top 62 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 143 points 8 months ago (7 children)

A year from now, after we've been paying $5 a gallon for gas, we'll find out the oil companies had the biggest record profit year in their history. Then they'll announce layoffs.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago

    Here in the Netherlands it is 2.08€/L (9.10 U.S. dollars / US gallon) at its cheapest and 2.48€/L (10.84 U.S. dollars / US gallon) at its most expensive. While a lot of that is taxes, we are well past that mark.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Fyi Canadians pay well over 5$ a gallon. I'm sure others pay significantly more as well.

    Just explaining so you know that many people won't understand your comment

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Don't forget to convert the currency. $5 USD /gal is about $1.50 CAD /L, which is bang for Western Canada and cheaper than gas prices right now in Eastern Canada.

    You're right though, those aren't the insane prices the original poster thinks they are for countries outside the US.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 93 points 8 months ago (10 children)

    You know what? Fucking do it.

    Inflation will really fucking suck for a while, but anything that makes renewables and nuclear the better option is going to be a good thing in the long term. Strangle the oil industry with high prices, we fucking need it.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    This won't just affect oil by the way, fertilisers are a direct product of natural gas, bunkering, electricity, transport, the list goes on.

    The ripple effect might just pop the AI bubble. Good luck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Ferts can be made without natural gas, just bit more bothersome. Instead of cracking methane for hydrogen, we'll have to split water.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Im sure it will be great comfort to the billions who starve in a global famine while we spend decades building out the infrastructure for that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    That's probably overselling the importance of fertilizer a little. A huge proportion of the food we grow is completely wasted, rots without anyone eating it, or doesn't "look nice" so gets fed to animals who could just as easily eat other food sources. Another gigantic portion of the is grown inefficiently and stupidly for political and cultural and other asinine reasons, grown in inefficient places, or are inefficient crops to begin with. Sometimes it's all of the above, and sometimes it's not even grown for food at all, it's grown for oil. We burn it, because that's environmentally friendly, somehow. Famine is not a global agricultural problem, it's an economic problem, sometimes an intellectual property problem and almost always a political problem, it has nothing to do with lack of fertilizer, it never has been, and it almost certainly never will be. The whole system is rigged top to bottom, and fertilizer isn't going to make or break it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    Where do you think that proportion wasted is wasted? What happens when energy costs spike and plastics become more expensive? When logistics, transport and storage costs go up, waste doesn't vashish, it grows exponentionally.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago

    haha, reminds me that in 2007 I was delivering flowers when gas prices spiked and I made the mistake of opining that it wasn't all bad - for basically that reason. The owner did NOT appreciate my comments. lol.

    Nothing came of it or anything, it was just a little awkward for a bit. And I did express sympathy for her costs. But she could have optimized deliveries SO much better - I tried to help - but she just didn't care. Even though....... it cost her much more gas. heh

    She was a good person, just a little blind about some things. :)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Here’s the problem with that idea…yes, global prices could go way up, BUT

    • US has lots of oil, so won’t have shortages, just make a few obscene billionaire more obscenely wealthy. We’re deluded enough that renewables and EVs still won’t be an option
    • Russia needs to sell oil to stay in the war, and they’ll be able to get more profit
    • this mainly hurts everyone else
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 43 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Demand destruction will start happening well before it reaches $200/bbl.

    Prices of $120-140 begin demand destruction and economic recessions (as 2022 showed), with destruction accelerating past $160. Transportation costs doubling will put almost immediate halts on capex planning for most organizations. I would be surprised if sustained prices beyond $160/bbl could exist for more than a couple weeks before the global economy tail spins so fucking hard it immediately stops consuming the oil supply lost from the strait of Hormuz.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Are you sure you aren't underestimating the huge volume of demand that needs to be destroyed? I believe something like 20%-25% of demand needs to be destroyed, in both the crude and LNG markets.

    The last time demand was 20% lower than baseline was during the two worst months of Covid, when the majority of people were staying inside their home

    So the question is: how high does the price of oil have to get in order to force people to consume like they did under the worst of Covid?

    I'm no economist, but my gut feeling says it will be sustained significantly higher than $160/barrel.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    Industrial activity was still up during covid though, with all the shortages and everything most manufacturers were still running flat out. This demand destruction would be at the very base of consumption, not driven from the top consumer.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    There's also renewables. Solar is already cost competitive and there's no way EVs aren't flying off the shelves right now

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    Too late. Manufacturing and installing renewables or EV's or literally anything requires diesel.

