venezuela does have one real advantage - much of its output is heavy, sour crude, which is closer to some Middle Eastern grades than light-sweet barrels are. EIA notes that Venezuelan supply is heavy and sour and that this type of crude has been in short supply.
The bigger problem is that Venezuela cannot ramp quickly enough. EIA says its production growth is constrained by damaged infrastructure, underinvestment, loss of technical capacity, and the technical difficulty of producing extra-heavy Orinoco crude. Those are structural bottlenecks, not paperwork problems.
Sanctions and licensing have also limited how much Venezuela can do. OFAC replaced Chevron’s prior authorization with wind-down licenses in March 2025, which tightened rather than broadened their operations. More recent reporting says the U.S. has now eased some restrictions again in response to the current energy shock, but those policy changes still do not create instant upstream capacity, upgraded export infrastructure, or immediate large-volume replacement barrels.
They have cut production - or they actually call it "shut in" because they have no where to put it. You can't just spill it out on the ground.
Of course shutting wells in is bad because it can actually damage the formation or at least take it some time to get it going again.
That is different than it being destroyed. Once they have somewhere to put it they will endeavor to produce again.
Makes my point even more. That IEA statement was the state of affairs prior to blowing things up yesterday. That certainly didn't make things better or Venezuelan oil better able to substitute for lost Middle East production.
It is no longer accurate to describe all of the lost Middle East output as merely “shut in.” Earlier in the crisis, a lot of the missing supply reflected forced shut-ins because producers had nowhere to move or store crude. But this week Iran’s strikes have also caused direct physical damage to major energy facilities, including refineries, ports, and gas infrastructure across the Gulf. That means part of the lost supply is still reversible once logistics reopen, but part of it now reflects actual infrastructure damage that can slow or complicate a restart. The region has suffered a mix of shut-ins and real destruction, not just shut-ins alone.
Last edited:
And yet the government still subsidizes the oil industry.
Can you post this actual damage - by someone other than PBS who is likely reading it off the same internet as we are.
You keep hyping this but I am not seeing it and I track multiple oil sites and follow multiple oil analysts and have for years.
They don't. I have debunked this garbage on this site many times. Recently in fact. https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...s-why-its-a-terrible-idea.405207/post-7539421
Top link is from today and the others from the past week and half.
https://apnews.com/article/iran-war-isreal-us-kuwait-d052e93613dac59e4164194f4df52c88
https://apnews.com/article/oil-gas-...persian-gulf-24c4b439d2c6a5b571fea90e4d1227d8
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026...f-iranian-missiles-drones-target-gulf-nations
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2022
- Messages
- 1,138
Supply is not the issue with what we are seeing. It's nothing more than a money grab and that money comes from the people. If the people are not willing to cut their demand and will continue to pay the price will continue to climb. It's the same with any product. Nobody wants to invest in a million dollar gadget that nobody will buy. Obviously people must have fuel but all it takes is millions of people to stop making unnecessary trips and conserve and therefore show their unwillingness to pay these prices.
Of course demand still matters, but recent fuel price spikes are being driven primarily by supply shocks and supply risk, not by a sudden surge in consumer demand. Saying consumers could reduce driving and eventually push prices lower does not change the fact that the current price moves started on the supply side.
You’re describing how demand can eventually affect and discipline price. I’m describing what caused the current price spike. Those are not the same thing. Recent increases are about constrained or threatened supply, not some sudden boom in people wanting to drive more.
- Joined
- May 31, 2024
- Messages
- 744
Are YOU the Landman?
Similar threads
