quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
I'm a tad concerned about this blockade. I think it'd be a brilliant move...if we didn't have the midterms to worry about. Gas remaining at ~$5/gallon will NOT be good for Republicans.

Another question I have is, if we are supposedly self -sufficient WRT gas/oil and produce more than anyone, why are our prices so fargin high? We don't rely on the middle east as we've got our own (and Venezuela's).

We aren't oil self-sufficient. If you include Canada and call it North American oil independence then we're ~90% self-sufficient. I broke it down about 3 weeks ago in this post.

Same link as above, I also posted the other first in my 30 year career phenonmen that this Iran war has brought on is the crude oil trading hubs in ME and Asia have been trading ~50% higher than WTI (US's crude) and Brent (UK's crude). More on this below in post.

The US is in even better shape on the gas side. Iran is a shockingly small gas or LNG exporter so that's why natural gas hasn't been on the news.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
Then we should stop selling to the global market and ship direct to the refineries here and out to the gas stations from there.

Some of it is geography related. For example, if Alaska produces more crude than Washington state and California refineries can refine then it's in US interest to sell on world open market.

Some of it is Trump wants to export and the aforementioned ME/Asia oil price disparity is making it interesting to rest of world.

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
Another question I have is, if we are supposedly self -sufficient WRT gas/oil and produce more than anyone, why are our prices so fargin high? We don't rely on the middle east as we've got our own (and Venezuela's).

Because oil is a global commodity and US based gas/oil companies sell to the open global market, they're vulnerable to the cost fluctuations like everyone else.

I would also question why we continue to sell crude rather than refined products? Seems like the profit margin would be far higher on the latter, sort of like selling cars rather than iron ore.

I suspect there is a shortage of refining capability in the US because of misguided so-called environmental policies, but still, wouldn't it be more to our benefit if those super tankers were loaded with kerosene/diesel rather than crude?

And were does Venezuela fit into all this? Are we selling our crude to China, but denying the Venzies any customers except ourselves? Yes, I am aware that the quality and consistency of crude varies from source to source, and a refinery has to match its capabilities to its raw material. Is this what is responsible for this seeming disparity?

Does anyone have a link that (non-politically) explains the realities of the world's oil markets?

Tatortodd’s post right above yours has links to his explanation. As I recall, he explained the types of crude, various refinery’s abilities to process different types of crude, various ship size and canal capacities affecting the ability to get crude where it needs to be.

Sometimes a little AI Humor is needed....

https://x.com/LangmanVince/status/2043406685205569893

Our European "allies" are so weak...

US Allies Loudly Reject Trump's Scheme To Blockade Hormuz: 'Not Getting Dragged In'

The United Kingdom and several other countries rejected Washington's plan to impose a blockade on Iranian ports and target ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz, which has gone into effect Monday.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer made clear his stance that "we are not supporting the blockade" in a fresh interview with BBC Radio. He emphasized that the UK is not "getting dragged in" to the US-Israeli war against Iran, but still stated that it's "vital that we get the strait open and fully open."

As fully expected Spain's government also condemned the US move, with the country's Defense Minister Margarita Robles having said, "It's just another episode in this downward spiral we've slipped into," adding that Trump and Netanyahu "want to impose rules on the international community, which is illogical."

Earlier we reported that France is working with the UK on a conference to organize a "strictly defensive" and "peaceful" mission to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

President Emmanuel Macron said, "As regards the Strait of Hormuz, in the coming days, together with the UK, we will organize a conference with those countries prepared to contribute alongside us to a peaceful multinational mission aimed at restoring freedom of navigation in the strait." He added, "This strictly defensive mission, separate from the warring parties to the conflict, is intended to be deployed as soon as circumstances permit."

Still, Paris has rejected a US request to join a military coalition to forcibly reopen the strait, essentially paralleling Britain's position.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geop...-not-getting-dragged

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Earlier we reported that France is working with the UK on a conference to organize a "strictly defensive" and "peaceful" mission to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Do Starmer and Macron even realize that between the two countries there is no operational navy? Somebody needs to tap them on the shoulder, whisper in their ears, and clue them in.

quote:

Earlier we reported that France is working with the UK

They have little choice, now being Muslim enclaves on the way to total Muslim countries...

