this post was submitted on 08 May 2024
178 points (95.9% liked)

politics

18998 readers
2449 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Washington’s criticism is misplaced: attacks on oil refineries will not have the effect on global energy markets that U.S. officials fear. These s​trikes reduce Russia’s ability to turn its oil into usable products; they do not affect the volume of oil it can extract or export. In fact, with less domestic refining capacity, Russia will be forced to export more of its crude oil, not less, pushing global prices down rather than up. Indeed, Russian firms have already started selling more unrefined oil overseas. As long as they remain restricted to Russian refineries, the attacks are unlikely to raise the price of oil for Western consumers.

top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 24 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Why is everyone in here discussing "oil" when the article is talking about oil refining.

Russia was / is a big player in the refined petroleum market and exported a LOT of Diesel, Gasoline, Kerosene and other petroleum distillates.

This distinction is important because oil refineries are multi-billion dollar multi-year projects, they are not built quickly or easily. Most of the world is also refinery constrained, meaning that their existing refineries are already working at or near capacity.

Here's the capacity utilization data for the United States. As you can see the US has very little slack in its refinery capability so any dip in the ability to import refined petroleum products will, and does, lead to sharp price rises.

So yes, Ukraine blowing up an oil refinery in Russia will absolutely cause global price hikes for refined petroleum products...and I fully support them doing it.

tl;dr Y'all are discussing the wrong thing and "oil" is absolutely not a synonym for the refined petroleum products that come of out of an oil refinery.

[–] randon31415 21 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

America is a NET EXPORTER of oil. I know they weren't back in the 70s when all the current American politicians learned about where oil came from, but we are now. Every refinery that blows up HELPS America's economy - it just hurts consumers because big oil thinks they can pretend that oil prices jumping by 5% means they can hike gas prices by 100%.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

America is a NET EXPORTER of oil.

Big whoop. The article isn't talking about oil production and it isn't "oil" that matters; it's what that oil is refined into that matters and the US doesn't have the capacity to create much more in the way of refined products like Diesel, Gasoline, Kerosene, etc than it already does. In fact we've been importing a LOT of refined petroleum for years now to make up for our lack of refining capacity and pre-invasion much of it was imported from Russia itself!

So when Russian oil refineries suddenly explode and those refined petroleum products are no longer available on the world market the prices go up. This is exactly how you can end up with low oil prices but high gasoline prices. If Russia can't refine the oil they'll try and dump it on the market for whatever price they can get but that low cost oil is headed into a refinery system that's already working at capacity and can't make anything more than it already does.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago

It's a bit more complex than that. Just because the US is a net exporter doesn't mean that it doesn't still need to import. There are several types of oil and currently the US still needs foreign imports of certain types that we rely on but don't produce enough of.

That being said, I still think it makes sense to destroy infrastructure supporting the Russian invasion.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Except they still sell oil at global market prices, and a big player was caught colluding with OPEC. In a global commodity market without government intervention it doesn't make a huge difference where the oil is being pumped up

[–] kava 14 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Even if Russia increases crude oil exports to compensate, virtually all of their gasoline is produced domestically for domestic consumption. That demand isn't going to just disappear. Every liter that Russia stops producing from these refinery strikes will be imported from other sources.

They will have to Kazakhstan in order to make up the difference (which they have already started, afaik), then prices go up on the global market for gasoline.

If gasoline price goes up, there's economic incentive to buy crude oil to produce gasoline. That raises price of crude oil. You can't avoid it. It's all connected. You reduce global production and you raise price.

[–] MrVilliam 12 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I'm okay with reducing my gas use and/or paying more for gas in order to keep Putin out of Ukraine. I know that not everybody has room to stretch their dollar, so I don't mean to come off as callous, but my minor inconvenience is easily worth stopping bombs from hitting civilians in Ukraine. We already know that appeasement doesn't work. Putin will not stop. Let's stop allowing money to decide for us whether we should let monsters thrive.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

You bring up a good point that isn't addressed very well. There's still less refined oil being produced that is demanded. In this case, its for Russia. I suppose this demand is partially reduced as Russia will try to minimize unnecessary refined oil usage (maybe eventually increasing local prices to discourage unnecessary use), but even then I still feel their reduced refining capabilities should have an impact on prices.

I suppose that other refineries could pick up the slack, but I'm uncertain whether that really makes sense for them, and there's not an easy way to countries against Russia can reduce their own usage of refined oil in the near term.

Ultimately, time well tell whether these attacks are having a strong impact on global refined oil.

EDIT: one thing that they do mention, that counteracts my point above is the fact that Russia exporting additional unrefined oil, that would mean unrefined oil pricing would decrease, which could counteract the reduction in production of refined oil.

[–] PP_BOY_ 11 points 5 months ago

Reason 1: because Russia is actively committing ethnic cleansing against Ukraine

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago

Raising global oil prices should not really be a consideration when you're fighting a war for your survival. Anything that can help Ukraine survive is good.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

Blowing up oil refineries may be a net benefit anywhere on earth but certainly in Russia it is.