    The entire industrial supply chain is still built on diesel with decades to go before the current glacial pace of electrification makes a significant dent. A massive energy crunch is just going to make renewable buildouts even more materially constrained and astronomically more expensive, there is no way out without economic collapse. The current economic system is not designed around anything other than fossil fuels and will refuse to complete a changeover until no other options exist, which will usually mean billions of homeless starving people getting fucked over.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 53 points 8 months ago (18 children)

    This is TERRIBLE! We paid Trump MILLIONS of Dollars and FUNDED a War with Venezuela! HOW could he Do this to US!

    -Oil CEOS!

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 8 months ago (15 children)

    So this makes me think. Did they attack Venezuela first to get access to the oil there and prevent a price spike from happening when they attacked Iran? Or am I giving the current regime too much credit?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    Considering that representatives from the Trump cabinet appeared to be surprised that Iran can and did block the strait of Hormuz, I'd say you are giving too much credit.

    Also, the US is a net exporter of oil. National supply concerns aren't the issue so much as global supply shock. Restrictions anywhere lead to price hikes.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Wasn't the Venezuela oil basically worthless because proper extraction would be too expensive to be viable?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago*

    It's doubtful if most of the reserves can become viable at any price. (Because the cost of materials increase when oil price increase.) But some are perfectly viable.

    But also, even in perfect conditions, if they started drilling right now (what they aren't), it will take several month to start getting any of it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    Well if the price goes up then it becomes feasible to extract it. Same with the oil the US has at home. They could also extract it if the price gets too high, the reason they aren't doing so now is because the Middle East oil is cheaper (well, WAS cheaper).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    Same is true of us oil. If you want conspiracy theories, there’s a more straightforward one. Us oil tends to be expensive with the need for advanced drilling such as fracking and horizontal drilling. In order to make a profit, it has to sell at like $60/bbl or more. Raising the global price of oil helps enrich those oligarchs that funded drumps csmpaign

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago* (3 children)

    Venezuelan oil production fell off a cliff starting around 2015 and has only recovered to a third of what it was then. It will take years to build industry there back up, so it won't do much right now. However, once it is built back up, it will be a major exporter again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    TBF 2015 is when the US started sanctioning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Also when oil prices fell off a cliff

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago*

    Additionally, Venezuela's economy went hyper-inflationary at that time too. With three to five digit inflation rates per year. Yes, they had multiple years with five digit inflation rates. Maduro thought this was a great time to print a whole bunch of money!

    Then later, in 2023, when the western world is severing their reliance on Russian oil and Venezeula is an obvious choice as a new supplier, Maduro declares he's invading Guyana (their neighboring state with shitloads of oil). Just fucking torpedoes all attempts at improving things for his country.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Reminder that literally not one single major oil company wanted to be involved in Trump's plans to exploit Venezuelan oil - with the exception of the one company already there, who basically suggested they might make some very, very small expansions to their operations - because all of them thought it was an idiotic idea.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    So how is a local rebellion supposed to work when a fat orange won't take his short, weird fingers off the 'fire missiles at everything' button?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago

    Figures, the one year i plan to drive hours away to attend an expo, gas is going to be triple the cost. I hate republicans so freaking much. They have ruined so many parts of my american dream.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago

    On Wednesday, the G7 group of nations - the United States, Canada, Japan, Italy, Britain, Germany and France - agreed to examine the option of providing escort for ships so they can navigate freely in the Gulf.

    Cool. Cool. Cool. Everyone can get sucked into another pointless US Middle East war.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago

    Well of course our babies have been drilling nonstop since Trump arrived so surely production's gone up 115% to offset the loss of 15 million barrels per day!

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    At this point either Trump commits to a land invasion and we have 20 years and trillions of dollars and tens if not hundreds of thousands of American lives wasted, not even counting how many millions of Iranian lives would be wasted as well. Or Trump backs down and asks China to act as a mediator because there's no way Iran would trust Trump to negotiate.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    Or Trump declares victory (didn’t he already do that?) and goes home. In a bit of circular reasoning, maybe he starts making waves about the Epstein files to distract people from Iran

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago

    That's okay, I was planning on staying home anyways.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago

    Honestly fuck yeah

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    This is fun because when does the war end? When the US says so?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    Why not just go atom bomb and do $500?

    EDIT: I’m saying atom bomb as a metaphor for raising prices

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [+] -6 points 8 months ago