Any military action would probably incite massive internal Muslim wars on the streets endangering the general public....

quote:

Any military action would probably incite massive internal Muslim wars on the streets endangering the general public....

As sad as that is, I believe there is a lot of truth to that and they realize it and maybe, just maybe, feel a little bad that it's gotten to where it has.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Our European "allies" are so weak...



Prime Minister Keir Starmer made clear his stance that "we are not supporting the blockade" in a fresh interview with BBC Radio. He emphasized that the UK is not "getting dragged in" to the US-Israeli war against Iran, but still stated that it's "vital that we get the strait open and fully open."

[/url]

Good, and too fucking bad you losers.

They might yell "STOP!", again.

quote:

Prime Minister Keir Starmer made clear his stance that "we are not supporting the blockade" in a fresh interview with BBC Radio. He emphasized that the UK is not "getting dragged in" to the US-Israeli war against Iran

Maybe the US shouldn't have gotten involved in your little war down in the southern Atlantic, but then the "Iron Lady" had more f'in balls than you do.

quote:

Originally posted by 229DAK:

Maybe the US shouldn't have gotten involved in your little war down in the southern Atlantic, but then the "Iron Lady" had more f'in balls than you do.

Waiting for the revival of the Broadway Musical Evita, in which Margaret Thatcher's character sings that well-remembered song, "Don't Fuck With Me, Argentina."

Can someone explain to me why we don't just pull out and leave it up to the region to figure it out?

I guess I don't undersatnd why we care if no one else does? Wipe out thier oil fields and call it a war!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin101:
Can someone explain to me why we don't just pull out and leave it up to the region to figure it out?

I guess I don't undersatnd why we care if no one else does? Wipe out thier oil fields and call it a war!!!

Please. See my earlier comments, re: Nuclear Irán.

If you do not understand the threat… well, my condolences.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...1rP3%2BhvPUN%2Byc%3D

Iran Threatens Regional Ports Over US Hormuz Blockade Plan

Iran’s military command issued a regional port security warning as Washington moves to restrict Iranian shipping after failed peace talks in Pakistan.

Iran’s military leadership warned on April 13 that no port in the Persian Gulf or Gulf of Oman would remain secure if the United States proceeds with a naval blockade targeting Iranian shipping, raising the risk of a wider maritime confrontation across key regional waterways.

In a statement carried by state-linked media, the spokesperson for the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters said maritime security in the region must apply to all or to none, warning that any threat to Iranian ports would trigger reciprocal measures.

“Security in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman is either for everyone or for no one,” said the spokesperson, Lt. Col. Ebrahim Zolfaqari, according to a post on X by Iranian state broadcaster IRIB. “If Iran’s ports are threatened, no port in the region will be safe.”
US Blockade Plans Draw Iranian Response

The Iranian warning came in response to U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement that the U.S. Navy would begin blockading maritime traffic linked to Iran after high-stakes nuclear and ceasefire negotiations in Islamabad ended without a deal.

Trump said on April 12 that U.S. forces would “seek and interdict every vessel in International Waters that has paid a toll to Iran” and would prevent ships from entering or leaving the Strait of Hormuz.

“No one who pays an illegal toll will have safe passage on the high seas,” Trump added.

U.S. Central Command later clarified that the blockade—set to begin on April 13 at 10 a.m. ET—would apply specifically to vessels entering or exiting Iranian ports, not to broader commercial traffic moving through the strait.

Iran has described the move as an unlawful restriction on international waters and warned of wider consequences.

Zolfaqari described the U.S. actions as “piracy” and said Tehran would continue to enforce its own rules governing passage through the Strait of Hormuz, including barring vessels affiliated with “enemy forces” while allowing others to transit under Iranian regulations, according to a Telegram post from Iran’s semi-official Mehr News Agency.

Zolfaqari’s statement also indicated that Iran intends to establish a “permanent mechanism” to control access to the strait even after the current conflict ends.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has warned that military vessels attempting to pass through the strait would face a “firm response,” hinting at the possibility of direct confrontation between U.S. and Iranian forces in the narrow waterway.
Risk of Broader Maritime Disruption

The Strait of Hormuz, which connects the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman, handles roughly one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas flows, making it one of the most strategically sensitive shipping lanes in the world.
Iran’s latest warning suggested the conflict could expand beyond Hormuz to other critical maritime routes, including ports across the Gulf and potentially the Bab el-Mandeb Strait at the southern entrance to the Red Sea, a vital corridor for shipping between Europe and Asia.

Iran-allied Houthis in nearby Yemen have threatened to target the Bab el-Mandeb strait, a move that could add to pressure on regional shipping routes and energy infrastructure linked to Saudi Arabia and other Gulf producers.
While it assesses the threat level in the Strait of Hormuz as “critical,” the UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) said in an April 12 advisory update that the Bab el-Mandeb Strait remains at a “moderate” threat level.

“While regional tensions and Houthi rhetoric toward commercial shipping continue, there have been no confirmed incidents affecting maritime traffic in the area,” UKMTO said.

Iranian Navy Commander Rear Adm. Shahram Irani said Tehran was closely monitoring U.S. military movements in the region and dismissed Washington’s blockade threat as ineffective, according to Iran’s semi-official Tasnim News Agency.

The escalating rhetoric follows weeks of conflict that began on Feb. 28 with U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets, triggering retaliatory actions and widespread disruption to shipping and energy markets.

Emirati Minister of Industry Ahmed Al Jaber said in a post on X that as of April 12, hundreds of commercial vessels remained stranded in or near the Strait of Hormuz, including nearly 400 oil tankers.

UKMTO said in its April 12 advisory that just four vessels had transited the Strait of Hormuz in the previous 24-hour period, down from an average of 138 per day prior to the outbreak of hostilities.

Two oil tankers linked to Iran exited the Gulf via the strait on April 13 ahead of the planned U.S. blockade, according to shipping data from Kpler and LSEG.

The tanker Auroura is laden with Iranian oil products while the New Future tanker is carrying diesel loaded from the Hamriyah port in the United Arab Emirates, Kpler data showed.

Trump’s blockade announcement came shortly after U.S. Vice President JD Vance said that negotiations with Iranian officials in Pakistan had failed to produce a breakthrough, particularly on Tehran’s nuclear program.

“The simple question is, do we see a fundamental commitment ... not to develop a nuclear weapon,” Vance said after the talks. “We haven’t seen that yet.”
In February, the International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran had “produced and accumulated uranium enriched up to 60 percent U-235, of which it had accumulated 440.9 kg [about 970 pounds] by the time of the military attacks in mid-June 2025.”


Energy Market Risk

Oil markets have reacted sharply to the unfolding crisis, with prices rising amid fears of prolonged supply disruptions.
U.S. gasoline prices have climbed significantly since the start of the conflict, reflecting the global ripple effects of instability in the Gulf. Oil prices jumped after the U.S. threat to block Iranian ports, with Brent crude futures trading at about the $102.6 mark as of 6:32 a.m. ET, on the ICE exchange in Europe, per TradingView data.

With both sides signaling readiness to escalate and no immediate diplomatic breakthrough in sight, analysts say the confrontation risks evolving into a prolonged crisis with implications for energy markets.

“The market is now largely back to conditions before the ceasefire, except now the U.S. will block the remaining up to (2 million barrels) Iranian-linked flows through the Strait of Hormuz as well,” MST Marquee analyst Saul Kavonic said.

“The key remaining question is if the U.S. renews strikes on Iran, raising the risk of strikes on energy infrastructure across the region which could have a further lasting impact beyond the duration of the war.”

So… they’re threatening to systemically force a change to a lower risk system, and drive our revenues higher?

If we can get drilling in the Atlantic to finally open, this could actually be profitable…

Excuse me Iran, did I hear you correctly????

quote:

Iran has described the move as an unlawful restriction on international waters and warned of wider consequences.

quote:

Tehran would continue to enforce its own rules governing passage through the Strait of Hormuz

I didn't know Iran 'owned' the Strait.

Some reports of a 2nd meeting, to work out a deal to end this.

I say no, unless everything is agreed to ahead of time. This is a meeting between US delegates and Iranian officials.

With most high level meetings, things are agreed to ahead of time.